Portions of this site and the works within it are being produced with the intention of critique and/or educational use under Australia's 'fair dealing' exceptions to copyright (Section 40 & 41). However, if you feel your IP is being infringed, please contact my service provider (tumblr) with the appropriate DMCA requests, as I, the single author take full responsibility for the content of this site.
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
Text
Conflict & Social Media Governance
Whilst there are many benefits to digital citizenship it is not all positive activism and championing likeminded others. Digital citizenship comes with moments of conflict. People have the freedom on social media to post almost anything they like. People of all different backgrounds, belief, and value systems can see these posts. At the same time social media is a place where people like to have their say. This can lead to conflict in comments sections, competing posts, and threads. These same places can become host to bullying and harassing behaviour as well. This can include “Gaslighting” “the psychological manipulation of a person in order to erode their sense of self and sanity.” (Gleeson, 2018). Or other behaviours like “spreading rumours or cruel comments” “or posting threatening or offensive remarks online” (Marwick & Caplan, 2018, 544) as well as “doxing (publishing personal information online), revenge porn (spreading intimate photos beyond their origins), social shaming, and intimidation” (Marwick & Caplan, 2018, 544). This behaviour at times can also be “networked in that it is coordinated and organised.” (Marwick & Caplan, 2018, 543). Where a specific group of people team up and specifically target an individual or another group.
In turn this kind of behaviour leads to various forms of Social media governance, in an attempt to protect individuals from harmful behaviour and enact consequences for individuals who harass others. According to Milne social media can be governed at a number of different levels “commercial, Public Sector (like universities, research and development) Industry bodies who develop standards, and State actors (different countries’ approaches. China, US, Europe all vary in their internet regulations)”. (Milne, 2021). Social media sites have a vested interest in protecting their users (digital citizens) with rules and platform policies in order to keep them using the platform. Just as governments have a responsibility to protect their citizens in digital spaces with laws and regulations. “Governance also takes place at the micro level” (Milne, 2021) in the form of “forum or community moderators.” (Milne, 2021). Moderators have a similar role in keeping the peace in groups to keep members engaged. All of these forms of governing bodies have a different level of responsibility in maintaining a free public sphere, where individuals do not feel afraid of voicing their opinions. In this way social media governance and conflict coexist in a cycle. Governance deters online conflict which allows freedom of speech, and when digital citizens speak freely conflict may arise. Only time will tell if there is an effective form of governance that can eliminate online harassment and maintain the public sphere. For now governing bodies and individuals do their best to keep the peace in ever growing and changing online communities.
J. Gleeson (2018) What does Gaslighting Mean?. Research Officer, School of Global, Urban & Social Studies, RMIT University. The Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-gaslighting-mean-107888
A.E. Marwick & R. Caplan (2018) 'Drinking male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment'. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 543-559.
E. Milne (2021) Week Ten Lecture Digital Citizenship And Social Media Conflict [Lecture]. Retrieved from https://swinburne.instructure.com/media_objects_iframe/m-69gJYqf8Tzo4LsdpqMoteiXkn1J2XV54?type=video
0 notes
Text
Slow Fashion Movement
Fast fashion is best defined as “mass-produced, cheap, changes within a fortnight, and often associated with a ‘throw away’ attitude. “ (Lai, Henninger, & Alevizou, 2017, 82) and has been rampant in the fashion industry for decades now. However, in recent years there has been a rise of an opposing movement, the slow-fashion movement. Slow fashion “seeks to slow down the pace of the current fashion life cycle by producing a maximum of four fashion lines annually, focus on quality rather than quantity, and are not mass-produced. (Lai, Henninger, & Alevizou, 2017, 82). The slow fashion movement often also encompasses sustainable fashion “described as those ‘goods and services that respond to basic needs and bring a better quality of life, while minimising the use of natural resources, toxic materials and emissions of waste and pollutants over the life-cycle, so as not to jeopardise the needs of future generations.” (Lai, Henninger, & Alevizou, 2017, 82). With the rise of the slow and sustainable fashion movements a number of digital citizens have joined the cause, promoting the movements on their social media pages. One example is Corinna @kissenundkarma from Germany. She runs a beautifully curated Instagram page where she showcases her thrifted and sustainable clothing items and accessories in order to inspire others to do the same. She has also joined the movement further by founding an ethically responsible lingerie and swimwear line. Another example is an Australian blogger Leah who uses her page @unmaterialgirl to showcase how fashionable it can be to source second hand and ethically made fashion items. Canadian Youtuber Alyssa Beltempo has taken to YouTube to educate people about sustainable fashion. She states that she hopes to teach people “how to shop smarter, discover your style & embrace slow fashion for a mindful closet.” (Beltempo, 2021) and does so with short videos about thrifting, slow fashion tips, styling the clothes you already have, and more. These digital citizens are using their platform to inspire social change amongst their followers and anyone who might come across their page. Thus using their platform to be an active citizen promoting social change in the public sphere. The fast fashion movement is just one example of how digital citizenship can be used to promote movements and inspire wide spread change in the external world.
Corinna. [@kissenundkarma] (2021) A More Sustainable Lifestyle. Corinna. [Instagram Page] . Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/kissenundkarma/
Alyssa Beltempo. (2021). More Creativity, Less Consumption Alyssa Beltempo. [YouTube]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/c/AlyssaBeltempo.
Leah. [@unmaterialgirl] (2021) The Unmaterial Girl. [Instagram Page]. Retrieved from https://www.instagram.com/unmaterialgirl/
Z. Lai, C. E. Henninger, & P. J. Alevizou (2017) ‘An Exploration of Consumers’ Perceptions Towards Sustainable Fashion. In C.E. Henninger, P. Alevizou, H. Goworek, D. Ryding (Eds.) (A Qualitative Study in the UK’, in Sustainability in Fashion A Cradle to Upcycle Approach. (pp.81-101). London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan
0 notes
Text
Social Gaming
When many people think of digital communities they first think of social media such as Facebook, Instagram, twitter and online forums. However, they often miss a huge part of the digital community in this thought process, social gaming. Many people have a stereotype in mind when they think of gaming, that it is a very solitary activity. However, according to Taylor Hardwick gaming has been a social activity since before games could be accessed digitally. This began with “board games” (Hardwick, 2021) which by design require multiple players. It then progressed to computerised “arcade games” and “Local multiplayer”(Hardwick, 2021) games on PC or consoles pre internet. This is what T.L Taylor would call “The first wave (the 1970s and 1980s)” of social gaming. It “was anchored in arcades and around home console machines where the local dominated.”(Taylor, 2018, 4)
The introduction of the internet led to online social gaming as we know it now. Taylor calls this “The second wave (the 1990s through 2010)” It “leveraged the power of the internet for multiplayer connections and a more global formulation of the competitive space” (Taylor, 2018, 4).
One popular form of social gaming are games played through social media, in which people invite their friends to compete with them or to help build each other’s worlds by sending gifts or sharing in game currency. Hardwick suggests this is the framework games like words with friends or Farmville work on as they use “a player’s ‘friend’ network to acquire and retain new players” (Hardwick, 2021).
Another form of social gaming that takes place online are online multiplayer games in which players can compete in game play against other players anywhere in the world. Taylor argues that online multiplayer games “witnessed the power of networking as a means to jump-start an esports industry—one that largely had its eye on traditional sports as its model” (Taylor, 2018, 4) they explain that “In esports competitions, professional players compete in a formal tournament setting for prize money.” (Taylor, 2018, 1). This is another way that gaming is a social activity as gamers are competing against and at the same time communicating with each other. Whether that be in an online or in person tournament. According to Hardwick Esports tournaments are “closely tied with online streaming platforms” (Hardwick, 2021) Taylor would agree as this is how “The third wave (starting around 2010)” came about. They suggest that “at its core the growth of live streaming ….. takes the power of networking we saw earlier and powerfully combines it with the televisual.” (Taylor, 2018, 4). A streaming platform discussed by Taylor called Twitch as well as “companies such as YouTube or Facebook, organisations like the Electronic Sports League (ESL), DreamHack, PGL, and Major League Gaming (MLG), and game developers such as Riot, Valve, and Blizzard have all tossed their hat into the live streaming ring by producing and/or distributing broadcast content.” (Taylor, 2018, 3) Streaming allows fans to watch gamers play online whilst interacting with them in the process. It is also an interactive way of streaming online tournaments. It is clear through understanding the waves of game platform development that gaming is much more social than many people perceive it to be. Social gaming is a huge digital community that should not be underestimated as a large contributor to the wider global digital community.
T. Hardwick (2021) Week Eight Guest Lecture Social Gaming [Lecture]. Retrieved from https://swinburne.instructure.com/courses/33896/pages/week-8-social-gaming-guest-lecture?module_item_id=2155419
T.L. Taylor (2018) Broadcasting ourselves (chapter 1), In Watch Me Play: Twitch And The Rise Of Game Live Streaming. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
0 notes
Text
Instagram Filters

Instagram filters. There are so many different types of filters. They use “augmented reality (AR)” which “allows the user to see the real world, with virtual objects superimposed upon or composited with the real world” (Azuma,1997, 355). Using this technology some filters can change your age, some can change your gender, others can change your species, you can add butterflies to your cheeks and make your whole screen sparkle. Some of the most commonly used Instagram filters however are the ones that airbrush your face and “perfect” your features. This lends to many conversations about how “Not only do we critique our bodies in mirrors, but now we can digitize our dysmorphia by virtually modifying what we dislike, creating “perfect” selves instead.” (Coy-Dibley, 2016, 1) Coy-Dibley uses the term “Digitized Dysmorphia”(Coy-Dibley, 2016,1) to describe this phenomenon in which people use AR filters to edit out or change parts of their face or body that they do not like. She likens the phenomenon to how people with Body Dysmorphic disorder go about “camouflaging the “offending” body area, for example with make-up or clothing” (Coy-Dibley, 2016, 3). While it is not a medical condition like BDD, “Digitized Dysmorphia”(Coy-Dibley, 2016, 1) is basically a digital version of this process. With photos of celebrities being professionally edited and enhanced to look “perfect” according to societies standards and the majority of other social media users digitizing their “dysmorphia” with filters, how do we know what is real and what is not? The problem is that we don’t. Society, social media and even the filters themselves are creating increasing amounts of pressure for women in particular to conform to “inescapable ‘hetero-sexy’ ideals of femininity” (Miller, 2021). The more that people succumb to that pressure, the more that others feel the need to conform and use filters to fit societies ideal. The problem is that the ideal is becoming increasingly unrealistic, to the point where the look achieved with filters is not physically attainable for the average person. Coy-Dibley also argues this point in stating “many can now manipulate images of themselves to fit their image ideals, which ultimately transcend the boundaries and limitations of the physical, material body.” (Coy-Dibley, 2016, 2) In the photo below we can see how even with this basic filter the models nose has been slimmed, her eye colour enhanced and her skin has been made to sparkle. The beauty bar is being set beyond what people actually look like, and runs the risk of damaging people’s confidence over a look that is not even realistic. Filters can be fun, but maybe they’re also too dangerous to be taken seriously by a society that constantly strives for perfection.
Miller, L. (2021) Week Seven Guest Lecture Instagram Filters [Lecture]. Retrieved from https://swinburne.instructure.com/courses/33896/pages/week-7-face-filters-guest-lecture?module_item_id=2135919
R, Azuma. (1997) A Survey of Augmented Reality. Presence Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 6(4), 355-385. DOI: https://www.cs.unc.edu/~azuma/ARpresence.pdf
I, Coy Dibely. (2016) “Digitized Dysmorphia” Of The Female Body: The Re/Disfigurement Of The Image. Palgrave Communications 2(16040), 1-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2016.40
1 note
·
View note
Text
Body Modification

In today’s world social media holds an immense amount of power over people that use it. So much so that we call people who are social media (namely Instagram) famous “influencers” as they influence what is considered “cool” or “on trend” in society. Senft gives them the title of “Microcelebrity” “a relatively new form of identity that is linked almost exclusively to online spaces” (Senft, 2012)
These microcelebrities work incredibly hard “engaging in personal marketing to develop their brand and compete for visibility” (Marwick, 2013) in order to maintain their status as an “influencer”. As it affords them fame, power and money. This lifestyle is glamourized to everyday people as a world where you take photos of yourself doing exciting things or wearing cool outfits in order to make money. It sounds fun and easy. As more people chase after this seemingly fun and easy lifestyle the market gets more competitive and influencers have to work harder to stay on top. But, what is it that keeps them at the top? Dr Jonathan Mavroudis argues that “adhering to aesthetic templates endorsed by microcelebrity culture often through product campaigns”(Mavroudis, 2021) is what keeps them on top. So what must an influencer do in order to achieve or maintain this “aesthetic template” (Mavroudis, 2021). They must put in “Aesthetic Labour” (Mavroudis, 2021) to adjust their image. This includes carefully curating their outfits, hair and makeup. It also often includes body modification, working their bodies to achieve a certain look, and/or having plastic surgery to achieve the desired body aesthetic. This is quite a common phenomenon as “according to 2017 statistics from the American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 42% of surgeons report that their patients are seeking aesthetic surgery to improve their appearance on Instagram, Snapchat, Facebook, and other social media channels.” (Dorfman, Vaca, Mahmood, Fine, Schierle 2018). As more people microcelebrities modify their bodies surgically, the standard is set higher and higher leading to an increase in people taking part in body modification to meet that standard. If society continues on this body modification trajectory, where might beauty standards end up in 10, 20 50 years’ time? Only time will tell, but my guess is that the number of people surgically altering their bodies is likely to continue to increase.
R. Dorfman, E. Vaca, E. Mahmood, N. Fine, & C. Schierle, (2018) Plastic Surgery-Related Hashtag Utilization on Instagram: Implications for Education and Marketing. Aesthetic Surgery Journal, 38(3), 332–338.
A.E. Marwick (2013) Status update: celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Mavroudis, J. (2021). Week Six Guest Lecture Body Modification [Lecture]. Retrieved from https://swinburne.instructure.com/courses/33896/pages/week-6-body-modification-guest-lecture?module_item_id=2127314
Senft, T. (2012), Microcelebrity and the Branded Self. In J. Hartley, J. Burgess, & A. Bruns (Eds.) A Companion to New Media Dynamics. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
0 notes
Text
Digital Citizenship
What does it mean to be a digital citizen? In today’s world many of us are not only citizens of the nation we are familiar to, we are also citizens of the internet, and of a number of platforms and groups it hosts. It is understood that “The digital citizen ... is a subject of power and constraints wielded by states and institutions or even platform registration” (McCosker, Vivienne & Johns, 2016) and that there are “Three aspects of participation in society online: economic opportunity, democratic participation, and inclusion in prevailing forms of communication” (Mossberger, 2008). Digital citizenship is predominantly linked to discussions about modern engagement in politics and activism. Araidne Vromen argues that “the ubiquity of social media in the everyday lives of citizens fosters the development of digital citizenship. (Vromen,2017) this combined with the idea that “Most citizens,…now engage in politics in individualised, ad hoc ways, rather than as committed members of formal groups. (Vromen, 2017) is what leads to political engagement being strongly linked to digital citizenship. Many political organisations, activist groups and politicians have turned to social media and internet campaigns in order to “stay competitive in fundraising and to maintain prominence on the public agenda” (Vromen, 2017) Most political parties (particularly in Australia) make use of social media to promote their policies and keep digital citizens/voters up to date with what actions they are taking in the community at the local, state and federal level. In Australia in particular it is quite common for individual politicians to make use of social media for the same reasons. Predominantly through Facebook. Many local politicians have Facebook pages, even Prime Minister Scott Morrison has a Facebook page where he regularly updates his followers on who he has been engaging with (community groups, companies etc.) and important issues in line with his parties policies. Social media is a way for politicians to connect more directly with voters in real time. One of the most controversial examples of politicians on social media was Donald Trump and his regular use of Twitter throughout his American presidency. His tweets often created quite a stir in classical media and often sparked political conversation in the public sphere. Majority of people in the world have access to the digital world in 2021. Making almost every one of us a digital citizen. The nature of the digital world bridges the gap between digital citizens in politics, big business, activist groups and regular citizens. Which explains why digital citizenship is largely linked to the worlds of politics and activism. Being a digital citizen grants us access to a much broader public sphere than we could ever access in our daily lives offline, and connects us to people and nations all over the world.
McCosker, A. Vivienne, S. Johns, A. (2016) Negotiating Digital Citizenship: Control, Contest and Culture. London: Rowman & Littelfield.
Mossberger, K. Tolbert, C. McNeal, R (2008) Digital Citizenship The Internet, Society, and Participation. London: The MIT Press
Vromen, A. (2017) Intro. Digital Citizenship and Political Engagement The Challenge from Online Campaigning and Advocacy Organisations. (pp. 1-7). London: Palgrave Maccmillan
0 notes
Text
Reality TV And The Public Sphere
Reality TV is huge part of the regular TV viewing of millions of people worldwide. Although many claim to hate the genre, reality TV shows seems to top the ratings charts year after year. Suggesting that it is a huge part of people’s lives. So, how does reality TV contribute to Public Spheres? We have established that “The public sphere is the space where people can interact; where public opinion is formed; where citizens deal with matters of general interest and express and articulate their views.”(Sakariassen, 2020). Whilst reality TV does not fit this description on its own, it is a platform where controversial topics are often explored throughout the interactions of its stars or even through the concepts it is based on.
This is supported by Todd Graham who states that “like politically oriented communicative spaces, they (Reality TV shows) too con-tribute to the web of informal conversations that constitutes the public sphere, and as such, should not be overlooked.” (Graham, 2011, p.19)
As reality TV is broadly open to the public its themes are a catalyst for conversation amongst friends and commonly amongst digital communities on social media. Reality TV programs feed into this online discussion by having connected official social media accounts for the show and its stars that interact with the general public. The shows and their stars largely contribute to discussions around “lifestyle politics” (Bennett, 1998, Graham, 2011 p.19) more easily understood as the politics of individuals personal lifestyle choices and values. The lifestyle choices of these reality TV stars is what often sparks political conversation on social media amongst those engaged with the show. Leading to the creation of micro digital publics based around each show, or lifestyle choice called into question, or both. Reality TV on its own may not be considered a public sphere. Yet the way that it encourages its audiences to engage with its content and the types of themes it commonly introduces throughout its narrative are a definite catalyst for the creation of multiple digital public spheres on social media platforms worldwide.
Graham,T. & Hajru, A. (2011) Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere. European Journal of Communication 26(1), 18-32.
Sakariassen, H. (2020). A digital public sphere: Just in theory or a perceived reality for users of social network sites?. MedieKultur: Journal of media and communication research, 36(68), 126-146
0 notes
Text
Tumblr. A Digital Community
Tumblr. It is not a social media platform that everyone uses. However, it does seem to have a cult following from a number of niche online communities. Why is this? Jessalyn Keller suggests that the “platform vernacular”(Keller, 2019) of Tumblr creates a level of “social privacy” (Keller, 2019) because “there are no personal profiles or networks of “friends,”” (Keller, 2019). This allows users to feel comfortable expressing their views with “likeminded folks”(Keller, 2019) without facing any real world impact from having differing opinions to those around them. This creates a public sphere” (Bruns & Highfield, 2016). A space in which diverse groups of people can discuss ideas, opinions and goings on in the world. Thanks to the “platform vernacular”(Keller, 2019) of Tumblr people have equal opportunity to freely express their views in the digital community. The leader of Tumblr’s content and social teams Amanda Brennan states that “Tumblr has really empowered people whose voices are otherwise marginalised and given them a place to find their community and build their own kind of world.” (Brennan, McCracken, 2017).
This may also have to do with Tumblr’s “de-prioritizing of searchability in the site’s design” Keller states that this makes it “deeper, darker, more hidden, or hole-like.” (Keller, 2019) making it easier for users to engage in digital communities away from the eyes of the real world. By all accounts Tumblr is a digital community for anyone who desires “privacy, community, support, and respect online.” (Keller, 2019). It is a safe public space where people can comfortably engage with others in their interest groups or who share their views without risk of personal repercussions. If you are looking for a community of people who like the same things you do, or share your views of the world, but you are not comfortable expressing it to the world via other more personal social media platforms, Tumblr is likely the place for you. Your ideal digital community may be right there waiting to hear from you.
McCracken, A. (2020) Chapter 3. Going down the rabbit hole. In A. McCracken, A. Cho, L. Stein & I. Neill Hoch (Eds.) A Tumblr Book: Platform and Cultures. Michigan, USA: University of Michigan Press.
Keller, J. (2019) Oh she’s a Tumblr feminist: Exploring the platform vernacular of girls’ social media feminisms. Social Media + Society, 5(3), 1-11.
Bruns, A. Highfield, T. (2016) Is Habermas on Twitter? Social media and the public sphere. In A. Bruns, G. Enli, E. Skogerbø, AO. Larsson & C. Christensen (Eds.) The Routledge Companion To Social Media And Politics. (pp. 56-73). New York, USA: Routledge
1 note
·
View note