dylernnn

[dylernnn]

Digital Citizenship and Conflict: Where’s the Line Between Free Speech and Harm?

Social media promised an open digital town square, but we ended up with something far messier: a worldwide stage run under corporate guidelines. At its core, all of it? a deep and continuous struggle between the necessity to moderate damage and freedom of expression.

Although sites like Meta and X (formerly Twitter) stress free expression, their actual content policy enforcement is sometimes dubious and divisive. While activists, underprivileged artists, and reporters document being shadowbanned or removed for speaking truth to power, disinformation, hate speech, and harassment remain flourishing (Suzor et al., 2019).

This begs the awkward question: Who decides, for whom, what is too harmful to publish?

Platforms are accused of censorship when they remove posts disseminating false information—such as election lies or false COVID-19 treatments. But when they fail to act, they are blamed for allowing actual damage to occur (Gorwa, 2022). The situation is no-win mostly because platform governance is still reactive, vague, and hardly transparent.

Complicating matters also are automated systems such as artificial intelligence flagging tools. Many times they overlook context, which results in takedowns of satire, protest footage, or vulnerable user narratives (Roberts, 2021). Dangerous materials like hate searches or planned violence might go unpackled until it trends.

Being digital citizens helps us to realise that online "free speech" is moulded by politics, codes, and policies; it is not perfect. Promoting fair, consistent, inclusive moderation is not about suppressing anyone. It's about safeguarding communities, particularly those historically silenced both offline and online.

Therefore, the next time someone says "free speech," it's important to question: whose speech is being erased and whose is being amplified?

References:

Gorwa, R. (2022, September 21). Who Are the Stakeholders in Platform Governance?. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/ayx8h

Roberts, S.T., (2021). Behind the screen: content moderation in the shadows of media. https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=3-aaDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PP1&dq=Roberts,+S.+T.+(2021).+Behind+the+screen:+Content+moderation+in+the+shadows+of+social+media.+Yale+University+Press.&ots=CPYAFhUozr&sig=7IMIWfVwXcrVOeLi1fhEWnrymms&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Suzor, N. P., West, S. M., Quodling, A., & York, J. (2019, March 27). What do we mean when we talk about transparency? Toward meaningful transparency in commercial content moderation. Suzor | International Journal of Communication. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/9736

[dylernnn]

Parasocial Play: When Streamers Feel Like Friends

Live streaming in the digital era of today is about feeling as though you are playing a game with someone, not only about seeing someone play a game. Platforms like Twitch and YouTube Live have made gaming an emotional experience in which parasocial relationships—which are not only common but also appealing.

As livestreaming and real-time chat (Gong, et al, 2023) have grown, one-sided emotional ties created with media personalities have become more intense. Though the relationship isn't mutual, it can feel very personal when a streamer remembers you from the last stream, laughs at your comment, or says your name.

Streamers often post personal stories, discuss their daily lives, and create "communities" bursting with in-jokes and recognisable faces. For viewers experiencing loneliness or anxiety especially, this fosters the feeling of a digital friendship—a "safe space" to hang out (Kowert, 2020).

Still, the solace of parasocial play has a darker side. Some fans start to expect more as audiences expand: emotional access, individual attention, even loyalty. Streamers suffer burnout and backlash when limits are tested.

Fascinating is the fact that many viewers still find the relationship meaningful even though many of them are aware it is one- sided. Though they are formed on a screen, parasocial bonds can provide real comfort.

In the realm of livestreaming, the game might draw you in; but, the sense of community keeps you there. Being digital citizens helps us to appreciate the limits of connection online as well as its beauty.

References:

Kowert, R. (2019). Video games and well-being: Press start. Palgrave Macmillan. https://books.google.com.my/books?hl=en&lr=&id=-17BDwAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR5&dq=Kowert,+R.+(2020).+Video+games+and+well-being:+Press+start.+Palgrave+Macmillan.&ots=vibxP_nEpC&sig=FDlQ0rKzst8E747ozR1rl6NAi1g&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Gong, A.D., Huang, Y.T. (2023, June) Finding love in online games: Social interaction, parasocial phenomenon, and in-game purchase intention of female game players. Science direct. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0747563223000328

[dylernnn]

No Filter is a Lie: Editing Culture and False Authenticity

Ok be honest here: Is "no filter" really ever what it says it is?

Even "natural" images are sometimes chosen down to the pixel in the current era of face-smoothing apps, subtle colour grading, and built-in Instagram beautifiers. Photos are selected from a burst of forty shots, the lighting has to be flawless, and the angles are deliberately planned ahead of time. Then and only then, maybe "Facetune" will remove a few blemishes here and there.

In the current online world, this well chosen form of authenticity has become the standard. We are supposed to be effortlessly beautiful, radiant, and unbothered, but we are not supposed to own that we edited anything. Thus, creating a type of social media gaslighting whereby followers are made to believe that looking perfect is both normal and readily achievable (Barone et al., 2023).

Both regular users and celebrities participate in what researchers refer to as "performative vulnerability," presenting "real" events like acne or messy rooms only when the lighting is still aesthetically pleasing. A 2022 Mental Health Foundation UK research indicates that this cycle of polished imperfection fuels young people's pressure to reach an unreachable ideal of "relatable perfection" (Mental Health Foundation, 2022).

The phrase "no filter" has evolved from being about truthful representations of self, to being more about personal branding, a visual, humble, brag that says, "I woke up like this." Digital citizenship, however, isn't just about safety or privacy. It also relates to being sincere about how we interact with content and present ourselves online. That includes knowing the programs we use and the beauty standards we highlight (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2024).

Editing your photos isn't wrong, not even in the slightest. But part of being a responsible digital citizen is knowing the effect it has on others as well as on yourself. One does not need to feel ashamed of imperfection. The true problem is the facade most people put up, denying its very existence altogether.

References:

Barone, M., De Bernardis, R., & Persichetti, P. (2023). Before-and-After photography on social Media: The pursuit of Impossible beauty. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-023-03744-x

Mental Health Foundation, (2022). Image-editing apps and mental health. Mental Health Foundation. https://www.mentalhealth.org.uk/explore-mental-health/body-image-and-mental-health/image-editing-apps-and-mental-health

Nuffield Council on Bioethics welcomes Government plans to introduce licensing for Botox and fillers - Nuffield Council on Bioethics. (2024, October 9). Nuffield Council on Bioethics. https://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/news-blog/nuffield-council-on-bioethics-welcomes-government-plans-to-introduce-licensing-for-botox-and-fillers/

[dylernnn]

Before & After: The Normalization of Cosmetic Procedures Online

Cosmetic surgeries were barely mentioned in celebrity tabloids or hid behind euphemisms not too long ago. However on TikTok and Instagram today, they are front and centre with hashtags, affiliate links and healing vlogs. Aesthetic change is no longer a secret in the era of algorithmic beauty; it is a content category.

Botox, filler, and "baby BBLs" are now routinely framed by influencers as a kind of self-care no different from having a facial. Early 20s videos of lip flips, jawline contouring, or preventative Botox are labelled as "glow-up journeys." These videos generally contain heartwarming subtitles like "Just doing this for me 💕," clean transitions, and lively music edited in them. Soft gentle aesthetics; razor sharp impacts.

The Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery journal claims that over 70 percent of cosmetic surgery content on TikHub is educational or with promotional aspects, but usually omitting important information about dangers or recovery (Das & Drolet, 2021). And that is a big problem. A simple scroll through the #MyPlasticSurgeryStory tag shows you all of the highligths and beauty of these proecsses, but never the side effects, scarring, or regrets. Augmented filters, meantime, blur the boundaries between digital illusions and actual results.

This kind of exposure has dire consequences. Young adults and teenagers are absorbing unrealistically high standards for how their bodies "should" look more and more everyday. Affected mostly by social media representations, Gen Z is showing increasing demand for cosmetic procedures according to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (2023).

Though they should always be personal, cosmetic decisions also should be informed. Influencers sharing practices like morning routines without any context or disclaimers, crosses from empowerment into marketing.

As digital citizens, we should ask better questions. Not "Did they get job done?" but, "What's the message here, and who is it really serving?"

References:

American Society of Plastic Surgeons. (2023, December 7). American Society of Plastic Surgeons breaks down 2022 plastic surgery trends among different demographics. https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/press-releases/american-society-of-plastic-surgeons-breaks-down-2022-plastic-surgery-trends-among-different-demographics

Das, R. K., & Drolet, B. C. (2021). Plastic surgeons in TikTok: top influencers, most recent posts, and user engagement. Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, 148(6), 1094e–1097e. https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0000000000008566

[dylernnn]

Global Impact, Local Habits

How influencers Shape Sustainable Choices

In recent years fashion trends move at the speed of a scroll, while influencers are starting to pause, consider, and repeat instead of drive the next purchase from their platforms.

Business in fashion is about to change. Mass production of cheap, trendy clothing or in other words, fast fashion, depends heavily on overconsumption. Companies like Shein and Fashion Nova flood social feeds with ultra-low-cost hauls pushing a "wear once, buy again" attitude (Rees, 2022). From this follows mountains of textile waste, appalling working conditions, and a disposable style culture.

The slow fashion movement is pushing back while influencers are helping it stick.

From red carpets to TikHub trends, wardrobe repetition is bold. Stars like Cate Blanchett and Zendaya have made the news, challenging the out-of-date presumption that every outfit calls for another, re-wearing iconic looks at big events (LeSavage, 2024). Their decisions created virtual chain reaction, influencers nowadays often post "rewear challenges" and styling videos showing how to wear the same blazer five different ways — and always look great.

Creators are starting to embrace secondhand fashion and ethical consumption abound on sites like Instagram and TikTok. The tags #Thrift Flip and #Outfit Repeater honour originality, not consumption. This material changes the publics perceptions of their own closets, from empty and bland, to full of possibilities.

Although not saying that we should never buy new clothes, slow fashion is about choosing better items instead of buying a heap of fabrics we're only going to wear once, and making them last (Hill, 2023). As they walk the walk, influential people are rewriting history by demonstrating that even without supporting the fast fashion business, fashion can still be expressive and fascinating.

Small changes create big ripples changing what we know as a whole. That's the true power of digital influence.

References: Hill, M. (2023, July 3). What is slow fashion? - Good on you. Good on You. https://goodonyou.eco/what-is-slow-fashion/

LeSavage, H. (2024, December 30). Zendaya’s best red carpet fashion of 2024 proves she’s celebrity style’s MVP. Marie Claire. https://www.marieclaire.com/fashion/zendaya-best-red-carpet-fashion-2024/

Rees, L. (2022). Dopamine Dressing and Loved Clothes Last. Fashion Revolution. https://www.fashionrevolution.org/dopamine-dressing-and-loved-clothes-last/

[dylernnn]

Digital Citizenship: Cancel Culture and Digital Accountability

Nowadays, being a good online citizen involves more than just avoiding spam and bullies. In a world where sizable online communities can swiftly hold public figures accountable or unfairly target them, it necessitates navigating complex social relationships. Consider the recent issues involving Rachel Zegler, who plays Snow White in the live-action adaptation of the tale from Disney. When Zegler, a Latina actress, was chosen for a role where the character is typically perceived as having "skin as white as snow," she received negative publicity. Arguments concerning representation and accuracy resulted from some people claiming that this selection wasn't accurate to the original character's description.

The situation was exacerbated by Zegler's remarks regarding the original 1937 film. She claimed that the prince's behaviour was "weird," which led her to believe that the story's portrayal of women was outdated. Because of these remarks, she was criticised online for disrespecting the well-known story, which exacerbated the criticism. When Zegler discussed politics on social media, such as his support for Palestine and distaste for former President Trump, things became worse. These posts infuriated people even more, and some even demanded that the film be banned. Disney reportedly cut back on advertising events, presumably in an effort to defuse the escalating controversy. Being a good internet citizen can be challenging, as this case demonstrates. People can express their opinions and hold others accountable thanks to the internet, but it also makes it simple for criticism to spread swiftly and occasionally without providing all the facts. People often wonder about fairness and the impact of online speech because it's difficult to distinguish between cancel culture and responsibility.

As digital citizens, we must exercise caution and consider the complexity of each situation. We should make an effort to fully comprehend everything before participating in online campaigns or voicing our opinions, ensuring that our actions result in constructive discussion rather than unjust criticism.

Waxman, O. B. (2025, March 19). Why Disney’s Snow White Remake Is Creating Controversy. TIME. https://time.com/7267440/snow-white-disney-rachel-zegler-gal-gadot/

Winter, J. (2025, April 1). The “Snow White” Controversy, Like Our Zeitgeist, Is Both Stupid and Sinister. The New Yorker. https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-lede/the-snow-white-controversy-like-our-zeitgeist-is-both-stupid-and-sinister

[dylernnn]

Reality TV, unscripted but not unedited.

Reality TV presents itself as unscripted and that it looks into real life scenarios, however what viewers actually end up seing is a meticulously contructed story of lies that has been edited to optimise the shows entertainment value. To make sure audeinces stay hooked editors exaggerate tensions beyond what actually happens in these shows, increasing drama and conflict. Altering scenes, choosing reaction shots, removing entire sequences at specific times, and rearanging events. While all this keeps these shows entertaining and engaging, it tends to warp the actors actual personalities and behaviours (CIsupport, 2025).

These types of alterations tend to put negative characteristics of the actors on display. Violent, manipulative, or entitled behaviours or qualities that are frequently linked to the so-called "Dark Triad" personality profile is something you will almost always see in reality TV characters (Rutledge, 2021). Inevidently, cast members reputations may suffer from these portrayals, reducing them to mere cartoon characters rather than nuanced people. The worst part is that the effects of these inaccurate portrayals go way beyond the television, reality stars frequently face long-term harm to thier personal and professional life, internet harassment, and public reaction.

Furthermore, the assertion that reality TV is "unscripted" is highly deceptive. The distinction between performance and reality is further blurred when producers incite confrontations or promote reenactments in order to create entertaining content. Viewers' impressions of social standards and conduct may very well be influenced by their acceptance of these modified portrayals as real, particularly among younger viewers (Cockroft, 2021). This "cultivation effect" implies that viewers are influenced by these manufactured realities in addition to the reputations of individuals.

In a nutshell, reality TV can offer some entertaining drama, but it does so at the expense of editing very real people into roles that serve the narrative of their envisioned story, often at the very hefty cost of their true character and reputation. Understanding this encourages viewers to interact with reality TV critically rather than taking it at face value.

Cockroft, H. (2021, May 6). Research shows reality TV is not ‘harmless entertainment’ https://www.swlondoner.co.uk/entertainment/06052021-research-shows-reality-tv-is-not-harmless-entertainment

Ruteledge, P. (2021, April 3). Reality TV and the Dark Triad - Fielding Graduate University. Fielding Graduate University. https://www.fielding.edu/reality-tv-and-the-dark-triad/

Cisupport. (2025, February 6). Editing Techniques in Reality TV | C&I Studios. C&I Studios. https://c-istudios.com/editing-techniques-in-reality-tv-crafting-engaging-narratives/

[dylernnn]

Modern Feminism, is it still feminism?

Feminism used to be a symbol of unity and courage, a liberating force that granted women their rights. Feminism was the fierce fight that eventually created the fruits for women to be able to vote, work, study, and own property; to be able to stand on even ground with men. The first and second wave of feminists while not perfect were warriors who battled for genuine and meaningful change, change that freed many from the cage society has locked them in.

However, all that changed with the arrival of "modern feminism" or also known as the third wave of femism. Especially prominent on online spaces, feminism is now a heaping mess, sometimes coming off as performative and self-serving, other times just completely fragmented and nonsensical. It has replaced meaningful discourse has been replaced by hashtags and callouts. The movement itself has become commodified - sending the message that you can "do feminism" by buying feminist-themed products, not necessarily engaging in deep structural change (Ylostalo, 2024). Simply leaving us with what would be "feminism without substance".

To further elaborate the concerns of modern feminism, relating to the words of Dighol (2023), femisnists have decided to fight for the freedom to not shave despite the prevalance of sexual assault against women, child brides, female genital mutilation in third-world nations, women who are obliged to cover every inch of their bodies and whose freedom to do so has been physically taken away, and more. It just feels like modern feminists seem to have a very warped sense of priority, mostly fighting with no real sense of what they are fighting for.

While not trying to say that feminism is "bad", all thats being suggested is that maybe its time to reflect on the priorities within feminism and how it can once again become the empowering symbol of unity. As it stands, feminism will acchieve the opposite of what it strived for, and tear apart whatever sense of unity that was obtained in the past.

Dighol, M. (2023, March 24). The Flaws of Modern feminism – The Phillipian. The Phillipian. https://phillipian.net/2023/03/24/the-flaws-of-modern-feminism/

Ylöstalo, H., & Lamberg, E. (2024). Commodified state Feminism: The entanglements of feminist commodity activism and feminist politics in a Nordic welfare state. International Political Sociology, 18(2). https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olae005

[dylernnn]

Introduction and Disclaimer

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.