mattstevodigcom

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 10

In week 10 of digital communities, we looked into some of the negative aspects of social media and used our knowledge built up through the semester in order to explore how conflict is seen within the social media landscape. Throughout our study this semester, we have consistently seen examples of how social media is used positively to engage digital citizenship and create communities where users feel welcomed and safe during their time online. Despite this, it is also important that we acknowledge conflict on social media and what this demonstrates about power dynamics surrounding resources, speech and platforms within digital citizenship.

Issues of harassment on social media are commonly seen as individuals choosing to be abusive to others online, however, harassing behaviour is becoming increasingly coordinated and organised. Marwick and Caplan (2018) describe harassment as an “umbrella term encompassing a variety of behaviours” which can make defining and pinpointing harassment difficult. These behaviours are on display in the “manosphere”, an online collection of content that promotes misogyny and promotes the idea that men are an oppressed class within modern society (Marwick & Caplan, 2018, p.544). Members of this collective often engage in harassment in the form of doxing, revenge porn and social shaming (Marwick & Caplan, 2018, p.545). This calculated and organised harassment is extremely concerning for the safety of women online.

Online harassment can occur in more subtle forms, such as gaslighting. Gaslighting refers to the psychologically manipulating someone to question their sense of self and sanity (Gleeson 2018). While this form of harassment is less confronting and seemingly less harmful, it has recently been recognised as a form of abuse by groups such as the Domestic Violence Resource Centre of Victoria and Safe Steps.

The manner in which social media users feel they are free from consequences of their abuse online is extremely concerning, and the fact that there is no legislation against bullying and online abuse is disappointing. Despite this, there are pieces of legislation such as the Criminal Code Act 1995 and The Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 that offer a degree of protection (Powell & Henry 2017) I believe that transformative social change needs to be driven in order to reduce and eliminate gender-based violence and harassment online.

Thank you for reading my blog posts this semester, I have really enjoyed reading everyone else's!

References

Gleeson, J 2018, ‘Explainer: what does ‘gaslighting’ mean?’, The Conversation, viewed 23 May, <https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-does-gaslighting-mean-107888>.

Marwick, A & Caplan, R 2018, ‘Drinking Male tears: language, the manosphere, and networked harassment’, Feminist Media Studies, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 543-559.

Powell, A. and Henry, N., 2017. Sexual violence and harassment in the digital era. In The Palgrave handbook of Australian and New Zealand criminology, crime and justice (pp. 205-220). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 9

This week in Digital Communities, we looked at the topic of Social Media Influencers and the slow fashion movement through the lens of digital citizenship. The concept of slow fashion involves sustainable consumption through minimising the use of natural resources and toxic materials while employing ethical working conditions and limiting emission creation (Jung and Jin, 2014).

The new age social media influencers have been extremely influential in the rise of fast fashion brands through promotions on social media platforms such as Instagram and Youtube.There has been a big push to increase the awareness of slow fashion on these platforms to help viewers understand the impacts that their fashion choices have on the environment. The following of trends and disposing of fashion items no longer considered trendy, even if they are in fine condition is extremely detrimental to the environment (Hellmann & Luedicke 2018, p. 84). Slow fashion aims to change these attitudes by encouraging more sustainable decisions through slowing down fashion life cycles and focusing on high quality garments made sustainably and not mass-producing lower quality garments that are more impactful in the environment (Lai et al. 2017 p. 82).

Through my social media usage, I have definitely noticed a rise in fast fashion brands being promoted on these sites through influencers entering sponsorship deals with these brands. I believe that as the trend of becoming more sustainable in our day-to-day decisions becomes more mainstream, slow fashion will also become more of a normal and known concept amongst young people on social media. In addition, a key aspect of slow fashion being more widely accepted is greater accessibility to these products through greater promotion and awareness being spread of the slow fashion movement on social media. I believe that this will greatly assist in seeing an increase active purchasing behaviour relating to slow fashion.

References:

1. Jung, S. and Jin, B., 2014. A theoretical investigation of slow fashion: sustainable future of the apparel industry. International journal of consumer studies, 38(5), pp.510-

2. Hellmann, K.U. and Luedicke, M.K., 2018. The throwaway society: A look in the back mirror. Journal of Consumer Policy, 41(1), pp.84.

3.Lai, Z, Henninger, C. E, Panayiota, J. A 2017, A Exploration of Consumers’ Perceptions Towards Sustainable Fashion – A Qualitative Study in the UK, 1st edn, Springer.

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 8

In week 8 of digital communities, we covered the topic 'Gaming Communities, Social Gaming and Live Streaming'. This topic explored how gaming and their surrounding communities provide millions of people with an escape from their daily lives and for some, a deep passion that has forged careers through live-streaming.

Through the rise of social media and gaming in the late 2000s and early 2010s, the term "social games" was coined to describe online games that "adapt your friendship ties for playing purposes, while accommodating your daily routines" (Hamari and Järvinen, 2011). Successful examples of social games are 'Words with Friends' and 'Farmville'. When I first joined Facebook, these types of games were extremely attractive to me because I could play with my friends, whenever I had the time. This convenience was a big reason as to why my friends and I played these games and were a part of these gaming communities.

The rise of gaming communities can be seen on live streaming platforms such as ‘Twitch’ where users can broadcast themselves playing video games. Users can watch the action, while also participating in a live chat where they can interact with the streamer and other viewers. This fosters communities of like minded individuals from all around the world who can communicate with each other while bonding over a common interest. (Taylor, 2018). Twitch has also been the predominant platform for competitive gaming, which has become extremely lucrative as a result of the growth of Esports as an industry (Hallmann and Giel, 2018).

Gaming communities and social gaming have allowed people to not only turned to video games as a form of entertainment, but have also provided a sense of community for those with a passion for a certain game. Platforms such as Twitch have provided a space for these communities to operate and grow.

References:

1. Hamari, J. and Järvinen, A., 2011. Building customer relationship through game mechanics in social games. In Business, technological, and social dimensions of computer games: Multidisciplinary developments (pp. 348-365). IGI Global.

2. Taylor, T.L., 2018. Watch me play: Twitch and the rise of game live streaming. Princeton University Press.

3. Hallmann, K. and Giel, T., 2018. eSports–Competitive sports or recreational activity?. Sport management review, 21(1), pp.14-20.

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 7

This week in Digital Communities, we looked at the topic 'Digital Citizenship and Software literacy: Instagram Filters'. This topic revolved around the manner in which face filters are used on sical media platforms such as Instagram and how this has encouraged 'Digitised Dysmorphia'. Coy-Dibley (2015) describes 'Digitised Dysmorphia' as a socially constructed condition that has manifested through the digitisation of female appearances on social media and their alteration to fit an 'ideal' appearance.

The addition of filters to social media has pressured women to meet unrealistic beauty standards generated by society, in addition to their own image. This had led to users to digitally correct what they see as flaws in their images (Coy-Dibley 2016, p. 2). While this is a problem for both men and women, Western society's image-driven culture has had a greater impact on women. They often feel undesirable if they do not meet these socially constructed standards and value themselves based on how they present themselves to the world through their social media profiles. The presence of filters on social media encourages women to chase these realistic standards and the editing of images has become entrenched within social media ecologies (Tremblay et al 2021, p.35).

I believe that the prominence and popularity of filters on social media poses a great risk to young people on these platforms. When influencers and celebrities use filters and alter their pictures, impressionable viewers get a warped idea of reality. Unhealthy beauty 'standards' are set that young people feel like they must meet in order to be seen as attractive. While face filters can be used to improve one's self confidence, it can be easily taken too far and become unhealthy, which I believe must be taught to young users of social media as 'digital dysmorphia' becomes more popular.

References:

1. Coy-Dibley, I., 2016. “Digitized Dysmorphia” of the female body: the re/disfigurement of the image. Palgrave Communications, 2(1), pp.1-9.

2. Tremblay, S.C., Tremblay, S.E. and Poirier, P., 2021. From filters to fillers: an active inference approach to body image distortion in the selfie era. AI & SOCIETY, 36(1), pp.33-48.

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 6

In week 6 of Digital Communities, we looked at how instagram and social media has driven people to seek out medical procedures to improve their 'body image' online. We explored how often, those who undergo these procedures are dissatisfied with the results and how public health policy can educate people about the risks that these procedures pose.

Dorfman et al (2017) found that according to the American Society of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 42% of surgeons reported that their patients were looking to undergo procedures in order improve their appearance on social media platforms. This damning statistic displays the lengths people will go to in order to improve their online image. Celebrities and influencers on these websites are regularly editing and altering their images without notifying their followers. Because of this, un-realistic standards have been created whereby users feel they must alter their photos, or their bodies themselves in order to maintain a positive image on social media platforms (Chae, 2017).

Users of social media feeling as if they must modify their bodies in order to improve their online image is an extremely damaging trend. I believe that we must look to build an environment on social media that is accepting of all the different types of bodies and encourages users to express who they are, without feeling the need to alter their bodies in the pursuit of online gratification. I also believe that social media platforms such as Instagram and Facebook must do more to encourage body positivity on these platforms.

References:

Robert G Dorfman, Elbert E Vaca, Eitezaz Mahmood, Neil A Fine and Clark F Schierle, ‘Plastic Surgery-Related Hashtag Utilization on Instagram: Implications for Education and Marketing’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, Volume 38, Issue 3, March 2018, pp 332–338

Chae, J., 2017. Virtual makeover: Selfie-taking and social media use increase selfie-editing frequency through social comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, pp.370-376.

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 5

This week in digital communities, we looked at 'What is digital citizenship? Hashtag Publics, political engagement and activism'. In the reading this week, Vronmen (2017) details how there has been a shift in "digitally enable citizen participation, mobilisation and organisation".

Within the book's 8 chapters, Vronmen discusses how political engagement has been changed within the modern era and how the omnipresent nature of social media has developed digital citizenship. Vronmen also looks at how established political organisations are turning to these forms of media to re-engage citizens in political processes that have become disenfranchising for many. Vronmen believes that the traditional, necessary, group-based politics has not gone away, but has found a new form through digital mediums. Vronmen argues that it is vital that these changes regarding how political engagement occurs are understood by established political organisations.

The influence of digital citizenship can be clearly seen in elections in the way that they offer political parties and candidates to activate their voter bases and increase the effectiveness of campaigns by providing fund raising opportunities that would not be possible without these platformed interactions (Nelimarkka et al, 2020).

I believe that the encouragement of political participation through digital citizenship is extremely beneficial to society and our democratic system. Social media platforms have given all users a voice to express their thoughts on political issues and participate in the wider political landscape. While there has been a shift from traditional political collectives, it has made political participation more simple and easy for the everyday citizen through online social movements.

References

1. Vromen, A., 2017. Digital citizenship and political engagement. In Digital Citizenship and Political Engagement (pp. 9-49). Palgrave Macmillan, London.

2.Nelimarkka, M., Laaksonen, S.M., Tuokko, M. and Valkonen, T., 2020. Platformed interactions: how social media platforms relate to candidate–constituent interaction during Finnish 2015 election campaigning. Social Media+ Society, 6(2)

[mattstevodigcom]

Week 4: Digital Community and Fandom: Reality TV Case Study

This week revolved around Reality TV. I looked at the reading titled "Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere". By Todd Graham and Auli Harju, the reading discusses the ways in which reality TV sparks and promotes participation and invites us to act as citizens.

The reading contests that news journalism is the most common form of media that invites us to participate as citizens, in a top-down manner. Graham and Harju suggest that despite this, through the internet, many other forms of media exist whereby citizens can participate in discussions and communicate in a bottom-up manner. By doing this, they are capable of raising talking points and bringing their own knowledge and life-experiences to these discussions. Because of the internet, scholars have questioned the idea that there is only one public sphere in which citizens interact. It is now believed that there are many digital publics that form on different platforms and around different issues (Sakariassen 2020).

The article goes in to further detail about why Reality TV shows spark the citizens within us and poses two main questions the first being “What are the triggers of political talk in discussion forums tied to reality TV?" The second being "what are the topics and issues of such talk within these spaces?" (Graham and Hajru, 2011). The authors content that reality TV shows are successful in sparking participation from citizens by raising issues that citizens can relate back to their everyday experiences in an entertaining way that invites participation.

I agree with the contention that reality TV is prominent facilitator of discussion with public spheres. Given the controversial nature of many reality TV shows, citizens feel more passionately about the topics and as a result are more likely to voice their opinions on the many different public spheres available to citizens today.

References:

1. Graham, T. and Hajru, A., 2011. Reality TV as a trigger of everyday political talk in the net-based public sphere. European Journal of Communication, 26(1), pp.18-32.

2. Sakariassen, H., 2020. A digital public sphere: Just in theory or a perceived reality for users of social network sites?. MedieKultur: Journal of Media & Communication Research, 36(68).

[mattstevodigcom]

How Does Tumblr Function as a Digital Community?

Tumblr was founded by David Karp in 2007 as a microblogging social media platform. Tumblr allows users to create their own blog through a variety of multimedia and connect with other users who have shared interests.

Tumblr functions as a digital community in a different way compared to other popular social media networks. Tumblr users are drawn to the platform because of its use of visually engaging media. Users can add a variety of media to their posts to make their blogs more interesting for viewers. In addition, Tumblr focuses on connecting individuals who are likeminded and as a result, has created communities where people from all walks of life can connect through a shared interest/experience, without the fear of judgement that can be present on other social medias. Tumblr users can choose to remain anonymous on the platform, whereas other social media platforms are based on the users' persona. This anonymity allows users to feel more comfortable expressing who they are and what they believe in (Hillman et al., 2014, p.285)

Because of this anonymity, Tumblr users feel comfortable bringing awareness to and promoting issues within society that are not always discussed on other social media platforms. Topics such as LGBTQI+ and Feminism are commonly discussed on Tumblr as users can feel safe discussing these topics in a supportive environment. (Keller 2019 p8).

Tumblr has created a digital community that allows for individuality and expression while still fostering a strong sense of community for people with all different interests. This has helped set the platform apart from other social media and has kept users coming back to the platform to discuss and promote their interests and passions with like-minded users.

References

1. Hillman, S., Procyk, J. and Neustaedter, C., 2014, February. Tumblr fandoms, community & culture. In Proceedings of the companion publication of the 17th ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work & social computing (pp. 285-288).

2. Keller, J 2019, ‘”Oh, she’s a tumblr feminist”: exploring the platform vernacular of girls’ social media feminisms’, Social Media + Society, pp. 1-11.