Crybaby

Imagine reporting a death threat on Instagram, only to receive an automated reply: “We’re sorry, but this doesn’t go against our guidelines.” Sound familiar? Welcome to the paradox of social media governance, where platforms profit from engagement - even when it’s hate. Let’s dissect how digital citizenship collides with algorithmic apathy.  

1. Networked Harassment: From Gamergate to Gen Z

Gamergate exposed the gendered nature of online abuse and the role of platforms in facilitating harassment (Salter 2018). Fast-forward to 2023: Trans TikToker @RainbowRiotRae’s videos are buried under “community guidelines,” while neo-Nazi memes thrive. The weaponization of platform governance tools, such as mass reporting, has become a significant issue for social media creators, leaving them vulnerable to content takedowns and account bans (Meisner 2023).  

2. Governance or Gaslighting?

Recent research reveals challenges in regulating online hate speech. Australia’s eSafety duty of care aims to address Islamophobia (Butler 2022), while ineffective social media bans in Sri Lanka suggest a need for targeted moderation (Wijeratne 2018). However, global platform governance complicates decisions on free expression and privacy, raising concerns about transparency and accountability (Bloch-Wehba 2019). 

3. Humor as Resistance: Clapbacks Go Viral

When comedian Hannah Gadsby turned trolls misogyny into NFT art, she flipped the script. TikTok’s #TrollBeGone trend sees creators like @LGBTQNation roast bigots with absurdity - a tactic Galan (2016) call “subversive self-defense.” Even brands like Ben & Jerry’s troll back, replying to hate with ice cream puns. But is humor enough when death threats trend?  

4. CSR or PR Stunts?  

After Adidas dropped Kanye, they pledged $1M to anti-hate groups - yet their factory workers in Cambodia face union-busting. However, social media activism often manifests as performative allyship, exemplified by the #BlackOutTuesday campaign on Instagram, which failed to create substantial progress in diversity and inclusion (Wellman 2022). Real change? Pay marginalized creators to design AI moderation tools.  

Should platforms face fines for every unmoderated slur, or is digital citizenship a collective fight? Drop your hottest takes below. 🔥🗯️  

Reference

Salter, M 2017, ‘From geek masculinity to Gamergate: the technological rationality of online abuse’, Crime Media Culture An International Journal, vol. 14, SAGE Publishing, no. 2, pp. 247–264.

‌Meisner, C 2023, ‘The weaponization of platform governance: Mass reporting and algorithmic punishments in the creator economy’, Policy & Internet, vol. 15, Wiley, no. 4, pp. 466–477.

‌Butler, U 2022, ‘Combatting online Islamophobia and racism in Australia: the case for an eSafety duty of care’, SSRN Electronic Journal, Elsevier BV.

‌Wijeratne, Y 2018, ‘The Control of Hate Speech on Social Media: Lessons from Sri Lanka’, SSRN Electronic Journal, Elsevier BV.

‌Wellman, ML 2022, ‘Black Squares for Black Lives? Performative Allyship as Credibility Maintenance for Social Media Influencers on Instagram’, Social Media + Society, vol. 8, no. 1.

‌Galán, S 2016, ‘Beyond the Logic of State Protection: Feminist Self-Defense in Cairo after the January 25 Revolution’, Kohl: A Journal for Body and Gender Research, vol. 2, no. Summer, pp. 71–89.

‌Bloch-Wehba, H 2019, Global Platform Governance: Private Power in the Shadow of the State, Law.

The Rise of Social Gaming and Live Streaming

In today’s digital age, gaming communities have blossomed into vibrant social hubs, driven by the intersection of social gaming and live streaming. Platforms such as Twitch and Discord have transformed gaming from a solitary pursuit into a collaborative experience where players forge meaningful relationships based on shared interests (Hamilton et al. 2014). This dynamic environment fosters not just competition but lasting friendships that often transcend geographic boundaries, enhancing community engagement (Sheng & Kairam 2020).

The Impact of Streamers and Community Engagement

The rise of live streaming has intensified this community engagement, turning gamers into celebrities and influencers. For example, streamers like PewDiePie or Mixi Gaming - those with millions of viewers have cultivated dedicated fan bases by sharing their gaming experiences live, allowing for real-time viewer interaction (Afi & Ouiddad 2021). This communal experience not only enhances enjoyment but also leads to new career opportunities, particularly appealing by monetising their passions through subscriptions and sponsorships (Johnson et al. 2019). Essentially, these platforms empower and support gamers by transforming into the eSports industry (Edge 2013), creating sustainable careers in an evolving digital landscape.

Challenges and the Future of Gaming Communities

However, while these communities provide a sense of belonging, they also face challenges, such as toxic behaviour, cyberbullying and harassment (Bodaghi et al. 20223, highlighting the necessity for robust moderation policies and community standards to maintain an inclusive atmosphere (Behl et al. 2024). As gaming continues to evolve with technologies like 5G and AR, the potential for more immersive experiences will deepen connections among players (Hazarika & Rahmati 2023). It is crucial for platforms to prioritize safe, engaging spaces that celebrate diversity while actively combating negative behaviours.

Reference

Hamilton, WA, Garretson, O & Andruid Kerne 2014, ‘Streaming on twitch’, pp. 1315–1324.

‌Sheng, JT & Kairam, SR 2020, ‘From Virtual Strangers to IRL Friends’, Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, vol. 4, Association for Computing Machinery, no. CSCW2, pp. 1–34.

‌Fouad El Afi & Smail Ouiddad 2021, ‘The Rise of Video-Game Live Streaming: Motivations and Forms of Viewer Engagement’, Communications in computer and information science, Springer Science+Business Media, pp. 156–163.

‌Edge, N 2017, Evolution of the Gaming Experience: Live Video Streaming and the Emergence of a New Web Community, The Journal of Undergraduate Research.

‌Bodaghi, A, Fung, BCM & Schmitt, KA 2023, ‘Technological Solutions to Online Toxicity: Potential and Pitfalls’, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine, vol. 42, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), no. 4, pp. 57–65.

Hazarika, A & Rahmati, M 2023, ‘Towards an Evolved Immersive Experience: Exploring 5G- and Beyond-Enabled Ultra-Low-Latency Communications for Augmented and Virtual Reality’, Sensors, vol. 23, MDPI AG, no. 7, p. 3682.

Scroll through Instagram and TikTok, you’ll find faces smoothed into poreless mannequins, eyes widened to anime proportions, and skin bleached to ethereal glow—all thanks to AR filters like “Bold Glamour”. These digital masks aren’t just fun; they’re rewriting the rules of selfhood. Let’s unpack how AR filters shape communities, fuel brand power, and deepen the rift between authenticity and algorithmic aspiration.

1. Filters as the New Platform Vernacular

AR filters are today’s lingua franca - a visual slang shaping our communication. Instagram’s “Crying Makeup” filter, which aestheticises distress, or Snapchat’s “Gender Swap”, which reinforces binary norms, creates shared cultural codes (Goetz 2021). Yet, as Duffy & Meisner (2022) note, marginalized users often hack these tools: Queer creators subvert beauty filters to celebrate androgeny (#FilterFluidity), while disability advocates use AR to visualize accessible futures (#A11yFilters).  

2. Brands: Beauty Gatekeepers or Allies?

Brands like Gucci and Fenty Beauty deploy AR try-ons to gamify consumption, blurring shopping and selfie culture. But when Dove launched the #NoDigitalDistortion campaign, pledging to ban retouching in ads, critics called it hypocrisy - their parent company Unilever still sells skin-lightening creams.

3. The Dysmorphia Feedback Loop

Filters don’t just reflect beauty standards - they “set” them. A survey found that over 70% of young people use AR beauty filters and applications to enhance their photos (Šiđanin et al. 2023). This trend is linked to increased body image dissatisfaction and anxiety, potentially exacerbating body dysmorphic disorder (BDD) symptoms and leading to the pursuit of cosmetic procedures (Laughter et al. 2023)

4. Rewriting the Code: Grassroots AR  

Resistance blooms in niche corners. Artist “Ars Electronica” crafts filters that distort faces into abstract art, rejecting beauty algorithms. On TikTok, #FilterFreeFriday trends challenge influencer culture, while indie devs create filters celebrating acne, scars, and aging. These acts reclaim digital citizenship - proving self-expression can defy platformization (Šiđanin et al. 2023).  

Are AR filters the ultimate tool of self-empowerment - or just Silicon Valley’s new beauty industrial complex? Slide into the comments with your most unfiltered takes.

Reference:

Goetz, T 2021, ‘Swapping Gender is a Snap(chat)’, Catalyst: Feminism, Theory, Technoscience, vol. 7, University of Toronto Libraries - UOTL, no. 2.

Duffy, BE & Meisner, C 2022, ‘Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility’, Media Culture & Society, vol. 45, SAGE Publishing, no. 2, pp. 285–304.

Jolly, J 2021, Dove owner Unilever to ban excessive photo editing from its adverts, the Guardian, The Guardian. <https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/mar/09/dove-owner-unilever-to-ban-excessive-photo-editing-from-its-adverts>.

‌Šiđanin, I, Milić, B, Mitrović, K & Spajić, J 2023, ‘USE OF BEAUTY APPLICATIONS AND AR BEAUTY FILTERS AMONG YOUNG PEOPLE: TRENDS AND CHALLENGES’, 19th International Scientific Conference on Industrial Systems, Faculty of Technical Sciences, pp. 299–303.

Ever scrolled through Instagram and felt like your face isn’t “Instagram face” enough? You’re not alone. From Kardashian-esque curves to chiselled jawlines, platforms enforce aesthetic templates - standardised beauty ideals that blur the line between self-expression and digital conformity. Let’s dissect how these templates warp our self-image and who gets erased.  

Microcelebrity Culture: Branding Bodies for Clicks

Microcelebrities like Bella Hadid or James Charles don’t just post selfies - they sell aspirational blueprints. Influencers engage in various modes of labour, including intimate affective labour, developmental aesthetic labour, and aspiring relational labour, to build their brands and increase social and economic capital (Duguay 2019), which often involves sexualized labour, where influencers adopt a 'porn chic' aesthetic to monetize attention (Drenten et al. 2019). For example, TikTok’s “#FoxEyeChallenge” glorified eyelid tape to mimic Eurocentric features, while fillers and filters normalize “pornification” - sexualized poses that mirror commercial porn.  

Algorithmic Erasure: Who Gets Hidden?

Social media platforms like Instagram employ algorithmic and content moderation practices that disproportionately affect marginalized creators and stigmatized content, leading to experiences of invisibility and self-censorship (Duffy & Meisner 2022). Marginalised bodies face a double bind: conform to mainstream templates or vanish. Meanwhile, #BDD (Body Dysmorphic Disorder) rates surge as teens chase unattainable “snatched waists” and “thigh gaps” - ideals amplified by pro-ana (pro-anorexia) accounts disguised as #Fitspiration.  

The Profit of Dysmorphia  

Influencers’ accounts have attracted billions of views (Om et al. 2021), but the quality of information remains poor, with low discern scores on various procedures (Rothchild et al. 2023). For example, Kylie Jenner promotes "natural beauty" while tagging her cosmetic surgeons, highlighting identity dissonance between online and offline selves. Exposure to enhanced images can cause "perceptual drift," changing expectations of natural facial anatomy (Love et al. 2023), as Millennials and Gen Z increasingly pursue preventative and minimally invasive treatments like botulinum toxin and dermal filler (Mobayed et al. 2019).

Resisting the Template

Hope glimmers in corners of the web. Several influencers use TikTok to document their unfiltered surgeon or self-changing journey, while #BodyNeutrality activists reject “good vs. bad” body binaries.

Is your selfie a rebellion—or just feeding the algorithm’s beauty standard? Drop your unfiltered truths below. 🖤📸 

Reference:

Duffy, BE & Meisner, C 2022, ‘Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility’, Media Culture & Society, vol. 45, SAGE Publishing, no. 2, pp. 285–304.

Rothchild, E, Chernovolenko, D, Wang, F & Ricci, JA 2023, ‘An Analysis of Male Plastic Surgery Content on TikTok’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, vol. 44, Oxford University Press (OUP), no. 5, pp. 556–564.

‌Love, M, Saunders, C, Harris, S, Moon, Z & Veale, D 2023, ‘Redefining Beauty: A Qualitative Study Exploring Adult Women’s Motivations for Lip Filler Resulting in Anatomical Distortion’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, vol. 43, Oxford University Press (OUP), no. 8, pp. 907–916.

‌Mobayed, N, Nguyen, J & Jagdeo, J 2019, ‘Minimally Invasive Facial Cosmetic Procedures for the Millennial Aesthetic Patient’, Journal of Drugs in Dermatology, vol. 19, SanovaWorks, no. 1, pp. 100–103.

‌Om, A, Ijeoma, B, Kebede, S & Losken, A 2021, ‘Analyzing the Quality of Aesthetic Surgery Procedure Videos on TikTok’, Aesthetic Surgery Journal, vol. 41, Oxford University Press, no. 12, pp. 2078–2083.

Duguay, S 2019, ‘“Running the Numbers”: Modes of Microcelebrity Labor in Queer Women’s Self-Representation on Instagram and Vine’, Social Media + Society, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 205630511989400.

Picture this: A TikToker’s “slow fashion” haul features a $200 linen dress tagged #EthicalFashion - while Shein churns out 6,000 new styles daily. Welcome to the paradox of digital citizenship in the age of fast fashion. Let’s dissect how influencers like Venetia La Manna preach sustainability while algorithms profit from our guilt.

The Rise of “Eco-Influencers”

Slow fashion influencers blend activism with aesthetics, using performative posts such as Instagram Reels or OOTDs and wardrobe tracking to promote the movement's ethical and political goals. However, recent studies revealed that there are still complexities and potential pitfalls of sustainable supply chain management, such as unanticipated outcomes, trade-offs, and tensions in operations and supply chains (Matos, Gold & Hall 2020). When Big Sister Swap partners with H&M’s “Conscious” line (accused of greenwashing), is it activism or ambassadorship?

Digital Citizenship ≠ Consumerism

Digital fashion activism, exemplified by the #thriftflip trend, has altered consumption patterns but raised thrift store prices, risking the exclusion of low-income shoppers (Park et al. 2022; Ronobir et al. 2020). Initiatives like #WhoMadeMyClothes challenge fashion brands' sustainability claims (Greco 2022). This creates tension between gendered solidarity and neoliberal consumerism, positioning the female body as both a victim of exploitation and a symbol of ethical consumption (Horton & Street 2021).

#thriftflip trend vs #whomademyclothes

Algorithms vs. Authenticity

Platforms reward performative activism: Aesthetic “capsule wardrobe” videos get 10x more views than posts about unionizing garment workers. Etter & Albu (2020) warned that platforms can commodify citizenship through sorting, filtering, and ranking, but also introduce constraints like information overload and opacity - Shein’s TikTok ads now hijack #SlowFashion tags, targeting Gen Z with $5 crop tops for example. Even eco-influencers face pressure to #advertise “eco-friendly” fast fashion collabs to stay relevant.

Grassroots vs. Gatekeepers

Hope exists! Grassroots movements are leveraging digital platforms for sustainability. While sustainable practices like communal mending and "anti-haul" videos are emerging (Durrani, 2018; Wood, 2020), marginalized creators face algorithmic (in)visibility and biased moderation, leading to self-censorship (Duffy & Meisner, 2022). This highlights the complex role of digital spaces in promoting sustainability and perpetuating inequalities, emphasizing the need for better algorithmic literacy (Henderson et al., 2020).

Is your #ThriftHaul empowering workers—or just inflating an influencer’s brand deal? Drop your most controversial take below. 👀♻️

Reference:

Duffy, BE & Meisner, C 2022, ‘Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility’, Media, Culture & Society, vol. 45, SAGE Publications, no. 2, pp. 285–304.

‌Durrani, M 2018, ‘“People Gather for Stranger Things, So Why Not This?” Learning Sustainable Sensibilities through Communal Garment-Mending Practices’, Sustainability, vol. 10, MDPI AG, no. 7, p. 2218.

Etter, M & Albu, OB 2020, ‘Activists in the dark: Social Media Algorithms and Collective Action in Two Social Movement Organizations’, Organization, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 68–91.

Greco, S 2022, ‘Twitter Activists’ Argumentation Through Subdiscussions: Theory, Method and Illustration of the Controversy Surrounding Sustainable Fashion’, Argumentation.

Henderson, MJ, Shade, LR & Mackinnon, K 2020, ‘EVERY CLICK YOU MAKE: ALGORITHMIC LITERACY AND THE DIGITAL LIVES OF YOUNG ADULTS’, AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research, University of Illinois Libraries.

Horton, K & Street, P 2021, ‘This hashtag is just my style: popular feminism & digital fashion activism’, Continuum, vol. 35, no. 6, pp. 1–14.

Matos, SV, Schleper, MC, Gold, S & Hall, JK 2020, ‘The hidden side of sustainable operations and supply chain management: unanticipated outcomes, trade-offs and tensions’, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, vol. 40, no. 12, pp. 1749–1770.

Park, HJ, Kim, JY & Lee, K-H 2022, ‘Interplay Between TikTok & Generation Z: The Trickle-Up Effect of #thriftflip’, Breaking Boundaries, Iowa State University Digital Press <https://www.iastatedigitalpress.com/itaa/article/id/13735/>.

Imagine a world where hashtags hold more power than voting booths. From #BlackLivesMatter to #ClimateStrike, digital citizenship isn’t just about being online - it’s about rewiring democracy.  But as platforms like TikTok and Instagram monetize our outrage, are we citizens or data points?

Hashtag Publics: The New Town Square

#StopAsianHate didn’t just trend - it mobilized offline protests, fundraisers, and policy shifts. As Zappavigna notes, hashtags create “ambient affiliation,” binding strangers through shared rage or hope (Zappavigna 2011), but platformisation turns these publics into commodities.

For instance, concerns about Instagram's content moderation practices and their impact on activism and marginalized communities by algorithm promoting #Wellness content, which often reinforces neoliberal ideals of health and beauty (Jiang et al., 2024). Simultaneously, activists report increased automated content moderation during political events like #Palestine, leading to perceived censorship of pro-Palestinian content (Abokhodair et al., 2024).

Digital Citizenship: Rights vs. Algorithms

The growing use of algorithms in daily life presents opportunities and challenges for digital citizenship and fundamental rights, raising concerns about privacy, transparency, and fairness (Gerards, 2019). 

The adoption of algorithmic decision-making impacts constitutional rights, with IT companies holding significant power over human rights through data processing. Researchers advocate for a "right to explanation" for automated decisions and highlight the need for ethical standards in AI development (Pibaev & Simonova, 2020). Balancing algorithmic benefits with the protection of digital rights remains a key challenge in the digital age.

Gen Z’s Double-Edged Sword

Recent research highlights the complex relationship between youth activism, digital platforms, and data exploitation. Young activists employ hybrid tactics and "digital infra politics" to resist surveillance while engaging in political activities online (Lee, 2022). 

Take #BookTok: Teens rallied to connect over literature and promote reading, blending digital and analog media (Martens et al. 2022), but these digital environments also pose challenges, as youth's political participation and self-expression online generate data traces that can be mined and exploited (Barassi, 2020). As Stegeman (2024) warns, while online visibility can provide benefits, it also carries risks, especially for marginalised creators who must navigate the threat of both invisibility and harmful hypervisibility.

Then, hack the System?

While #SaveTwitter critiques Musk’s “free speech” farce, decentralized platforms like Mastodon gain traction. But is fleeing enough? The EU’s Digital Services Act forces transparency—a glimmer of hope. Yet, as … reminds us, platforms are architectures of control, not neutral stages.

Reference

Abokhodair, N, Skop, Y, Rüller, S, Konstantin Aal & Houda Elmimouni 2024, ‘Opaque algorithms, transparent biases: Automated content moderation during the Sheikh Jarrah Crisis’, First Monday, University of Illinois at Chicago.

‌Barassi, V 2020, ‘Youth, algorithms, and the problem of political data’, Routledge eBooks, Informa, pp. 166–176.

‌Gerards, J 2019, ‘The fundamental rights challenges of algorithms’, Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, vol. 37, no. 3, pp. 205–209.

Igor Pibaev & Snezhana Simonova 2020, ‘Algorithms in the mechanism of implementation of constitutional rights and freedoms: challenges in the digital age’, Sravnitel noe konstitucionnoe obozrenie, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 31–50.

Jiang, K, Bailey, KA & Lamarche, L 2024, ‘An infinite project to nowhere: #wellness on Instagram’, Feminist Media Studies, Taylor & Francis, pp. 1–17.

Lee, A 2022, ‘Hybrid activism under the radar: Surveillance and resistance among marginalized youth activists in the United States and Canada’, New Media & Society, vol. 26, SAGE Publishing, no. 7, pp. 3833–3853.

Martens, M, Balling, G & Higgason, KA 2022, ‘#BookTokMadeMeReadIt: young adult reading communities across an international, sociotechnical landscape’, Information and Learning Sciences, vol. 123, Emerald Publishing Limited, no. 11/12, pp. 705–722.

‌Stegeman, HM, Are, C & Poell, T 2023, ‘STRATEGIC (IN)VISIBILITY: HOW MARGINALISED CREATORS NAVIGATE THE RISKS AND CONSTRAINTS OF ONLINE VISIBILITY’, AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research.

US Institute of Diplomacy and Human Rights 2022, What is Digital Citizenship and Why is it Important?, Usidhr.org.

“Anh trai vuot ngan chong gai” (Call me by Fire) is a reality TV show that captivates audiences by merging art with personal narratives of 35 reputable artists in the age of over 30, creating a unique spectacle that blurs the lines between reality and performance.  But is the show’s spectacular significant contrast to the authenticity?

Engagement and Authenticity Paradox

While producers encourage contestants to share their real-life experiences, the need for drama and engagement often leads to scripted or edited narratives that can distort the audience's perception of reality (Weil & Dunbar 2016), creating a complex relationship between producers, performers, and audiences, where engagement is carefully crafted and can be easily disrupted (Hill, 2017).

In Call me by Fire show, this is also the biggest concern of most contestants, as these people are mostly music artists with a fear of their reputation being negatively affected (Vietcetera 2024). However, the show also implemented this concern successfully by respecting every wish and story of each artist and creating a cozy, safe environment in the most subtle way to make the artists feel comfortable, natural, and emotional (Thach Anh 2024). As a result, the show successfully impressed the audience with its authenticity, with genuine emotions and connections of the artists in every scene.

Social Media Dynamics

Reality TV shows have evolved to create intimate connections between contestants and audiences through social media platforms, blurring the lines between reality and performance. Viewers often fail to distinguish between actors and their characters, developing strong emotional attachments (Torrego et al. 2021). This "mediated public intimacy" transforms viewers from bystanders to confidants, fostering a sense of collective complicity (Kaplan & Kupper 2017). 

In Call me by Fire show, besides scenes related to the interpersonal connection between artists recorded, the “brothers” also actively interacted with viewers on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Tik Tok…, creating an immediate and personal connection that enhances viewer investment but also reinforces the notion that reality TV is performative (Thach Anh 2024). This dynamic interaction between artists, audiences, and producers across multiple platforms has reshaped the reality TV landscape, highlighting the need for media education to enhance critical viewing skills while maintaining entertainment value (Torrego et al. 2021).

Viewer Consumption Habits

As we dissect this phenomenon, it’s crucial to discuss the implications of our consumption habits. Are we craving authentic connections, or are we just drawn to the spectacle? 

In Call Me by Fire show, social media also plays an important role in not only shaping the artist's icon but also reflecting the “true self” of each individual through their content behind the scenes like interviews, life in the show, and connection between artists... The cultivation of identity through social media influence perhaps signals that audiences seek not only validation of their experiences but also a curated version of reality that satisfies their emotional needs (Davis 2019). As a result, social media platforms have become integral to identity construction in the digital age, allowing individuals to curate and present idealized versions of themselves (Nikolova 2022).

So, what do we truly seek in a reality TV show?  

Ultimately, shows like Call me by Fire challenge us to navigate the tension between spectacle and authenticity and remind us that while curated realities can entertain and engage, it’s the genuine emotions and shared experiences that create lasting connections. As viewers, we're invited to reflect on what we truly seek in our journey through reality TV: the allure of drama or the comfort of authenticity.

References

Weiland, SJ & Dunbar, K 2016, ‘What’s real about reality television?’, Journal of Mass Communication and Journalism, vol. 06, OMICS Publishing Group, no. 03.

Hill, A 2017, ‘Reality TV Engagement: Producer and Audience Relations for Reality Talent Shows’, Media Industries, vol. 4, Michigan Publishing, no. 1. 

‌Vietcetera 2024, CEO Vân Hạnh và khát vọng định hình tiêu chuẩn ‘premium’ cho show truyền hình Việt, Yeah1group.com.

<https://yeah1group.com/ceo-van-hanh-va-khat-vong-dinh-hinh-tieu-chuan-premium-cho-show-truyen-hinh-viet>.

Thạch Anh 2024, Nhà sản xuất ‘Anh trai vượt ngàn chông gai’: Các ‘anh tài’ vui chơi nhưng có chiến lược, Thanh Niên Vietnam. <https://thanhnien.vn/nha-san-xuat-anh-trai-vuot-ngan-chong-gai-cac-anh-tai-vui-choi-nhung-co-chien-luoc-185240613143220251.htm>.

Torrego, A, Gutiérrez-Martín, A & Hoechsmann, M 2021, ‘The Fine Line between Person and Persona in the Spanish Reality Television Show La isla de las tentaciones: Audience Engagement on Instagram’, Sustainability, vol. 13, Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute, no. 4, pp. 1753–1753.

Kaplan, D & Kupper, Y 2017, ‘Toward an Interaction-Centered Approach to Media Events: Mediated Public Intimacy on the Reality TV ShowBig Brother’, Journal of Communication, vol. 67, Oxford University Press, no. 5, pp. 758–780.

Davis, JL 2019, ‘Authenticity, Digital Media, and Person Identity Verification’, Oxford University Press eBooks, Oxford University Press, pp. 93–112.

Tumblr isn’t just a relic of 2010s internet culture - It’s a living, breathing ecosystem where *platform vernacular* fuels niche communities and redefines digital activism. But how do Tumblr’s unique language and norms empower marginalized voices while navigating the paradoxes of the “public sphere”?

Micro-Publics and the Rise of Hashtag Vernacular

Habermas’s “public sphere” idealizes open, rational discourse, but Tumblr’s fragmented micro-publics - like LGBTQ+ blogs or fan communities - show how digital spaces operate differently (Simpson 2018). Here, hashtags like #BlackLivesMatter or #MeToo aren’t just metadata; they’re rallying cries that shape political discourse (Rho & Mazmanian 2020). 

For instance, the #bodypositive movement on Tumblr challenges beauty norms through user-generated selfies and essays, fostering a community-driven counter-narrative to mainstream media (Reif, Miller & Taddicken 2022). These hashtags act as vernacular glue, binding users through shared slang (e.g., “OTP” or “AU”), GIFs, and reblogs - a far cry from Habermas’s text-heavy ideal.  

Anonymity as a Double-Edged Sword

Tumblr’s lack of real-name policies creates safe spaces for marginalized groups, like LGBTQIA+ teens, to express themselves without fear of surveillance (Cavalcante 2018). Yet, this anonymity coexists with algorithmic biases. While Tumblr’s reverse-chronological feed *seems* democratic, studies show platforms like Twitter skew political discourse leftward, raising questions about whose voices get amplified (Huszár et al. 2021).  

Platform Vernacular in Action: Memes and Fandom 

Tumblr’s vernacular thrives on remix culture. Take TJLC (The Johnlock Conspiracy), a Sherlock fandom theory that spiralled into a meta-commentary on queer representation. To be more specific, the video of Sarah Z’s dissection of TJLC highlights how Tumblr’s “shitposting” and roleplay (RP) cultures blend humour with activism. Memes here aren’t just jokes - they’re resistance tools, as seen in political movements like #FreeHongKong, where absurdist humour critiques authoritarianism (Zheng & Li 2023).  

Challenges: Surveillance and Algorithmic Gatekeeping 

Despite its grassroots ethos, Tumblr isn’t immune to corporate or governmental surveillance. The Department of Homeland Security’s social media monitoring underscores how “safe spaces” can still be policed (Boyce 2016). Meanwhile, algorithmic curation risks homogenizing discourse - echoing Habermas’s fear of institutional influence.  

Conclusion: Tumblr as a Vernacular Public Sphere?  

Tumblr’s vernacular - reblogs, dashboards, and niche slang - creates a *participatory* public sphere where aesthetics and activism collide. Yet, its fragmented micro-publics remind us that the digital “public sphere” is plural, messy, and perpetually evolving. As platforms phase out hashtags, Tumblr’s survival hinges on balancing creativity with resistance to algorithmic control.  

Reference:

Anselmo, DW 2018, ‘Gender and Queer Fan Labor on Tumblr’, Feminist Media Histories, vol. 4, University of California Press, no. 1, pp. 84–114.

Boyce, GA 2015, ‘The rugged border: Surveillance, policing and the dynamic materiality of the US/Mexico frontier’, Environment and Planning D Society and Space, vol. 34, SAGE Publishing, no. 2, pp. 245–262.

Cavalcante, A 2018, ‘Tumbling Into Queer Utopias and Vortexes: Experiences of LGBTQ Social Media Users on Tumblr’, Journal of Homosexuality, vol. 66, Taylor & Francis, no. 12, pp. 1715–1735.‌

Huszár, F, Ktena, SI, O’Brien, C, Belli, L, Schlaikjer, A & Hardt, M 2021, ‘Algorithmic amplification of politics on Twitter’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 119, no. 1.

Reif, A, Miller, I & Taddicken, M 2022, ‘“Love the Skin You‘re In”: An Analysis of Women’s Self-Presentation and User Reactions to Selfies Using the Tumblr Hashtag #bodypositive’, Mass Communication & Society, vol. 26, Taylor & Francis, no. 6, pp. 1038–1061.

Rho, EH & Mazmanian, M 2020, ‘Political Hashtags & the Lost Art of Democratic Discourse’, pp. 1–13, viewed 16 February 2025.

Simpson, E 2018, ‘Integrated & Alone’, pp. 237–240.