Untitled

Introduction: Gaming as a Digital Community

Gaming is more than just entertainment—it’s a digital social space. Online gaming communities shape interactions, identity, and culture, creating spaces where players form friendships, compete, and even influence game development.

This post explores: 🎮 Gaming cultures & communities 🎮 Live streaming & social gaming 🎮 Inclusivity and digital citizenship in gaming

Gaming Cultures & Communities

Gaming communities function as social networks, where players interact based on: ✅ Skill & expertise – Competitive gaming (eSports, speedrunning) ✅ Shared interests – RPG groups, modding communities ✅ Platform-based engagement – Twitch, YouTube Gaming, Discord

📌 However, gaming culture has historically been dominated by a specific demographic—young, white, or East Asian men—making it harder for women and marginalized players to be accepted as ‘true gamers’ (Hardwick, 2023).

Live Streaming & the Rise of Gaming as a Social Space

Streaming platforms like Twitch, YouTube Gaming, and Facebook Gaming have transformed gaming into a spectator sport and community-driven experience.

🔹 Twitch alone has over 31 million daily visitors. 🔹 Streamers create fan-based micro-communities, where engagement is shaped by chat interactions, donations, and community guidelines.

💡 But live streaming also brings challenges:

Harassment of marginalized streamers

Platform moderation issues (who decides what’s acceptable?)

The pressure of ‘always being online’ for content creators

Gaming & Inclusivity: Who Gets to Participate?

Despite the social nature of gaming, not all players feel welcome. Online spaces often reflect real-world biases, with issues such as: 🚨 Gatekeeping – "You're not a real gamer if you play mobile games!" 🚨 Toxicity & harassment – Women and LGBTQ+ gamers face disproportionate abuse. 🚨 Lack of representation – Many mainstream games still lack diversity in characters and narratives.

Modding & Knowledge Communities

The modding community (players modifying games) is an example of digital citizenship in action—players create content, fix bugs, and expand narratives beyond what developers intended (Sotamaa, 2010).

Similarly, knowledge communities (Jenkins, 2006) allow players to exchange strategies, guides, and content in fan forums and wikis.

What Can Be Done?

Introduction: Social Media as a Space of Conflict

Digital citizenship is often associated with community, inclusion, and participation, but social media platforms are also sites of conflict, harassment, and power struggles. Governance and regulation shape these spaces, determining who gets to speak, what content is allowed, and how harassment is handled.

This post explores: 🔹 Online harassment and its impact 🔹 Social media governance—who controls digital spaces? 🔹 What can be done—legal action, advocacy, and corporate responsibility

Social Media Governance: Who Controls Digital Spaces?

Governance in social media is a complex system involving: ✅ Tech corporations (Meta, Twitter, TikTok) setting policies and moderating content ✅ Governments & laws (e.g., Australia’s Online Safety Act 2021) ✅ Community-based moderation (e.g., Facebook groups, Reddit admins)

While moderation helps prevent hate speech and misinformation, critics argue that corporate control over speech can be used to silence activism or dissent. Different countries have varying regulations, creating tensions between free speech and online safety.

Understanding Online Harassment

Online harassment is a serious digital citizenship issue, affecting people disproportionately based on gender, race, and identity.

📊 Key findings on online abuse:

59% of women globally have faced online harassment (Plan International, 2020).

Trans & gender-diverse individuals are at higher risk of digital abuse (Haslop et al., 2021).

Analyzing 70 million comments, The Guardian found that women and people of color received the most online hate (Gardiner et al., 2016).

Harassment tactics include: 🚨 Trolling – Insults and disruptive comments meant to provoke. 🚨 Doxxing – Publishing someone’s personal information to incite real-world harm. 🚨 Image-based abuse – Sharing private or intimate images without consent.

These behaviors are often coordinated and organized, as seen in Gamergate, where anti-feminist groups systematically harassed women in the gaming industry (Marwick & Caplan, 2018).

What Can Be Done?

🔹 Legal Solutions

The Online Safety Act 2021 allows Australian authorities to force platforms to remove harmful content within 24 hours.

Some countries criminalize doxxing, cyberstalking, and image-based abuse.

🔹 Humor & Counter-Speech

Comedians like Hannah Gadsby & Amy Schumer use satire to expose online misogyny.

TikTok creators reclaim space by using humor to challenge online bullies.

🔹 Advocacy & Reporting

Organizations like eSafety Commissioner offer resources to report digital abuse.

Grassroots movements educate users on digital safety & mental health.

🔹 Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)

Brands & influencers face increasing pressure to stand against online abuse.

Introduction: The Rise of AR Filters

Augmented Reality (AR) filters use technology to superimpose virtual elements onto real-world images, most commonly seen on Instagram, Snapchat, and TikTok. Filters have evolved from fun effects (e.g., dog ears) to realistic beauty enhancements, influencing how people perceive their own appearance.

📌 Key Facts:

Instagram has 1.28–2 billion active users, with 46% using filters.

700 million Meta users interact with AR every month.

Snapchat filters normalized digital beauty standards, leading to Snapchat Dysmorphia—a condition where people seek surgery to look like their filtered selves (Rajanala et al., 2018).

How AR Filters Shape Self-Perception

Filters are not just for fun—they reinforce specific beauty ideals, often promoting: ✅ Clearer skin & airbrushed textures ✅ Slimmer facial structure & jawline contouring ✅ Bigger eyes, fuller lips, and lifted brows

These edits contribute to social comparison (Festinger, 1954), where users compare their unfiltered appearance to unrealistic digital versions, leading to self-esteem issues.

‘Ambient’ Filtering: When Digital Beauty Becomes Invisible

Researchers note a shift from obvious (e.g., dog ears) to subtle beauty-enhancing filters, called ambient filtering (Lavrence & Cambre, 2020). This effect is so natural that people begin to see filtered versions as their ‘real’ faces.

📢 The Digital-Forensic Gaze: Users scrutinize selfies to determine if they’ve been filtered, destabilizing our understanding of what ‘natural beauty’ actually is.

Gender and Filters

🔸 Filters are often coded as feminine, emphasizing beauty and ‘perfection.’ 🔸 Men tend to use filters for humor, while women use them to enhance attractiveness (Pescott, 2020). 🔸 AI-generated filters reinforce Western beauty standards, making non-conforming identities less visible online.

The Future of AR Filters

🚀 Advancements in AI-powered filters are making beauty effects more seamless. 💳 Alipay has introduced beauty filters in banking apps, allowing users to appear ‘prettier’ while verifying payments (Peng, 2020).

What Can We Do?

Introduction: The Influence of Social Media on Body Image

Social media plays a crucial role in shaping body image ideals through the promotion of aesthetic templates—specific looks or styles that influencers and celebrities promote. Public health campaigns use these platforms to raise awareness about body image issues, but at the same time, social media also reinforces unrealistic beauty standards, often leading to body dissatisfaction and mental health concerns such as Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD).

Microcelebrity Culture and Aesthetic Labour

A microcelebrity is an individual who builds a personal brand online for visibility and status (Senft, 2012). This requires them to engage in aesthetic labour, meaning they conform to beauty standards that will attract followers and sponsorships.

Some common aesthetic templates include: 📌 For women – Emphasized lips, jawlines, waist, and buttocks. 📌 For men – Defined jawline, athletic body, dominance-focused poses.

Platforms like Instagram and TikTok encourage users to self-brand, meaning they curate their online presence to match these beauty ideals. However, this can create a disconnect between online and offline identity, leading to self-esteem issues.

The Concept of ‘Pornification’

🔸 The term pornification refers to the increasing normalization of sexualized self-presentation on social media. 🔸 Women, in particular, are encouraged to pose in ways that emphasize curves and facial features. 🔸 Men also participate but in more subtle ways, aligning with traditional masculinity.

The issue with pornification is that it reinforces heteronormative beauty standards, making it harder for marginalized identities (e.g., LGBTQ+ creators) to gain visibility on platforms.

Algorithmic Invisibility and Marginalized Identities

Studies suggest that social media algorithms prioritize mainstream beauty standards, making it harder for trans, non-binary, and plus-size creators to gain visibility (Duffy & Meisner, 2022). Many marginalized creators self-censor to avoid being shadowbanned, where platforms restrict their content’s reach.

This raises a key question: 💡 Do social media branding perceptions reinforce societal biases by making certain identities "invisible"?

Public Health Implications: The Body Image Crisis

📉 Users who constantly compare themselves to aesthetic templates may develop dissatisfaction with their real appearance. 💉 This has led to increased cosmetic surgery trends, especially among young people who aspire to look like their edited social media photos. ⚠️ Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD) is linked to the pressure of maintaining unrealistic self-presentations online and offline.

What Can Be Done?

Understanding Digital Citizenship

Digital citizenship refers to the responsible and ethical use of digital technologies to engage in society. A good digital citizen actively participates in online communities while being aware of their rights and responsibilities (Office of the eSafety Commissioner). Social media has played a crucial role in shaping digital citizenship by allowing individuals to advocate for causes, challenge institutions, and spread awareness.

One key example is how movements like Black Lives Matter (BLM) and COVID-19 activism used digital platforms to amplify voices and push for social justice (Choi & Cristol, 2021).

The Connection Between Digital Citizenship and Slow Fashion

The slow fashion movement is a response to the environmental and ethical issues caused by the fast fashion industry. It promotes sustainable, ethical, and high-quality clothing production. Digital citizenship plays a role in this movement as social media influencers and activists use their platforms to promote slow fashion ethics and challenge harmful fast fashion practices.

Some key slow fashion advocates include:

Venetia La Manna – Calls out unethical fashion practices.

Big Sister Swap – A fashion swap initiative promoting circular fashion.

Kristen Leo – Promotes sustainable consumption.

Social media has allowed these activists to educate consumers and encourage them to make ethical purchasing decisions.

The Economic and Environmental Impact of Fashion

The global fashion market is valued at $1.55 trillion USD, projected to reach $2 trillion USD by 2026 (Statista, 2022). However, this growth comes at a cost:

Carbon Footprint – The fashion industry produces 10% of global carbon emissions, more than international flights and maritime shipping combined.

Waste – In the U.S., 11.9 million tons of clothing are discarded annually, with 8.2 million tons ending up in landfills.

Unethical Labor – Many fast fashion brands exploit cheap labor with poor wages and working conditions (McKinsey, 2021).

Slow Fashion as a Form of Digital Activism

With the rise of digital citizenship, consumers are more empowered than ever. Social media allows for: ✅ Spreading awareness – Influencers educate audiences on ethical fashion. ✅ Holding brands accountable – Exposing greenwashing and unethical labor. ✅ Building communities – Engaging in slow fashion swaps and secondhand markets.

Introduction

What does it mean to be a citizen in the digital age? In traditional terms, citizenship involves rights and responsibilities within a nation. But in the online world, the concept expands to include participation, activism, and engagement through digital platforms.

This week, we explore digital citizenship, the power of hashtags, and how social media has transformed political engagement. From movements like #MeToo and #BlackLivesMatter to election campaigns and online petitions, digital activism has reshaped how individuals participate in society. However, this shift also raises important questions about platform control, accessibility, and the risks of digital surveillance.

What is Digital Citizenship?

Digital citizenship refers to how individuals engage with online platforms in responsible, informed, and ethical ways. It includes:

✅ Using digital technologies for communication, learning, and creativity. ✅ Participating in political, social, and cultural discussions. ✅ Navigating digital spaces with awareness of privacy, safety, and misinformation.

According to the Council of Europe (2022), digital citizenship is a lifelong process involving formal and informal learning while defending human dignity in online spaces.

However, digital citizenship is not just about individual behavior—it is shaped by platforms, algorithms, and corporate policies (McCosker, Vivienne & Johns 2016). This leads to the study of platformization, a concept that explores how digital platforms shape our interactions and limit or expand our agency.

The Rise of Hashtag Publics

Hashtags are more than just keywords—they are powerful tools for activism. They create “hashtag publics," which are online communities that form around specific issues or movements (Goswami, 2018).

📌 How Hashtags Create Movements

#MeToo – Sparked a global conversation about sexual harassment and gender inequality.

#BlackLivesMatter – Mobilized protests and political action against systemic racism.

#OscarsSoWhite – Exposed racial inequality in Hollywood’s award system.

#StandWithUkraine – Generated global awareness and support for Ukraine during the war.

These hashtags facilitate connection, coordination, and visibility. They also challenge mainstream media narratives, allowing marginalized voices to be heard.

(Zappavigna, 2012) describes hashtags as linguistic markers that create ambient affiliation, meaning they connect people even if they have never met. This sense of belonging and purpose is crucial for digital activism.

Political Engagement in the Digital Age

Traditional political engagement involved voting, party membership, and activism through unions or organizations. However, this has changed significantly with the rise of social media.

According to Vromen (2017), there has been a decline in long-term political affiliations and an increase in issue-based activism. People now engage in politics through: 📢 Signing petitions on platforms like Change.org. 📢 Sharing or commenting on political content. 📢 Contacting public officials via social media. 📢 Following and engaging with political figures online.

However, there is an ongoing debate: Does social media activism lead to real change, or is it just “clicktivism” (passive online participation)?

A study by Theocharis et al. (2023) found that while many engage in low-effort political actions (e.g., liking or sharing a post), others mobilize, protest, and take offline action as a result of online discussions.

The Power and Limits of Platforms

Although social media empowers users, platforms themselves are not neutral. The concept of platformization (Poell, Nieborg & van Dijck, 2019) explains how platforms:

🔹 Control visibility through algorithms (deciding what content users see). 🔹 Shape discourse by enforcing content moderation and banning accounts. 🔹 Monetize activism, turning social movements into advertising opportunities.

For example, during the 2016 U.S. election, Donald Trump’s “authentic” and unfiltered use of Twitter contrasted with Hillary Clinton’s professionalized campaign (Enli 2017). This reflects a shift in political communication, where personal branding on social media can be more effective than traditional advertising.

At the same time, platforms are businesses first—they profit from engagement, even if it spreads misinformation or hate speech. This raises concerns about corporate control over public discourse.

Conclusion

Digital citizenship extends beyond personal responsibility—it is deeply connected to platform dynamics, political engagement, and activism. Hashtags have proven to be powerful tools for social change, but they also exist within a system where platforms control access and visibility.

The challenge is to navigate these digital spaces critically, ensuring that online activism leads to real-world impact while remaining aware of corporate influence and digital surveillance.

🔹 What do you think? Do hashtags create real political change, or are they just a trend? Join the discussion in the comments!

📌 Hashtags: #MDA20009 #DigitalCitizenship #HashtagActivism #SocialMediaPolitics

References

DIGITAL CITIZENSHIP EDUCATION HANDBOOK what children say? What teachers say? What parents say? (2022). https://rm.coe.int/16809382f9.

Goswami, M. P. (2018, July 27). Social media and hashtag activism. ResearchGate; Kanishka Publisher. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/326655352_Social_Media_and_Hashtag_Activism

Lübke, S. (n.d.). Authenticity in political communication: Conceptualization, measurement, and examination of a popular concept. https://www.db-thueringen.de/servlets/MCRFileNodeServlet/dbt_derivate_00057586/Dissertation_SimonLuebke.pdf

McCosker, A., Vivienne, S., & Johns, A. (2016, October 12). Negotiating digital citizenship: Control, contest, culture. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312491876_Negotiating_Digital_Citizenship_Control_Contest_Culture

Murschetz, P. C. (2020). Political engagement of individuals in the digital age. Handbook of Communication for Development and Social Change, 633–646. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-2014-3_85

Poell, T., Nieborg, D., & van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation. Internet Policy Review, 8(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1425

Vromen, A. (2017). Digital citizenship and political engagement. Palgrave Macmillan UK. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-48865-7

Introduction

Reality TV is one of the most paradoxical genres in entertainment. It dominates TV ratings worldwide, yet surveys show that many viewers claim to dislike it. Despite this contradiction, reality TV remains a significant cultural force, shaping conversations about fame, social status, gender, and even politics.

More importantly, reality TV has evolved beyond traditional television—social media platforms like Twitter, TikTok, and Instagram have transformed the way audiences interact with reality stars, producers, and each other. This shift raises an important question: Can reality TV create digital publics that function as a modern-day public sphere?

Reality TV and the Public Sphere

The public sphere, as defined by Jürgen Habermas, is a space where private individuals come together to exchange ideas, discuss public issues, and influence political change. Traditionally, media scholars viewed television as a one-way communication tool, where audiences were passive consumers. However, the rise of social media has blurred the lines between media producers and consumers, allowing audiences to participate in discussions and even shape the narratives of reality TV.

Micro-Publics and Digital Communities

Scholars argue that instead of one unified public sphere, we now have multiple digital publics, or micro-publics, formed around specific issues or platforms (Bruns & Highfield). Reality TV, especially through hashtags like #MAFS (Married At First Sight) or #BachelorNation, creates online spaces where fans not only discuss the show but also engage in deeper conversations about gender roles, relationships, ethics, and social norms.

For example, discussions about The Bachelor often spark debates about gender expectations in dating, while shows like RuPaul’s Drag Race have contributed to mainstream discussions about LGBTQ+ rights and visibility.

How Social Media is Changing Reality TV

Reality TV is no longer just about what happens on screen—it’s about what happens across multiple platforms.

📱 1. Transmedia Engagement & Audience Participation Reality TV stars are now social media influencers, using platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Twitter to build personal brands and engage with fans. Networks actively encourage reality stars to create digital content, extending the life of the show beyond television.

As Jacquelyn Arcy (2018) points out, reality TV producers manipulate contestants by placing them in competitive situations where they must share intimate details of their lives to remain relevant. The “drama” continues on social media, with reality stars feuding over Twitter, monetizing their fame through Cameo videos, or launching influencer careers.

📢 2. Reality TV as a Digital Public Sphere Reality TV triggers everyday political discussions, creating digital spaces where fans engage in debates about power, privilege, and ethics.

Studies show that reality TV forums—such as those for Big Brother and Wife Swap—often become spaces for discussing immigration, racism, gender roles, and discrimination (Graham & Hajru). While these conversations might start as reactions to a TV show, they frequently expand into broader sociopolitical debates, illustrating the power of reality TV to create meaningful online discourse.

Deller (2019) argues that reality TV is designed to elicit conversation, as audiences debate not just the contestants’ behavior but also the authenticity of the show itself. This discourse spreads beyond homes and workplaces into forums, blogs, and social media, forming digital publics that extend beyond the entertainment industry.

The Reality TV Paradox: Popular but Hated?

A fascinating paradox exists in audience engagement with reality TV:

📊 Surveys show that reality TV is consistently ranked as one of the most disliked genres. 📺 Yet, it dominates TV ratings and generates millions of online discussions.

In a US study, 48% of respondents had an unfavorable opinion of reality TV, and 61% said there was too much of it (Statista). Yet, reality TV continues to expand, precisely because of its ability to provoke reactions and encourage fan engagement.

This raises important questions:

Do audiences really dislike reality TV, or do they just dislike admitting that they watch it?

Is reality TV consumption more about participation in online discourse than the shows themselves?

Should reality TV be taken more seriously as a form of digital culture and social commentary?

Conclusion

Reality TV is no longer just about entertainment—it plays a crucial role in shaping online discourse and digital publics. Through hashtag activism, social media debates, and transmedia storytelling, reality TV has transformed from a passive viewing experience into an interactive, multi-platform conversation.

Whether we love it or hate it, reality TV is an undeniable part of digital culture, challenging us to reconsider its influence on social and political discussions.

References

Arcy, J. (2018). The digital money shot: Twitter wars, the real housewives, and transmedia storytelling. Celebrity Studies, 9(4), 487–502. https://doi.org/10.1080/19392397.2018.1508951

Deller, R. A. (2019). Reality television: The television phenomenon that changed the world. Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/9781839090219

Dempster, S. (2017, November 28). Channel flopping: A tour of tv’s worst genres. The Guardian; The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2017/nov/28/channel-flopping-tour-tv-worst-genres

Bruns, A & Highfield, T, Micro-publics and social media engagement

Tumblr and the Public Sphere: A Unique Digital Community

Introduction

Tumblr is a unique social media platform where users share content through short posts, images, GIFs, and hashtags. With its anonymity and creative focus, Tumblr has become a safe space for many marginalized communities and social movements.

From a theoretical perspective, Tumblr can be examined through the concept of the public sphere, developed by Jürgen Habermas in the 1990s. An ideal public sphere is a space where individuals can freely discuss, access unrestricted information, and contribute to societal change. But does Tumblr truly fulfill these criteria?

The Public Sphere and Digital Communities

According to Habermas, a public sphere must: ✅ Provide full access to information for all. ✅ Be free from institutional control (government, corporations, etc.). ✅ Ensure equal participation for everyone.

However, scholars like Bruns & Highfield argue that instead of a single public sphere, modern society consists of micro-publics—small digital communities formed through social media platforms. Tumblr is a prime example of micro-publics, where users connect via:

Blogging

Algorithmic content distribution

Hashtags (#)

Comment interactions

Yet, Tumblr is not a completely free space. There are still barriers to participation, including:

Digital literacy gaps, making access difficult for some.

Economic limitations, where certain marginalized groups lack resources to engage.

Algorithmic biases, which shape what users see and how content spreads.

Tumblr – A Distinct Digital Community

Tumblr has several features that set it apart from platforms like Facebook and Twitter:

1. Anonymity and Low Surveillance

Unlike Facebook and Instagram, Tumblr does not enforce real-name policies, making it a safer space for marginalized groups, particularly LGBTQ+ communities. Additionally, Tumblr does not show users’ online status, reducing social pressure.

2. Hashtagging as a Community-Building Tool

Tumblr was one of the first social media platforms to utilize hashtags to organize content. This has allowed social movements like #BlackLivesMatter and #MeToo to gain momentum.

3. Aesthetic and Creative Focus

As Jessalynn Keller (2019) points out, Tumblr prioritizes aesthetics and creativity, allowing users to customize their blogs freely, fostering a distinct artistic digital culture.

Activism and Tumblr’s Unique Communication Style

The concept of “Platform Vernacular”, introduced by Martin Gibbs et al. (2015), refers to the unique communication styles, rules, and logics that shape how users interact on different platforms.

On Tumblr, this is evident through: 📌 The use of GIFs as responses rather than plain text. 📌 Memes and quote-sharing as a way of spreading messages. 📌 Reblogging content to keep discussions active and visible.

A strong example of Tumblr’s role in activism is found in Jessalynn Keller’s (2019) research, where she interviewed teenage girls from the US, UK, and Canada about their experiences on different social media platforms. One 14-year-old girl shared that she prefers posting feminist critiques on Tumblr rather than Twitter due to the hostile backlash on Twitter.

📢 "Even when I have experienced [sexism], I don’t really feel like putting it on Twitter because I feel like I’ll be attacked for it. Actually, I want to put it out there so people know this stuff is going on, but I don’t want three or four guys replying ‘you’re a liar, you’re a whore.’ I’d rather just not say anything." – (Dara, 14, quoted in Keller)

This demonstrates how Tumblr provides a safer environment for political and social discussions.

Tumblr’s Evolution and Challenges

📌 Corporate Acquisitions: Tumblr was acquired by Yahoo in 2013 for $1.1 billion, then by Verizon in 2017, and later by Automattic (WordPress) in 2019. 📌 NSFW Ban (2018): The ban on explicit content led to a decline in younger users, particularly affecting body-positive communities (Reif, Miller & Taddicken, 2022). 📌 Declining User Base: Once a leading social platform, Tumblr has struggled to maintain relevance after multiple policy changes.

Conclusion

While Tumblr may not fit Habermas’ ideal definition of a public sphere, it serves as a powerful example of a digital community. With its anonymity, hashtag culture, and creative expression, Tumblr has fostered a unique online environment that supports social movements and marginalized groups.

However, corporate influence and content restrictions have posed significant challenges to its continued role as an open platform. The question remains: Can Tumblr maintain its identity as a safe and creative digital community, or will it continue to decline?

REF:

Bruns, A & Highfield, T, Micro-publics and social media engagement,

Keller, J 2019, ‘Oh, She’s a Tumblr Feminist: Exploring the Platform Vernacular of Girls’ Social Media Feminisms’, Social Media + Society, vol. 5, no. 3.