#digitalcommunities

Digital Citizenship and Online Harassment

By emphasizing that internet communities are not always welcoming, safe, or good, this week's lecture helped me get a more critical awareness of them. Social media platforms facilitate participation, communication, and information sharing across international networks, but they also foster situations that can give rise to abuse, harassment, and violence. This helped me realize that being a good or active user of technology is only one aspect of digital citizenship; another is comprehending the moral obligations associated with fostering inclusive, safe, and respectful online communities. 

The idea of online harassment and how it functions in networked situations caught my attention. Marwick and Caplan (2018) define online harassment as actions like spreading harmful or misleading rumors, imitation, coordinated attacks, and abusive messages. One particularly significant takeaway from the lecture is that online harassment is frequently social and organized rather than private or individual behavior. Network effects, in which groups of users contribute to the reinforcement and escalation of harmful content, frequently lead to increased levels of harassment. This illustrates how "mob-like" dynamics where exposure and virality aid in the spread of harm can be accidentally enabled by digital platforms. 

The experiences of celebrities like Taylor Swift, who has frequently been the target of organized harassment, body shaming, and the spread of altered or artificial intelligence-generated information, provide a relevant illustration of this. This demonstrates how dangerous content can spread far before it is successfully monitored or removed, and how digital harassment can grow rapidly through networked platforms. 

The examination of how some groups are disproportionately affected by internet harassment caught my curiosity. According to research, targeted internet harassment is much more common among women, girls, and people of different gender identities. For instance, Plan International (2020) discovered that 59% of girls in 31 countries said they have encountered offensive or abusive online behavior. This demonstrates that digital spaces are not neutral settings; rather, they frequently mirror and perpetuate current social injustices, such as power disparities and discrimination based on gender. In this way, cyber harassment is a social and cultural problem in addition to a technological one. 

I was also inspired by the lecture to consider governance and accountability's role in resolving these problems more critically. Digital platforms are responsible for protecting users and filtering harmful content, even as they offer avenues for community development and speech. Digital literacy efforts, platform-based moderation systems, community reporting mechanisms, and legal frameworks like the Online Safety Act 2021 all contribute to the decrease of hazardous online behavior. These solutions, however, are not always simple since they raise concerns about censorship, freedom of expression, and the efficacy of automated moderation systems. 

Advocacy groups and public awareness campaigns are also crucial for helping victims of cyberbullying and teaching users about safe online conduct. In particular, social media companies have a big part to play in creating safer platform structures and more successfully enforcing community rules. This implies that a multi-stakeholder strategy that includes governments, platforms, civil society organizations, and users themselves is necessary to address online harm. 

References

Rahman-Jones, I. (2024, January 26). Taylor Swift deepfakes spark calls in Congress for new legislation. Www.bbc.com. https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-68110476

Marwick, A. E., & Caplan, R. (2018). Drinking Male Tears: Language, the Manosphere, and Networked Harassment. Feminist Media Studies, 18(4), 543–559.

Plan International. (2020). Free To Be Online? Girls’ and Young Women’s Experiences of Online Harassment.

Have you ever posted on social media during an emergency?

Maybe it was sharing information about a flood in your area, reposting evacuation notices during a wildfire, or checking whether friends and family were safe after a natural disaster.

Social media is often associated with entertainment, memes, and everyday communication. However, during times of crisis, these platforms can become something much more important. When traditional communication systems fail or become overwhelmed, people increasingly turn to platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and WhatsApp to share information, seek help, and coordinate responses (Bruns & Burgess, 2014).

There is something remarkable happening every time a disaster unfolds online. Information no longer flows only from governments, journalists, or emergency services. Ordinary citizens become active participants in collecting, verifying, and distributing information. In many cases, people on the ground can provide updates faster than official organisations.

This process is often described as crowdsourcing. Crowdsourcing refers to the collection of information, knowledge, or resources from a large group of people, usually through digital platforms (Howe, 2008). During natural disasters such as the Haiti earthquake, the Japan tsunami, the Queensland floods, and the Black Saturday bushfires, volunteers used social media and collaborative mapping tools to gather real-time information from affected communities. The result was a new form of crisis communication that relied on networks of ordinary people rather than solely on traditional authorities.

The rise of crowdsourcing challenges conventional understandings of communication during emergencies. Traditionally, information moved through hierarchical structures, from governments and emergency services to the public. Social media has transformed this process into a networked model where information can travel rapidly between citizens, communities, journalists, and institutions (Bruns & Burgess, 2014).

This shift reflects broader changes in digital communities. Online networks allow people to come together around shared goals, even if they have never met. Boyd (2010) describes these spaces as networked publics — publics that are restructured by networked technologies and shaped by the interactions of connected users. During crises, these temporary communities often emerge quickly, sharing information, coordinating aid, and solving problems collectively.

Volunteer programmers, digital activists, and local residents frequently collaborate to create tools and resources that assist disaster response efforts. Jenkins (2006) argues that digital communities often generate collective intelligence, where knowledge is produced through the contributions of many individuals rather than a single authority. Crowdsourcing demonstrates how collective intelligence can be mobilised in times of crisis to solve problems and distribute critical information.

However, crowdsourcing is not without its challenges. While social media enables rapid information sharing, it also creates opportunities for misinformation and rumours to spread. In fast-moving emergencies, inaccurate information can cause confusion, panic, or even place people at risk. Information shared by the crowd may be fast, but it is not always reliable (Bruns & Burgess, 2014).

This creates an important tension. On one hand, crowdsourcing empowers citizens and allows communities to respond quickly when official systems are overwhelmed. On the other hand, emergency response requires accurate and trustworthy information. The same platforms that enable collective intelligence can also amplify mistakes.

The question, then, is not simply whether crowdsourcing is useful during disasters.

WHEN CRISIS STRIKES, SHOULD WE TRUST OFFICIAL SOURCES, OR THE COLLECTIVE KNOWLEDGE OF THE CROWD?

References

boyd, d. (2010). Social Network Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), Networked Self: Identity, Community, and Culture on Social Network Sites. Routledge.

Bruns, A., & Burgess, J. (2014). Crisis Communication in Natural Disasters: The Queensland Floods and Twitter. In K. Weller, A. Bruns, J. Burgess, M. Mahrt & C. Puschmann (Eds.), Twitter and Society. Peter Lang.

Howe, J. (2008). Crowdsourcing: Why the Power of the Crowd Is Driving the Future of Business. Crown Business.

Do you play video games?

Whether it's competitive PvP matches, cooperative raids with friends, first-person shooters, or relaxing farming games like Stardew Valley, gaming has become one of the most popular forms of entertainment in the digital age.

But increasingly, playing games is only part of the experience. Millions of people now spend hours watching others play through livestreaming platforms such as Twitch and YouTube Gaming. For many players, gaming is no longer just about participation — it is also about spectatorship, community, and shared digital experiences.

There is something interesting happening every time you open a Twitch stream. You're not playing the game yourself, yet you're still part of the experience. Through live chat, donations, memes, and community discussions, viewers become active participants in gaming culture rather than passive audiences.

Gaming communities have always been social spaces. Historically, players gathered in arcades, local multiplayer settings, and online gaming networks to share experiences, strategies, and knowledge. As networked technologies evolved, these communities expanded beyond physical spaces and became increasingly digital. Hardwick (2023) describes gaming communities as social communities where players move between multiple overlapping groups based on shared interests, expertise, and knowledge.

This shift has been accelerated by livestreaming platforms such as Twitch, YouTube Gaming, and Facebook Gaming. What was once considered unusual — watching someone else play a video game — is now a major form of digital entertainment. Streaming is often live, platform-based, and highly profitable, while communities form around both streamers and the content they create (Hardwick, 2023).

Jenkins' (2006) concept of knowledge communities helps explain why these platforms have become so popular. According to Jenkins, digital communities are built through shared intellectual interests and emotional investments. Members voluntarily exchange information, collaborate, and collectively produce knowledge. Within gaming communities, viewers do far more than simply watch gameplay. They share strategies, discuss game updates, teach newcomers, and contribute to a collective understanding of the games they love.

However, gaming communities are not always welcoming spaces. Hardwick (2023) notes that the stereotypical image of the "gamer" is often associated with being young, male, and either white or East Asian. This perception has contributed to a masculine-dominated gaming culture where certain groups may feel excluded from participation. As gaming communities increasingly move online, issues such as harassment, gatekeeping, and toxic behaviour continue to shape who feels comfortable participating and whose voices are heard.

At the same time, livestreaming can create opportunities for inclusion and connection. Communities often form around streamers rather than games themselves. Many viewers return not only for the gameplay, but also for the sense of belonging that develops through regular interaction with streamers and other audience members. During periods of social isolation, these communities have provided spaces for friendship, support, and shared experiences.

This raises an interesting question about the future of gaming culture. If games were traditionally designed to be played, what does it mean when millions of people choose to watch instead? Has livestreaming expanded gaming into a richer and more social experience, or has it transformed play itself into a form of content consumption?

The question, then, is not simply whether game streaming is beneficial or harmful.

WHO BENEFITS MOST FROM THE RISE OF GAME STREAMING PLATFORMS — THE PLAYERS, THE COMMUNITIES, OR THE PLATFORMS THEMSELVES?

References

Hardwick, T. (2023). Gaming Communities, Social Gaming and Live Streaming. MDA20009 Digital Communities Week 8 Lecture.

Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide.

Week 11: Digital Citizenship and Conflict – Social Media Governance.

Social media has transformed the way we communicate, allowing people from around the world to connect, share ideas, and participate in online communities. However, while digital platforms bring people together, they can also become spaces for conflict, trolling, and harassment. This highlights the importance of digital citizenship, which involves using technology responsibly and contributing positively to society. Good digital citizens understand that their online actions can affect others and help create safer and more inclusive communities.

Unfortunately, online harassment has become a growing issue across many social media platforms. Harassment can include abusive comments, spreading rumours, impersonation, and sharing personal content without consent (Haslop et al., 2021). Research has shown that women and gender-diverse individuals are more likely to experience online abuse, demonstrating that digital spaces often reflect inequalities that already exist offline. Global studies have also found that many young women experience hateful or insulting messages while using social media.

These challenges have increased the importance of social media governance, which refers to the rules, policies, and moderation systems that regulate online platforms. Governments, technology companies, and online communities all play a role in creating safer digital environments. In Australia, the Online Safety Act 2021 was introduced to provide stronger protection against serious online abuse and harmful content.

Creating healthier digital communities requires cooperation from everyone. Social media companies must improve moderation systems, governments need effective regulations, and users should practice empathy and respect online. In the end, being a good digital citizen is not only about what we post, but also about how we treat others. A simple act of kindness online can help make digital communities safer and more welcoming for everyone.

References

eSafety Commissioner. (2022). How to report serious online abuse and harmful content. Australian Government.

Haslop, C., O'Rourke, D., & Southern, R. (2021). Online harassment and the role of digital platforms in protecting users. Information, Communication & Society, 24(14), 2083–2100.

Pew Research Center. (2021). The state of online harassment. Pew Research Center.

The Economist Intelligence Unit. (2021). Measuring the prevalence of online violence against women. Economist Impact.

Week 10: Gaming Communities, Social Gaming and Live Streaming: Twitch

Video games are no longer just a form of entertainment—they have become powerful spaces for social interaction and community building. From multiplayer games to livestreams on Twitch and YouTube, players connect with others who share similar interests, skills, and experiences. Gaming communities allow people from different backgrounds to communicate, collaborate, and form friendships beyond geographical boundaries. 

The rise of live streaming has further transformed gaming culture. Platforms such as Twitch and YouTube Gaming have created communities around streamers, where audiences interact through live chats, donations, and shared experiences. These communities are built not only around games but also around the personalities and content creators themselves (Johnson & Woodcock, 2021). 

Gaming communities also reflect the idea of knowledge communities, introduced by Jenkins (2006). Players constantly exchange information, share strategies, create guides, and even modify games through modding. These collaborative practices demonstrate how gaming culture encourages participation, creativity, and collective learning. 

Week 9: Digital Citizenship and Software literacy: Instagram Filters

Social media filters have become a normal part of everyday life. Platforms such as Snapchat and Instagram allow users to enhance their appearance through Augmented Reality (AR) technology. While these filters provide entertainment and creative expression, they also influence how people perceive beauty and identity. As digital technologies become increasingly integrated into social media, users are exposed to idealized appearances that may shape their expectations of themselves and others (Burnell et al., 2021).

Many beauty filters promote similar facial features, creating unrealistic beauty standards that encourage users to compare themselves with edited images. According to Social Comparison Theory, people naturally evaluate themselves by comparing their appearance with others. Constant exposure to filtered images may therefore increase body dissatisfaction and lower self-esteem (Burnell et al., 2021). The growing popularity of the "Instagram Face" also demonstrates how digital beauty ideals are becoming normalized across social media platforms.

Another concern is the rise of digitised dysmorphia, where users become dissatisfied with their natural appearance because they prefer their filtered selves. Studies have shown that social media beauty technologies can contribute to appearance anxiety and influence attitudes toward cosmetic enhancement (Bhandari & Bimo, 2022). As digital citizens, users should critically evaluate the content they consume and recognize that online beauty standards are often digitally altered rather than realistic representations.

References

Bhandari, U., & Bimo, S. (2022). Why's everyone suddenly looking like that? The effect of Instagram's beauty filters on women's self-perception and cosmetic surgery consideration. Women's Studies International Forum, 91, 102597.

Burnell, K., Kurup, A. R., & Underwood, M. K. (2021). Snapchat lenses and body image concerns among young adults. Body Image, 36, 1–12.

Duffy, B. E., & Meisner, C. (2022). Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators' experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility. Media, Culture & Society, 44(5), 904–920.

Hawker, B., & Carah, N. (2021). Snapchat's augmented reality brand culture. Media International Australia, 178(1), 57–69.

Week 8 : Digital Citizenship and Health Education: Body Modification on Visual Social Media

Social media platforms such as Instagram and TikTok have transformed the way people view beauty and self-identity. Through filters, editing tools, and influencer content, users are constantly exposed to idealized appearances that promote specific beauty standards. These standards, known as aesthetic templates, encourage individuals to modify their appearance in order to fit popular trends and gain social approval (Mavroudis, 2020). 

The rise of microcelebrity culture has also changed how people present themselves online. Many users carefully curate their photos and personal brands to attract followers and increase visibility. According to Senft (2012), microcelebrity involves treating one's online identity like a brand, while Marwick (2013) explains that users perform visibility labour by constantly managing their online.

However, these unrealistic beauty ideals may negatively affect mental health. Continuous comparison with edited images can create dissatisfaction with one's appearance and contribute to identity dissonance, where individuals struggle to reconcile their real appearance with their online identity. In severe cases, this may lead to Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD), a condition characterized by excessive concern over perceived physical flaws (Phillips, 2009). 

As digital citizens, social media users have a responsibility to promote healthy and realistic representations of beauty. Digital citizenship is not only about participating online but also about using digital platforms responsibly and understanding how online content can influence mental health and social well-being. By encouraging authenticity and critical media literacy, users can help create a healthier digital environment for everyone.

References

Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. Yale University Press.

Phillips, K. A. (2009). Understanding body dysmorphic disorder: An essential guide. Oxford University Press.

Senft, T. M. (2012). Microcelebrity and the branded self. In J. Hartley, J. Burgess, & A. Bruns (Eds.), A companion to new media dynamics (pp. 346–354). Wiley-Blackwell.