yinyi

Hello peeps👋 Today we will be diving into the topic of crowdsourcing.

Have you ever wondered how ordinary people can help save lives during a disaster, even if they are thousands of kilometers away?

When a crisis strikes, whether it is an earthquake, flood, wildfire, or humanitarian emergency, information becomes just as important as food and shelter. This is where crowdsourcing comes in. Crowdsourcing refers to the process of gathering information, ideas, or assistance from a large group of people, usually through digital platforms and social media. During crises, it allows communities to share real-time updates, report incidents, and help responders make faster and better decisions.

To address this challenge, volunteers and humanitarian organizations used Ushahidi, an open-source crowdsourcing platform that collects information from the public through SMS messages, emails, social media posts, and online submissions. People affected by the disaster could send reports about trapped victims, damaged roads, shortages of food and water, and medical emergencies. These reports were translated, verified by volunteers, and plotted onto an interactive digital map.

One of the most innovative aspects of the initiative was the use of a dedicated SMS shortcode, "4636," which allowed Haitians to send free text messages requesting assistance. Thousands of volunteers from around the world helped process and categorize these messages in real time. Emergency organizations, including the United Nations and various humanitarian agencies, used the crowdsourced maps to identify priority areas and coordinate rescue efforts more effectively.

The Haiti earthquake response demonstrated how crowdsourcing can transform ordinary citizens into valuable contributors during a crisis. Instead of waiting for official reports, responders gained access to real-time information directly from affected communities. This improved situational awareness, accelerated decision-making, and helped ensure that aid reached those who needed it most. The success of Ushahidi in Haiti later inspired the use of similar crowdsourcing technologies in disasters around the world, proving that collective participation can play a critical role in emergency response and recovery.

What makes crowdsourcing powerful is the role of public participation. Instead of relying solely on government agencies or news organizations, citizens become active contributors. People on the ground can provide immediate updates about road closures, damaged infrastructure, missing persons, or urgent needs. This often results in faster situational awareness and improved disaster response (Riccardi, 2016).

However, crowdsourcing is not without challenges. Information may be inaccurate, duplicated, or intentionally misleading. Verifying large volumes of user-generated content can also be difficult during fast-moving emergencies. Despite these limitations, crowdsourcing remains a valuable tool for connecting communities and supporting crisis management efforts.

As technology and social media continue to evolve, crowdsourcing demonstrates how collective action can make a real difference in times of crisis. Sometimes, a simple post, report, or shared update can contribute to saving lives and helping communities recover faster.

References

Meier, P. (2015). Digital humanitarians: How big data is changing the face of humanitarian response. CRC Press.

Hello peeps✨ I'm back again with another blog :D

Have you ever thought about who decides what is OK on social media?

Our vision of digital citizenship is usually one of positive online communities that are inclusive, connected and participatory. But conflict also happens online, too, and as we will see, power is tightly linked with social media: power in the shape of speech, platforms, resources, brands, and commerce.

Social media governance is defined as the mechanisms, rules and regulations established by governments and platforms to govern online behavior and content. These systems are designed to be safe for use online, but also uphold freedom of expression and community wellbeing. A good digital citizen is someone who responsibly uses digital technologies to engage in society, to communicate and to generate positive digital content (eSafety Commissioner, n.d.).

Unfortunately, there are not only positive online interactions. Trolling is posting of provocative messages to throw others off balance, flaming is a hostile argument in online forums, and harassment is abusive behaviour that is repeated against a person. Haslop et al. (2021), indicates that online harassment disproportionately impacts women and marginalised communities, limiting their participation in online communities. According to Plan International (2020) a large number of women young women limit their use of the internet because of experiences of abuse and intimidation.

One famous case is feminist media critic Anita Sarkeesian, who has been targeted for years with organized harassment for critiquing the representation of gender in video games, through a video series called ‘Tropes vs. Women in Video Games’. In 2012, Sarkeesian started a campaign to do a study on how women are portrayed in video games by raising money, a campaign that was funded by more than 900 people.In 2012, Sarkeesian launched a campaign to study the representation of women in video games, raising over $900 through a crowdfunding initiative. She received much support for her project, and was also subject to large-scale online harassment, such as trolling, abusive messages, threats, and coordinated efforts to discredit and silence her project. In 2014, the harassment escalated during the GamerGate controversy when women who had a role in gaming culture, such as Sarkeesian, were subjected to constant online harassment. Her experience reveals that digital citizenship is more than just about participation and inclusion; it's also about who speaks, whose voices are heard, and how platforms regulate negative behaviour. The case brought to a broader focus a discussion on how to regulate social media, how responsibility ought to be shared, how freedom of expression can be balanced, and how a safer online community can be achieved. It also pointed to the ways that activism can contest the status quo, and the ways in which people can be subject to intense online backlash (Marwick & Caplan, 2018; Haslop et al., 2021).

What can be done then? Online Safety Act 2021 in Australia offers legal frameworks to tackle harmful content. Meanwhile, the use of advocacy campaigns, pressure on platforms, corporate social responsibility (CSR) and even humour can challenge unhelpful behaviour and support victims (Vitis & Gilmour, 2017). In conclusion, only through cooperation between governments, platforms and communities can effective regulation be achieved and ensure that digital citizenship is good for society.

References 

Haslop, C., O'Rourke, F., & Southern, R. (2021). #NoSnowflakes: The toleration of harassment and an emergent gender-related digital divide in a UK student online culture. Convergence, 27(5), 1418–1438.

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.

Vitis, L., & Gilmour, F. (2017). Dick pics on blast: A woman’s resistance to online sexual harassment using humour, art and Instagram. Crime, Media, Culture, 13(3), 335–355.

Sarkeesian, A. (2012, December 4). Anita Sarkeesian at TEDxWomen 2012 [Video]. YouTube. TEDx Talks YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZAxwsg9J9Q 

Hello hello, it's me again! 🎮✨

Have you ever watched someone play a video game for hours and found yourself just as entertained as if you were playing it yourself?

Gaming has come a long way from the days of arcade machines and local multiplayer sessions. Today, gaming is not only about playing games but also about participating in online communities. Platforms such as Twitch have transformed gaming into a social experience where players, streamers, and viewers interact in real time. According to Taylor (2018), Twitch has created a new form of entertainment that combines gameplay, performance, and community engagement.

One example of Twitch's impact on gaming culture is the popularity of Kai Cenat. Known for his energetic livestreams, Kai has built a large community that regularly interacts through live chat, challenges, and gaming sessions. During his gaming streams, viewers do more than just watch, they actively participate by commenting, reacting, sharing memes, and influencing the direction of the stream. This demonstrates how Twitch has blurred the line between content creator and audience, turning gaming into a shared social experience rather than a solitary activity. The strong sense of belonging within these communities is one reason why livestreaming has become such an important part of contemporary gaming culture.

Gaming platforms also play a major role in shaping how games are developed and distributed. Chia et al. (2020) describe this process as platformisation, where platforms influence how games reach audiences and how communities form around them. Beyond major gaming companies, local gaming communities continue to contribute to gaming culture. Keogh (2021) highlights how independent game developers in Melbourne rely on networks of creators and supporters to share resources and build sustainable gaming communities.

Ultimately, Twitch demonstrates that modern gaming is about more than simply playing games. It is about communication, participation, and belonging to communities that connect people from around the world.

🎮 Do you think watching games can be just as enjoyable as playing them?

References

Chia, A., Keogh, B., Leorke, D., & Nicoll, B. (2020). Platformisation in game development. Internet Policy Review, 9(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2020.4.1515 

Keogh, B. (2021). The Melbourne indie game scenes: Value regimes in localized game development. In P. Ruffino (Ed.), Independent Videogames: Cultures, Networks, Techniques and Politics (pp. 209–222). Routledge.

Hello fellow people 😸😁! I’m back again with another post. Today I will be covering the topic on filters. 

Have you ever opened Instagram or TikTok, turned on a filter, and suddenly looked like a completely different person? Bigger eyes, smoother skin, sharper jawline, all in one tap. While filters can be fun and creative, they also raise important questions about digital citizenship and software literacy.

Today’s social media platforms like Instagram and TikTok use augmented reality (AR) and ambient editing tools that can completely transform someone’s appearance in real time. Beauty filters are now part of everyday online culture, influencing how people present themselves and how others expect them to look. Barker (2020) explains that filters may seem harmless, but they can reinforce unrealistic beauty standards and affect self-esteem, especially among young users.

This has also contributed to what many people call the “Instagram Face”, a digitally enhanced look with flawless skin, fuller lips, and symmetrical facial features. Over time, constantly seeing these edited faces can blur the line between reality and fantasy. According to Coy-Dibley (2016) this describes as “digitised dysmorphia,” where edited online images reshape how individuals see their real bodies and faces.

At the same time, software literacy is becoming more important than ever. Understanding how filters, AI enhancement, and facial editing tools work helps users become more critical and responsible digital citizens. In accordance to Rettberg (2014), technology doesn’t just help us share our identities online, it also shapes how we see ourselves. Even selfie filters are designed around cultural beauty norms, which can pressure users to fit into certain standards.

Filters are not automatically bad. They can be artistic, entertaining, and empowering. But being digitally literate means recognizing when edited content is influencing our perceptions of beauty, identity, and reality.

So here’s a question for you: ‘do filters help us express ourselves creatively, or are they quietly changing how we value real appearances?’ 🤔

References

Barker, J. (2020). Making-up on mobile: The pretty filters and ugly implications of Snapchat. Fashion, Style & Popular Culture, 7(2), 207–221.

Coy-Dibley, I. (2016). “Digitised Dysmorphia” of the Female Body: The Re/Disfigurement of the Image. Palgrave Communications, 2, 16040.

Rettberg, J. W. (2014). Filtered Reality. In Seeing Ourselves Through Technology. Palgrave Macmillan.

Hello friends! Welcome to my blog again✨ Today we’re going to be diving into the topic of body modifications 

Have you ever caught yourself scrolling and wondering whether what you’re seeing online is actually “real,” or just another version of an ideal that’s been carefully constructed for likes, algorithms, and attention?

In today’s digital world, visual social media platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, and YouTube shape how people see beauty, identity, and bodies. Social media is no longer just communication but a constant stream of “ideal” appearances built by influencers, celebrities, algorithms, and trends. As a result, body modification practices like cosmetic surgery, fillers, filters, editing apps, and extreme fitness routines are becoming normalised.

This raises bigger questions about digital citizenship and health education: Why do we feel pressured to look a certain way online? How do these beauty standards affect mental health? And what happens when “real” starts to feel not enough?

Public Health Campaigns and Social Media

Social media is now a major space for public health campaigns, especially around body positivity, mental health awareness, and self-acceptance. These campaigns try to challenge unrealistic beauty standards pushed online.

Howard (2018) notes that social media campaigns work because they are emotional, shareable, and participatory. Thompson (2016) adds that digital platforms make health information more accessible worldwide.

But there’s a problem: algorithms still prioritise aesthetic, edited, and highly visual content, meaning health messages often compete with unrealistic beauty posts.

Microcelebrity Culture

Microcelebrities build fame by carefully curating their online image. Influencers often show “perfect” routines, bodies, and lifestyles to stay relevant.

Duffy and Meisner (2022) explain that creators face algorithmic pressure where only certain bodies and aesthetics stay visible. This creates comparison culture as followers don’t just watch influencers, but they measure themselves against them.

📌 Example: Kylie Jenner is often cited in beauty culture discussions for normalising lip fillers and highly curated beauty transformations, shaping global beauty expectations.

Aesthetic Labour

Aesthetic labour such as; posing, editing, filtering, skincare routines, gym routines,

 is the constant effort to maintain an “acceptable” online appearance. Carah and Dobson (2016) describe this as “algorithmic hotness,” where visibility depends on fitting platform beauty expectations.

For influencers, their body becomes their brand  and their income depends on how desirable that brand appears.

Pornification + Body Standards

Pornification refers to the growing sexualisation of online culture, where revealing or highly curated content is often rewarded with more attention and visibility. On platforms like Instagram and X, creators can monetise attractiveness, body image, and sexual appeal as part of their online brand.

Drenten et al. explain that in digital culture, attention itself becomes profit. This is why many influencers carefully curate hyper-sexualised aesthetics to gain followers, engagement, and income.

As a result, narrow beauty standards become normalised online:

Women: slim waist, flawless skin, fillers, “Instagram face”

Men: muscular physiques, sharp jawlines, gym-focused masculinity

The more these images dominate social media feeds, the more users may feel pressured to fit those same aesthetic templates in order to feel attractive, relevant, or accepted online.

Body Dysmorphic Disorder (BDD)

Body Dysmorphic Disorder can develop when people become obsessed with perceived flaws amplified by filters, editing, and comparison culture.

Social media doesn’t just show beauty, it edits reality.

📌 Example: Public figures like Oli London have undergone multiple cosmetic surgeries in attempts to look like K-pop idols, sparking global discussions on identity, body modification, and self-perception.

BDD may lead to anxiety, low self-esteem, obsessive appearance checking, and unhealthy cosmetic behaviours.

Identity Dissonance

Identity dissonance happens when your online self and real self don’t match anymore. Social media encourages a curated identity,  but living between the “real” and “ideal” self can affect confidence and mental wellbeing.

Digital citizenship means recognising this gap, questioning what we see, and understanding that most online “perfection” is constructed not natural.

Conclusion

Social media shapes how we see bodies, beauty, and even identity itself. Through microcelebrity culture, aesthetic labour, and algorithm-driven visibility, users are constantly pushed toward narrow beauty ideals.

Public health campaigns try to balance this, but they often compete with highly visual and aesthetic content. That’s why digital literacy and mental health awareness matter more than ever.

Because online beauty isn’t just something we scroll past but rather something that quietly shapes how we see ourselves.

References

Carah, N., & Dobson, A. (2016). Algorithmic hotness: Young women’s “promotion” and “reconnaissance” work via social media body images. Social Media + Society.

Duffy, B. E., & Meisner, C. (2022). Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility. Media, Culture & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221111923

Drenten, J., Gurrieri, L., & Tyler, M. (2020). Sexualized labour in digital culture: Instagram influencers, porn chic and the monetization of attention. Gender, Work & Organization.

Howard, A. (2018). 10 effective public health social media campaigns. Strategic Social Media Lab.

Hello once again my fellow people! On today’s blog we’ll be taking a look at digital citizenship through the lens of social media influencers and the slow fashion movement. ✨ 

Have you ever paused mid-scroll and wondered: “Is this influencer actually helping… or just selling sustainability as a trend?”

so… what is slow fashion (and why does it matter)?

Slow fashion is basically the opposite of fast fashion. Instead of mass-producing cheap, trendy clothes, it focuses on ethical production, sustainability, and mindful consumption. According to Domingos et al. (2022), slow fashion encourages consumers to think about where their clothes come from, how they’re made, and their long-term impact on the environment.

But here’s the thing, awareness alone doesn’t always change behavior. People know fast fashion is harmful, yet still buy it. That’s where influencers come in.

Influencers as digital citizens

In digital spaces, influencers aren’t just content creators, more so, they’re participants in digital citizenship. This means they shape norms, values, and behaviors online.

Some influencers like Tiffany Ferguson or Venetia La Manna actively promote ethical consumption, call out exploitative brands, and educate audiences on sustainability. (which you can check them out below)

This aligns with what Geiger & Keller (2018) describe as compassion-driven consumption, where people make choices based on empathy and values.

When influencers use their platforms responsibly, they:

Raise awareness about labor exploitation

Encourage mindful buying habits

Promote alternatives like thrift shopping or clothing swaps

And honestly? That’s powerful.

However, not everything is what it seems…

Here’s where it gets complicated.

Not all “sustainable influencers” are genuinely sustainable. Some engage in greenwashing, which means making eco-friendly claims that aren’t fully true (Kopnina, 2019). In my opinion, brands still collaborate with influencers because of herd mentality, where if everyone is promoting something, people assume it’s worth buying.

This creates a contradiction:

Influencers can both challenge fast fashion and unintentionally reinforce overconsumption.

Even slow fashion content can become aestheticized, turning sustainability into just another trend instead of a real lifestyle shift.

Case study insight: influence vs intention

Research by Chi et al. (2021) shows that consumers are more likely to purchase slow fashion when they:

Trust the message

Feel aligned with sustainability values

Believe their actions make a difference

So it’s not just about influencers being loud,  it’s about being credible and intentional.

Why this matters for us (yes, us)

As digital citizens, we’re not just passive viewers. We:

Choose who to follow

Decide what to believe

Influence others through our own actions

So maybe the better question isn’t just “Are influencers responsible?” but also:

 “How do we respond to what they show us?”

On final note, the slow fashion movement isn’t just about clothes, it’s about values, responsibility, and awareness in a digital world.

Influencers can spark change, but real impact happens when audiences think critically and act consciously.

So next time you see a “sustainable haul”…

maybe pause and ask: is this helping the planet or just rebranding consumption?

References

Chi, T., Gerard, J., Yu, Y., & Wang, Y. (2021). A study of U.S. consumers’ intention to purchase slow fashion apparel: Understanding the key determinants. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education, 14(1), 101–112. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17543266.2021.1872714 

Domingos, M., Vale, V. T., & Faria, S. (2022). Slow fashion consumer behavior: A literature review. Sustainability, 14(5), 2860. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/5/2860 

Geiger, S. M., & Keller, J. (2018). Shopping for clothes and sensitivity to the suffering of others: The role of compassion and values in sustainable fashion consumption. Environment and Behavior, 50(10), 1119–1144.

Kopnina, H. (2019). Green-washing or best case practices? Using circular economy and cradle to cradle case studies in business education. Journal of Cleaner Production, 219, 613–621.

Brewer, M. K. (2019). Slow fashion in a fast fashion world: Promoting sustainability and responsibility. Laws, 8(4), 24.

Hashtag Publics, Political Engagement and Activism

Hey guys, it's me again 😆

Welcome back to another one of my blogs!!

Have you ever reposted a hashtag without really thinking about it? Or felt like you were “participating” in something important just by liking or sharing a post? And honestly… does that actually make us good digital citizens?

Let’s talk about it.

What is Digital Citizenship? 

Digital citizenship isn’t just about being online, it’s about how we behave, interact, and participate in digital spaces. According to Choi and Cristol (2021), digital citizenship should be seen through an intersectional lens, where individuals actively participate in shaping a more inclusive and democratic digital society. In other words, we’re not just users but contributors to online culture and conversations.

For me, this makes digital citizenship feel more serious. It’s not just about avoiding toxic comments or fake news, but about being aware of how our actions online can influence others.

#Hashtag Publics: When posts turn into movements 

Hashtags have become one of the most powerful tools in digital activism. They create what scholars call “hashtag publics”. Campaigns like #ShoutYourAbortion show how people use hashtags to share personal stories and challenge stigma (Kim & Lee, 2022).

In Malaysia, hashtag campaigns during COVID-19 also played a huge role in spreading information and expressing public concerns. These online spaces function like a modern “public sphere,” where people can voice opinions and engage in discussions about social and political issues.

From my take, sometimes I feel like people (including me) repost things just because everyone else is doing it. It can feel a bit performative. But at the same time, without hashtags, many issues wouldn’t even gain attention in the first place.

Political Engagement: From passive scrolling to active participation 

Social media has made political engagement way more accessible. Platforms are designed to encourage interactions like liking, commenting, and sharing all contribute to public discourse (Theocharis et al., 2023). Even something as simple as retweeting can amplify a political message.

We’ve seen this globally, especially during the campaigns of Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, where social media became a key tool for direct communication with the public (Enli, 2017).

But in reality, engaging doesn’t always mean understanding. It’s easy to click “share,” but harder to critically evaluate what we’re sharing.

Digital Activism: Real change or just “slacktivism”? 

Digital activism has the power to mobilize people, raise awareness, and even influence real-world change. However, it also comes with challenges like misinformation and performative activism. According to Vromen (2017)  while online engagement is important, it becomes more impactful when combined with offline actions.

In my opinion, posting is easy. Doing something offline? Not so much. I think digital activism is a good starting point, but it shouldn’t stop there.

So… what does it mean to be a good digital citizen? 🤔

To me, it’s about being intentional:

 Thinking before posting

 Fact-checking information

Respecting diverse perspectives

And engaging in ways that actually contribute to meaningful discussions

It’s not about being perfect, but rather it’s about being responsible.

At the end of the day, digital citizenship is something we practice every day, whether we realise it or not. So next time you repost something, maybe ask yourself: ‘am I just following the trend, or am I actually contributing to something meaningful?’ 👀

References

Choi, M., & Cristol, D. (2021). Digital citizenship with an intersectionality lens: Towards participatory democracy driven digital citizenship education. *Theory Into Practice, 60*(4), 361–370. 

Enli, G. (2017). Twitter as an arena for the authentic outsider: Exploring the social media campaigns of Trump and Clinton in the 2016 presidential election. *European Journal of Communication, 32*(1), 50–61.

Kim, Y., & Lee, S. (2022). #ShoutYourAbortion on Instagram: Exploring the visual representation of hashtag movement and the public’s responses. *SAGE Open, 12*(2). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440221093327 

Theocharis, Y., Boulianne, S., Koc-Michalska, K., & Bimber, B. (2023). Platform affordances and political participation: How social media reshape political engagement. *West European Politics, 46*(4), 788–811. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/01402382.2022.2087410 

Hello there!  Welcome to my first post for #MDA20009!

Have you ever watched a reality show and thought… “Is this actually real, or are they just acting for drama?” 🤔

For this week, I’m exploring reality TV through a case study of Hell's Kitchen. Hell’s Kitchen is a show that has been my go-to favourite past time till now and it is famous for its intense kitchen chaos, emotional breakdowns, and of course, Gordon Ramsay’s fiery personality.

Reality television is often defined as unscripted content featuring “ordinary people,” but as discussed in this week’s lecture, it actually blends authentic emotion with constructed drama. In Hell’s Kitchen, contestants are placed in high-pressure situations where conflict and emotional reactions are almost unavoidable.

According to Ruth A. Deller (2019), reality TV in the age of social media is no longer just about what happens on screen, rather, it extends across multiple platforms where audiences engage, react, and even influence the narrative. This is evident in Hell’s Kitchen, where viewers actively discuss contestants online, forming strong opinions about who deserves to win or be eliminated.

This supports the idea by Todd Graham and Auli Hajru (2011), who argue that reality TV can trigger everyday conversations that contribute to the public sphere, where people express opinions and engage with social issues.

Another key idea from the readings is how audiences are no longer just passive viewers. With social media, fans become active participants; creating memes, sharing clips, and engaging in discussions. This reflects participatory culture, where audiences contribute to the meaning and popularity of media content.

In Hell’s Kitchen, this is especially clear as dramatic moments are often clipped and shared online, extending the life of the show beyond television. As a result, contestants can gain followers and build personal brands, showing how reality TV can transform ordinary individuals into influencers.

Personally, I think Hell’s Kitchen is entertaining because of its unpredictability and emotional intensity, but it also feels highly constructed. The editing, dramatic music, and focus on conflict make me question how “real” it actually is. At the same time, it’s interesting how the show creates such strong audience reactions, proving that reality TV is more than just entertainment, it’s also a social experience.

Overall, Hell’s Kitchen highlights how reality TV operates as both entertainment and a platform for digital interaction. It shows how audiences engage beyond the screen, forming communities and participating in discussions that sometimes go beyond the show itself.

References

Ruth A. Deller (2019) Reality Television: The TV Phenomenon That Changed the World. Emerald Publishing.