An Instagrammer by the name “Dai James” ostentatiously posted videos of himself opening products in a supermarket and eating or drinking some of the contents before returning the containers to the shelf, apparently presuming he would not get caught.
Warped values spread by so-called Internet celebrities such as “Dai James” have lately been widely replicated in the group behavior of teenagers and college students. This kind of fan culture has gradually expanded its social influence everywhere from real communities to commercial marketing to political propaganda.
A few days ago, two YouTubers going by the names “Toyz” and “SuperPie” posted a livestream of themselves having a fight that looked like a performance, but also could have been the real thing. This livestreamed punch-up, widely covered on social media, sets a bad example for society, but the two YouTubers only seem to have gained more support from viewers and more traffic to their channels.
Internet celebrity culture has emerged mainly due to the growing diversity of people’s entertainment demands. Over-the-top behavior lets viewers derive enjoyment from watching new media without having to think.
However, the limitless freedom of the Internet and a wide variety of values make it hard to define who is “successful.” As a result, people have widely differing opinions about Internet celebrities’ behavior. There is a widespread idea that “traffic is money,” meaning a person could make money just by enticing others to click and watch.
The latest generation of smartphone natives has grown up with ostentatious behavior learned from performances on platforms such as YouTube, Instagram and TikTok, as well as the latter’s Chinese equivalent, Douyin. Just as the 20th century nurtured a generation of TV addicts, the 21st century has produced a generation of wannabe Internet celebrities who seek influence in online communities.
However, many Internet celebrities with poor information literacy make bad choices about how to manipulate the attention economy. Randomly opening and consuming food and drinks and posting this behavior online is a case in point. Those who do so only care about finding shortcuts to instant online fame, all while risking their reputation.
Such people are oblivious to legal and moral concerns. Internet celebrities’ knack for making quick profits has shaken the way young people think about money. The mistaken idea of “getting rich through quantity” is undermining the original down-to-earth work ethic and values of honesty and diligence, while opening the door to all sorts of deviant ideas. To keep their subscribers, Internet celebrities constantly exhibit and perform. They have turned exaggeration, showing off, exhibitionism, eroticism and idiosyncrasy into the new mainstream.
However, the information age has normalized obtaining news and information from digital platforms. Do not underestimate the influence of YouTubers, Internet celebrities and other key opinion leaders. In the eyeball economy and close-up media, Internet celebrities have issues of performance quality and commercial involvement or lack of it, but this is an important part of media development. They should not think that they can do whatever they want just because their stage is “virtual.”
With their hands on a weapon equivalent to mass media, Internet celebrities’ freedom of expression cannot be limitless.
Furthermore, online advertising endorsement and advertorial content cannot cross legal red lines. Just wanting fame is not enough. Internet celebrities must know where to draw the line and respect universal social values.
Chao Che-sheng is an assistant professor in Kainan University’s Department of Information Communications.
Translated by Julian Clegg
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS