Biometric cash transfers are becoming ubiquitous in the aid sector driven by donor demands for audit and cost efficiencies and as humanitarian organisations turn to technological solutions to address complex logistical challenges. What is often overlooked is the perspective of refugees themselves. Drawing on a mixed-methods study including 80 interviews and participatory action research, our paper examines biometric cash transfers as exemplars of digital identity systems from the point of view of Karen refugees in Mae La camp in Thailand. Focusing on the introduction of an aid distribution system based on face recognition, our findings reveal that while digital identity programmes offer some advantages, there are significant concerns with their implementation. The new system raises both practical and ethical concerns, such as reduced rations, systematic errors, and power asymmetries. This paper argues that digital identity is not simply a form of identity provided in digital format: the conversion of human beings into data has significant consequences for recognition, dignity, privacy and freedom.

This paper explores the unintended consequences of content takedowns. It focuses on the hardening of extremist positions in alternative online spaces as a reaction to perceived persecution from “Big Tech”. It begins by addressing how counterterrorism responsibilities and profit motives combine to determine how content is typically classified as ‘extreme’ on mainstream social media platforms: that is, the basis for applying takedown policies. It contends, via Chantal Mouffe, that rather than erasing or weakening extremist discourse, the intervention(s) of content takedowns can accelerate antagonistic(/polarizing) relations of confrontation and, in doing so, accelerate the very threat of extremism that takedowns portend to erase.

To explore this dynamic, our paper focuses on the case of the high-profile Australian wellness influencer and celebrity chef, Pete Evans, whose extremist discourse and positioning became entrenched following content takedown and de-platforming policies as applied to his accounts on mainstream social media platforms. We find that in this case, content takedowns effectively diminished spaces for robust debate in which contending perspectives are argued, reducing the possibility of agonistic relations in which there is mutual acknowledgement of the right to possess opposing or 'alternative' views. The paper concludes that content takedowns can, in some cases, be seen as exercises in regulatory self-harm and may incentivise the migration of extreme communities to alternative social media where content moderation is, typically, much looser and the formation of extremist identities can accelerate. Thinking with Mouffe, we observe how content takedowns may incentivise counter-hegemonic articulations of resistance, strengthening an “us versus them”

On December 4th, 2024, Brian Thompson, CEO of UnitedHealthcare was killed in New York City. The shooting quickly galvanized public critiques of the American healthcare system. Our proposal focuses upon user-generated content featuring Luigi Mangione, the 26-year-old suspect, arrested days later. Indeed, the lionization of Mangione across popular social media platforms signalled social rupture of internet practices, of generational allegiances, and of class consciousness. We address the multiple meanings attributed to Mangione’s act and explore the extent to which the case marks complex cultural and political realignments. We use mixed methods to analyze all available posts and comments linked to the Mangione case that emerged on TikTok immediately following the shooting. With attention to platform affordances and online subcultural practices, we explore content that is political, transgressive and ambiguous at once. We draw upon a variety of sources to theorize and update our understanding of the tactics of resistance available to the dispossessed, drawing on cultural historian James Scott’s notion of “weapons of the weak” and exploring it in relation to recent studies of political communication on TikTok. As a final line of questioning regarding social rupture, we examine the often-contradictory objectives of users and the social media monopolies that manage platforms.

This study explores the emerging "Internet Toilet" subculture in China, the vitriolic online communities dominated by marginalized young women, known as "Toilet-Girls," who anonymously express frustrations and attack others' appearances, behaviors, or societal norms. Combining digital ethnography with 15 semi-structured interviews, the research examines three types of "Internet Toilets" (2D, 2.5D, and 3D), focusing on participants' offline marginalization, motivations, and emotional consequences.

The study introduces the framework of "emotional refuge" to conceptualize these spaces as politically ambivalent: they serve as both sanctuaries for expressing repressed emotions and tools for normalized aggression. "Internet Toilets" enable marginalized girls to negotiate their underprivileged position through emotional expression, creating an emotion-based collective. However, this collective is fragmented and often driven by emotional release rather than a coherent political agenda. The study argues that these subcultures are shaped by broader structural forces, including class inequality, gender discrimination, and social alienation, rather than merely individual emotional needs.

Ultimately, the research reveals the paradox of "Internet Toilets" as spaces where hostility is weaponized to cope with structural neglect, yet this coping mechanism reinforces cycles of harm. It calls for addressing systemic inequalities to create inclusive spaces for transformative resistance, emphasizing the need to move beyond hostility to foster constructive change.