Dissertation:




How do digital platforms empower and commodify marginalised artists, and what systemic barriers and algorithmic biases affect their representation and visibility?


Abstract


This dissertation examines the intersection of digital platforms, marginalised artists, and the challenges of visibility and commodification in the contemporary art world. By focusing on queer, disabled, and chronically ill artists, the research explores how these platforms offer new opportunities for representation while simultaneously perpetuating systemic barriers and algorithmic biases. Through drawing on theoretical frameworks and personal reflections, this essay will critically analyse how digital platforms empower marginalised communities to share their work and connect with global audiences while navigating the pressures of marketability, commercialisation, and identity commodification. By reviewing the roles of platforms like Instagram, Twitter, and Tumblr, this dissertation argues that, although these spaces can democratise access to visibility, they risk reducing artistic practice to marketable trends, complicating the notion of authentic empowerment. The study concludes by proposing reforms prioritising inclusivity, transparency, and community-driven content curation. It advocates for digital spaces that encourage artistic integrity and support marginalised artists in reclaiming their autonomy against an art world that has historically been inhospitable and, at times, antagonistic. Through this analysis, the dissertation aims to contribute to a broader understanding of the complexities surrounding digital art, identity, and representation in the 21st century.


The traditional art world has long been shaped by institutional structures reinforcing power dynamics marginalising artists from underrepresented communities. These marginalisations often involve race, gender, disability, and economic factors that create significant barriers to both visibility and representation for marginalised groups such as queer, disabled, and non-Western artists. Historically, the dominance of white, male, and Western artists within mainstream art institutions has resulted in the systematic exclusion of other identities and artistic forms. Scholars like Richard Meyer and Julian Stallabrass have critiqued the art world's commercialisation, which privileges marketability over artistic merit, further sidelining politically or socially charged works that challenge the status quo (Meyer 2002; Stallabrass 2004). These issues are compounded by economic disparities, geographical centralisation, and the inaccessibility of art spaces for disabled or neurodivergent individuals (Harris 2019). While digital spaces provide unprecedented access, marginalised artists still struggle with financial precarity, limited funding, and exclusion from traditional art grants and residencies, which digital visibility alone does not resolve (Sutton Trust, 2024). Despite increased representation online, economic barriers remain a fundamental obstacle to sustaining a creative career.


However, in the digital age, platforms that enable self-publishing, direct audience engagement, and global outreach have reached the art world, offering marginalised artists unprecedented opportunities for visibility and community-building. These digital spaces offer marginalised artists an avenue to bypass traditional gatekeepers and democratic access and enable a broader range of artistic expressions (Archey and Peckham 2016). These platforms allow artists to assert their identities, challenge exclusionary practices, and find communities that affirm their experiences.


Nevertheless, these same platforms also present challenges. Algorithms prioritising user engagement and market-driven metrics often reward mainstream aesthetics over nuanced or experimental forms of expression (Noble 2018). This can result in marginalising work that does not align with dominant trends, forcing artists to navigate a delicate balance between maintaining authenticity and meeting the demands of an algorithm-driven art world. The commodification of marginalised identities in digital spaces further complicates this dynamic, as artists are sometimes compelled to cater to audience expectations in ways that dilute the depth of their creative expressions to appease algorithmic powers and increase the visibility of their work (Folks 2020).


This dissertation explores the role of digital platforms in shaping the representation and visibility of marginalised artists while addressing the systemic barriers and algorithmic biases that persist within these spaces. Through an intersectional lens, it examines how marginalised artists leverage digital tools to assert their voices, confront exclusion, and cultivate inclusive, supportive communities. Importantly, this study also highlights the role of the audience in this process. Audiences on digital platforms have the power to amplify the work of marginalised artists, challenge dominant narratives, and demand more inclusive and diverse content. This study highlights the dual nature of digital platforms. While they offer empowering opportunities, they also require artists to navigate complex, often conflicting pressures to maintain creative autonomy and market relevance.


The rise of digital platforms has fundamentally reshaped artistic visibility, particularly for marginalised artists who have historically been excluded from traditional institutions. Platforms such as Instagram, TikTok, Tumblr, and Patreon have removed barriers imposed by conventional gatekeepers, like gallery owners, museum curators, and art critics, allowing creators to share their work directly with audiences worldwide (Rettberg 2014). This shift has decentralised artistic visibility, fostering new creative communities and providing alternative spaces where underrepresented voices can challenge dominant cultural narratives and redefine artistic value on their terms.


This transformation is particularly significant for artists from communities that have been historically marginalised in the art world—such as Black, Indigenous, LGBTQ+, disabled, and neurodivergent creators. By bypassing restrictive institutional structures, digital platforms enable these artists to take control of their narratives, cultivate dedicated followings, and engage in direct, meaningful interactions with global audiences (Archey and Peckham 2016). For instance, Deaf artist Christine Sun Kim has leveraged social media to challenge conventional understandings of sound and communication, using digital spaces to amplify discussions around accessibility and perception (Kim 2015). Similarly, LGBTQ+ artist Zanele Muholi has used Instagram to share their powerful visual narratives, challenging the lack of representation of Black queer lives in the art world. Their work exemplifies how digital platforms provide visibility and powerful tools for advocacy, education, and reimagining artistic norms.


As these digital spaces continue to evolve, they offer immense potential for fostering inclusivity, reshaping representation, and expanding the scope of artistic engagement beyond the limits of traditional institutions. However, they also bring new challenges, including algorithmic bias, commercialisation pressures, and digital access issues, which must be critically examined to ensure these platforms remain equitable and empowering for all artists. It is important to recognise and understand these challenges to better support and advocate for the needs of marginalised artists in the digital age.


For centuries, traditional art spaces have been dominated by Eurocentric, patriarchal, and elitist paradigms, which exclude marginalised artists from engaging in the formal, commercial, and higher art world in favour of their white, male, wealthy counterparts. These systems often enforced rigid norms about who could produce art and what subjects were deemed worthy of attention. As Bourdieu (1993) observes, institutional gatekeepers who reinforce dominant ideologies have long-mediated cultural production. By contrast, digital platforms such as Instagram, YouTube, and Patreon empower marginalised artists to bypass these structures, allowing them to create and distribute work independently, gain a global audience, and even earn a living from their art.


Beyond curatorial exclusion, financial gatekeeping—through gallery commissions, high application fees for residencies, and limited funding for marginalised artists—has long maintained systemic disparities in artistic success (Sutton Trust, 2024). Working-class, disabled, and BIPOC artists face additional challenges securing financial stability within the arts sector. While digital platforms offer alternative visibility, they rarely address the fundamental issue of material support. Programs such as the Supporting Act Foundation and Creative Capital have attempted to bridge this gap by directly assisting underrepresented creators. However, these opportunities remain limited in scale (Supporting Act Foundation, 2024; Creative Capital, 2025).


A notable example is the rise of Indigenous creators on platforms like TikTok, who use viral trends to subvert stereotypes and reclaim their cultural identities. Artists like Shina Novalinga, who shares Inuit throat singing on social media, highlight how digital spaces can amplify historically silenced voices (Novalinga, 2021). Similarly, Black artists have leveraged hashtags like #BlackArtMatters and #AfroFuturism to build online communities that celebrate Black creativity, history, and resilience, challenging the racial exclusions of traditional art markets (Parker 2020).


Despite digital platforms' opportunities, they are not free from systemic barriers. Algorithms, which determine what content is promoted or suppressed, often reproduce societal inequalities. Safiya Umoja Noble's Algorithms of Oppression (2018) highlights how these systems privilege mainstream tastes, marginalising creators who produce politically charged or culturally specific work. Content from marginalised artists is often flagged as "inappropriate" or derogated due to biases in algorithmic design. However, the resilience and determination of these artists in the face of such challenges is startling, as they showcase their creativity and determination to be heard.


Algorithms are often perceived as neutral, objective systems, but Noble's work reveals the hidden biases deeply embedded in these technologies. These biases stem from the data used to train algorithms, often reflecting societal prejudices. As a result, content from marginalised communities, including intersectional or experimental work, face significant challenges on social media platforms. This can be particularly detrimental for queer and transgender creators, whose content is disproportionately flagged or removed due to platform guidelines that fail to account for cultural nuances.


These practices create additional hurdles for artists seeking visibility, reinforcing the marginalisation they face offline. For instance, social media giant Meta has faced criticism for its content moderation policies affecting LGBTQ+ users. In January 2025, Meta reportedly removed Pride and LGBTQ+ themes from Facebook Messenger, just days after altering hate speech rules to permit users to label queer individuals as "mentally ill" (The Pink News, 2025). Additionally, LGBTQ+ groups have experienced the removal of their posts and, in some cases, the shutdown of their Facebook groups after sharing links to mental health support resources (ABC News, 2025).


These incidents highlight the systemic biases present in content moderation practices, which often fail to consider the context and significance of LGBTQ+ content. Such actions not only hinder the visibility of queer and transgender artists but also perpetuate the marginalisation they encounter in both digital and physical spaces. The biased application of algorithmic moderation underscores the need for more inclusive and culturally sensitive approaches to content curation.


Moreover, the opacity of algorithmic decision-making processes exacerbates the challenges marginalised artists face. Creators often struggle to understand why their content is suppressed or removed, leading to a lack of transparency and accountability. This lack of clarity can be demoralising, as artists are left to guess what type of content will be accepted and promoted. The unpredictability of algorithmic outcomes forces creators to navigate a complex and often hostile environment where visibility is contingent on conforming to the preferences of a biased system.


Despite digital platforms' opportunities, they are not free from systemic barriers. Algorithms, which determine what content is promoted or suppressed, often reproduce societal inequalities. Safiya Umoja Noble's Algorithms of Oppression (2018) highlights how these systems privilege mainstream tastes, marginalising creators who produce politically charged or culturally specific work. Content from marginalised artists is often flagged as "inappropriate" or derogated due to biases in algorithmic design.


Algorithms, often perceived as neutral and objective, are, in fact, deeply embedded with hidden biases. These biases, originating from the data used to train algorithms, reflect and perpetuate societal prejudices. As a consequence, content from marginalised communities, including intersectional or experimental work, faces significant challenges on social media platforms. This unjust situation is particularly detrimental for queer and transgender creators, whose content is disproportionately flagged or removed due to platform guidelines that fail to account for cultural nuances.


These practices create additional hurdles for artists seeking visibility, reinforcing the marginalisation they face offline. For instance, social media giant Meta has faced criticism for its content moderation policies affecting LGBTQ+ users. In January 2025, Meta reportedly removed Pride and LGBTQ+ themes from Facebook Messenger, just days after altering hate speech rules to permit users to label queer individuals as "mentally ill" (The Pink News, 2025). Additionally, LGBTQ+ groups have experienced the removal of their posts and, in some cases, the shutdown of their Facebook groups after sharing links to mental health support resources (ABC News, 2025).


These incidents highlight the systemic biases present in content moderation practices, which often fail to consider the context and significance of LGBTQ+ content. Such actions not only hinder the visibility of queer and transgender artists but also perpetuate the marginalisation they encounter in both digital and physical spaces. The biased application of algorithmic moderation underscores the crucial need for more inclusive and culturally sensitive approaches to content curation.


The commercial nature of digital platforms presents another challenge for marginalised artists. Platforms like Instagram and TikTok operate as profit-driven ecosystems where visibility is often tied to marketability. Christian Fuchs (2017) notes that social media platforms exploit the labour of creators by incentivising content that aligns with dominant trends. For marginalised artists, this creates a tension between authentic self-expression and the need to appeal to broader, less sympathetic audiences.


This dynamic is particularly evident in 'aesthetic activism,' a term that refers to the use of art and aesthetics to promote social or political change. In this context, social justice themes are often commodified for public consumption. While this can amplify important messages, it risks diluting the political intentions of marginalised artists' work, reducing it to a product tailored for engagement metrics. Artists must navigate these complexities carefully, balancing their creative autonomy with the demands of the platform economy.


The pressure to produce visually appealing and easily consumable content can lead to oversimplifying complex issues. For example, an artist addressing systemic racism might feel compelled to create visually striking but reductive content that aligns with trending hashtags and aesthetic standards. This can undermine the depth and nuance of their message, as the need for likes, shares, and comments takes precedence over the integrity of their work.


Furthermore, the commodification of identity in digital spaces exacerbates this tension. Marginalised artists often find that their identities become a marketable asset, commodified for public consumption. This can lead to a performative form of activism, where the artist's experiences and struggles are packaged and sold as content. The commercialisation of identity not only diminishes the authenticity of the artist's work but also perpetuates exploitative dynamics where marginalised voices are co-opted for profit.


The demand for constant engagement on digital platforms places significant emotional and mental strain on marginalised artists. Unlike traditional art spaces, where work is exhibited in curated intervals, social media requires relentless content production to maintain visibility within algorithmic systems. This cycle, often called 'digital burnout,' refers to the exhaustion and stress that comes from the constant pressure to create, self-promote, interact with audiences, and navigate online harassment. It disproportionately affects artists who already face systemic barriers, as they must not only create but also self-promote, interact with audiences, and navigate online harassment (Phillips & Milner, 2017).


Without institutional support, marginalised artists often turn to self-promotion and crowdfunding, navigating a digital economy where personal identity becomes a commodity (Jackson, 2021). The rise of alternative funding models such as Patreon and Ko-Fi has allowed some artists to sustain their work independently. However, this reliance on audience donations replicates the financial precarity of the 'gig economy,' a term that refers to a labour market characterised by short-term contracts or freelance work rather than offering long-term stability (Working Artists and the Greater Economy, 2024). As a result, many artists feel pressured to package their identities in marketable ways that align with trending aesthetics and activism discourse rather than focusing purely on creative expression


This labour is further compounded by the expectation to provide personal narratives alongside their work. Many find themselves pressured to disclose aspects of their identity or trauma to generate engagement, a dynamic that platforms subtly encourage by rewarding content that aligns with marketable narratives of resilience or struggle (Jackson, 2021). This creates an exploitative feedback loop where artists feel they must "brand" their marginalisation to remain visible, even at the expense of their well-being.


Additionally, the emotional labour of moderating online spaces—filtering hate speech, educating audiences, and combating misinformation—falls disproportionately on marginalised creators. The lack of platform accountability forces artists to become both content creators and digital caretakers, further exacerbating burnout. Urgent systemic changes are needed to support sustainable artistic practices online. Without these changes, the current model risks reinforcing the very exclusions it claims to dismantle as artists withdraw from these spaces to protect their mental health.


Despite these challenges, marginalised artists continue to resist and subvert exclusionary systems. Digital platforms provide unique tools for critique and innovation, enabling artists to question the structures that limit their visibility—movements like Net.Art and post-internet art demonstrate how digital media can be used to interrogate the intersections of technology, identity, and power.


For example, Hito Steyerl's work critically examines how digital aesthetics shape perceptions of identity and agency in the online age. Steyerl's practice involves deconstructing the visual language of digital media, exposing how technology mediates and manipulates our understanding of reality. Through works like "How Not to Be Seen: A Fucking Didactic Educational .MOV File" (2013), Steyerl explores the politics of visibility and the implications of living in a hypermediated world.


Similarly, feminist and queer artists have used interactive media to challenge patriarchal and heteronormative structures, creating spaces where alternative narratives can thrive. By leveraging digital platforms' decentralised and interactive nature, these artists push back against systematic marginalisation while expanding the possibilities for creative expression. Projects like "Queering the Map" by Lucas LaRochelle, which maps queer experiences and histories worldwide, exemplify how digital tools can be harnessed for activism and community-building.


The ability of marginalised artists to subvert dominant narratives and create alternative spaces is a testament to their resilience and ingenuity. By using digital platforms as sites of resistance, these artists reclaim their agency and assert their presence in a landscape that often seeks to erase or commodify them. Beyond individual acts of resistance, marginalised artists increasingly turn to mutual aid networks and collective organising to counteract platform-driven exclusion. Independent art cooperatives, crowdfunding initiatives, and peer-run digital galleries allow artists to bypass algorithmic suppression and economic precarity. Projects like the Disability Visibility Project and community-driven zine networks provide alternative avenues for creative expression outside the confines of profit-driven platforms. These grassroots efforts emphasise the power of community in countering exclusion, reinforcing that empowerment in digital spaces often relies on shared solidarity rather than corporate structures.


Fan art is another site of resistance and empowerment for marginalised creators. Platforms like DeviantArt, Tumblr, and Archive of Our Own allow artists to rewrite cultural narratives that exclude their identities. Queer fan artists, for instance, have reimagined popular media to centre LGBTQ+ characters and relationships, addressing the erasure of queer themes in mainstream storytelling. This practice not only amplifies marginalised voices but also challenges the 'hegemony ', a term used to describe the dominance or influence of one group over others.


As Jason S. F. Parker (2020) notes, fanart functions as both a mode of cultural resistance and a testament to the creative potential of marginalised communities. By reclaiming representation in popular culture, these artists assert their agency in shaping the narratives that define them. Fanart provides a platform for marginalised creators to challenge the dominant cultural scripts and insert their experiences and perspectives into mainstream narratives.


Moreover, fanart's collaborative and community-driven nature fosters a profound sense of belonging and solidarity among marginalised artists. Online communities centred around fanart offer spaces for creators to connect, share their work, and support one another. These communities provide a refuge from the exclusionary practices of traditional art institutions, allowing marginalised artists to thrive in an environment that values diversity and inclusivity. The importance of these spaces for the well-being and creative growth of these artists cannot be overstated.


While digital platforms have democratised access to visibility, they are not immune to systemic inequalities. Platform algorithms like Instagram and TikTok prioritise content that generates high engagement, often favouring visually appealing or mainstream works over nuanced or experimental pieces. This preference often leads to 'algorithmic suppression ', a term coined by Safiya Umoja Noble in her book Algorithms of Oppression (2018), to describe how these algorithmic structures reflect and reinforce societal biases, perpetuating the exclusion of marginalised voices even within ostensibly accessible digital spaces. Noble argues that search engines and social media platforms often amplify content that aligns with the dominant cultural and commercial narratives while suppressing or relegating work that challenges the status quo. These biases are compounded by the prioritisation of engagement metrics such as likes, shares, and comments, which often align with mainstream tastes rather than the diversity of artistic practices.


This algorithmic bias creates a tension between empowerment and commodification for marginalised artists. As Cathy Park Hong (2020) observes in Minor Feelings: An Asian American Reckoning, marginalised creators face an uphill battle to gain visibility in spaces that prioritise commercial interests. Hong discusses how Asian American artists, in particular, have been expected to conform to narrow representations to achieve success within mainstream cultural contexts. This is mirrored for marginalised artists, whose work may be sidelined if it does not conform to the platform's algorithmic preferences—by being visually striking, easily consumable, or aligned with trending topics. The pressure to adapt to these algorithmic demands often stifles artistic authenticity, as creators are forced to commodify their work to gain traction. Visibility becomes a form of economic capital, and artists are compelled to compromise their creative integrity to pursue algorithm-driven engagement.


In this environment, marginalised creators are often expected to navigate a double bind: either conform to the norms set by algorithms or remain invisible. For disabled and chronically ill artists, this becomes even more challenging, as the accessibility needs that could make their work more meaningful to a niche audience often conflict with the need to optimise content for wide-reaching visibility. This tension highlights how the pursuit of visibility in digital spaces is not simply about gaining recognition but also about balancing the demands of authenticity with the pressures of commercialisation and commodification.


In recent years, decentralised platforms have emerged as alternative spaces where artists can share their work, engage with communities, and maintain greater control over their creative output. These platforms prioritise user autonomy and community-driven engagement, reducing reliance on corporate oversight and profit-driven algorithms. Decentralised platforms offer a promising solution to mainstream social media's challenges, including algorithmic bias and the commodification of art.


Mastodon is an open-source, federated social network that allows users to select independent servers, known as 'instances,' which operate under their own rules and governance. In a federated social network, these instances are interconnected, allowing users from one instance to interact with users from another. This structure grants users greater control over their content and interactions, fostering niche communities where artists can find supportive audiences without the constraints of mainstream platforms. The decentralised nature of Mastodon has attracted users seeking alternatives to traditional social media, contributing to its growth and diversity. Artists on Mastodon can curate their feeds, connect with like-minded individuals, and share their work without the pressure to conform to algorithmic trends. As a result, Mastodon has become a vibrant space for marginalised artists to express their creativity and build communities.


Bluesky, launched in early 2023, has experienced rapid growth, reaching over 20 million users by November 2023. Its user-friendly interface and commitment to decentralisation have made it an appealing platform for creators. Notably, the tabletop gaming community has migrated to Bluesky, rebuilding their online presence in a space that offers advanced curation tools and better moderation (Polygon, 2023). Bluesky's decentralised model allows users to create and join communities that align with their interests and values, fostering a sense of belonging and support. This has benefited marginalised artists who may feel alienated or overlooked on mainstream platforms. By providing a space where artists can share their work without the pressure to cater to algorithms, Bluesky has empowered creators to maintain their artistic integrity and connect with appreciative audiences.


Tumblr has long been a haven for artists, particularly those from marginalised communities. Its flexible content formats and supportive subcultures have enabled artists to build dedicated followings. Despite changes in ownership and policy shifts, Tumblr remains a vibrant platform for creative expression. Unlike other social media platforms prioritising visual content and engagement metrics, Tumblr allows for various content types, including text, images, gifs, and videos. This flexibility has attracted a diverse range of artists who use the platform to share their work, engage in discussions, and build communities. For marginalised artists, Tumblr offers a space to explore their identities, challenge societal norms, and connect with others who share their experiences. The platform's tagging system also allows for discovering niche content, enabling artists to reach audiences genuinely interested in their work.


Blockchain-based art spaces have introduced new avenues for artists to monetise their work through non-fungible tokens (NFTs). NFTs are digital tokens representing ownership of a unique asset, such as a piece of art, and are recorded on a blockchain. While environmental impact and market volatility concerns persist, some artists have leveraged NFTs to gain financial independence and challenge traditional art market dynamics. The integration of NFT technology has been explored to address gender disparities in the art world, offering decentralised and accessible platforms for female-identifying artists (MDPI, 2023). Using blockchain technology, artists can sell their work directly to collectors, bypassing traditional gatekeepers and retaining a more significant share of the profits. This has been particularly empowering for marginalised artists who have historically faced barriers to entry into the art market. NFTs allow artists to establish provenance and protect their intellectual property, ensuring their work is recognised and valued.


However, the adoption of decentralised platforms is not without challenges. Audience fragmentation, moderation, and ethical considerations remain significant hurdles. While decentralised platforms offer greater control and autonomy for users, they also require active participation and management to ensure a positive and inclusive environment. The lack of centralised moderation can lead to issues with harmful content, harassment, and misinformation. To address these challenges, artists and platform developers can work together to implement practical moderation tools, community guidelines, and user reporting systems. By navigating these challenges and advocating for policies and practices prioritising inclusivity and community support, artists can help shape a more positive and empowering environment on decentralised platforms.


Despite these challenges, the evolution of decentralised platforms presents promising opportunities for marginalised artists. As these platforms continue to develop, they offer alternative avenues for artists to share their work, connect with communities, and maintain greater control over their creative practices. By embracing decentralised models, artists can reclaim their autonomy, challenge traditional power structures, and create spaces celebrating diversity and creativity. The potential of these platforms to reshape the digital art world is significant, offering a counter-narrative to mainstream social media's commodification and algorithmic bias. With the support and advocacy of the art community, decentralised platforms can become the norm, providing a space for all artists to be heard, their work to be valued, and their communities to thrive.


The rise of decentralised platforms highlights the potential for a more equitable and inclusive digital art ecosystem. These platforms offer a counter-narrative to mainstream social media's commodification and algorithmic bias by prioritising user autonomy and community-driven engagement. For marginalised artists, decentralised platforms provide a space for their voices to be heard, their work to be valued, and their communities to thrive. While platforms like Patreon offer financial alternatives, they require ongoing engagement and content production, replicating the labour demands of traditional social media visibility rather than resolving financial precarity. Some decentralised platforms, such as cooperative-led artist networks and blockchain-based grant systems, aim to provide fairer compensation models. However, these alternatives remain niche, and issues of accessibility, sustainability, and ethical concerns around blockchain technologies persist (On the Move, 2024).


As the digital landscape continues to evolve, it is essential to consider the broader implications of decentralised platforms for the future of art and representation. By supporting and advocating for these alternative spaces, we can work towards a digital art world that truly reflects the diversity and richness of human creativity. This requires ongoing investment in infrastructure, education, and policy development to ensure that decentralised platforms remain accessible, sustainable, and empowering for all artists.


The intersection of digital platforms and marginalised artists reveals an empowering and profoundly complex landscape. On the one hand, digital platforms have opened up unprecedented opportunities for visibility and community-building, offering marginalised creators a space to express their work without the traditional gatekeeping of the art world. Artists from diverse backgrounds—whether queer, disabled, chronically ill, or otherwise marginalised—can bypass physical and institutional barriers, reaching global audiences who might otherwise never have encountered their work. These platforms allow for direct engagement with communities, fostering solidarity, connection, and creative collaboration across geographical and cultural divides.


The rise of decentralised platforms presents a promising alternative to these algorithm-driven systems, offering artists a way to reclaim control over their narratives and engage with audiences without overreaching corporate oversight. These platforms enable creators to distribute their work freely without the influence of profit-maximising algorithms. By bypassing centralised gatekeepers, these platforms hold the potential to disrupt traditional models of visibility and gatekeeping, offering marginalised artists a more democratic space for creative expression. This potential for change is a reason for hope in the future of digital art.


To navigate these dualities, marginalised artists must critically engage with the systems shaping their visibility, advocating for platforms that prioritise authenticity, inclusivity, and creative autonomy. This requires pushing back against the forces of commodification and algorithmic bias, demanding platforms that allow for the flourishing of diverse artistic practices without forcing creators to conform to mainstream or market-driven expectations. By rejecting the notion that visibility must come at the cost of artistic integrity, marginalised artists can reclaim digital spaces as sites of empowerment, transformation, and genuine community-building. This ongoing process of negotiation and resistance holds the potential to reshape the digital landscape, creating a future where marginalised voices are not only heard but celebrated.


This dissertation has explored the complex and multifaceted relationship between digital platforms and marginalised artists, emphasising how these platforms offer new opportunities for visibility, community-building, and creative expression. For marginalised artists, the digital ecosystem provides a vital space for amplifying voices often silenced in traditional art venues. However, as digital platforms have democratised artistic expression, they have also introduced new layers of commodification, algorithmic bias, and market-driven demands that complicate the notion of empowerment.


While platforms like Instagram, Tumblr, and Twitter offer visibility, they pressure artists to conform to trends and marketable identities. The commodification of identity in the digital age, where authenticity and visibility often intersect with the need to be "profitable," presents significant challenges for marginalised creators. As an artist who navigates both empowerment and exploitation in digital spaces, I have experienced firsthand the duality that these platforms offer: they provide a stage for my art, but often at the expense of personal authenticity, with the pressure to meet algorithmic expectations and capitalise on my identity for commercial gain. This duality underscores the need for critical reflection on how platforms function and the structures they impose on creative work.


In order to create a truly inclusive and equitable digital art ecosystem, platforms must undergo intentional reforms that prioritise diversity, representation, and the dismantling of algorithmic biases. These reforms, which include integrating marginalised voices into platform governance, offering artists tools to control their work's visibility and reach, and fostering community-driven content curation, are crucial for the future of digital art. They should motivate us to advocate for change in the digital art landscape.


Empowerment for marginalised artists extends beyond visibility; it necessitates equitable access to resources, mentorship, and financial support. Structural barriers—such as economic instability and lack of institutional connections—limit the capacity of marginalised artists to sustain long-term creative practices. Despite efforts to address this disparity through initiatives like the Supporting Act Foundation and Creative Capital, traditional funding mechanisms continue to privilege artists with existing economic and social capital. This underscores the need for us to be empathetic and supportive of the struggles faced by marginalised artists.


Beyond formal grants, peer-mentorship models have become vital alternatives to institutional programs. Organisations like Working Artists and the Greater Economy (W.A.G.E.) advocate for sustainable economic relationships between artists and institutions, promoting equitable compensation structures (W.A.G.E., 2024). Without such direct support mechanisms, digital platforms risk perpetuating existing inequalities, leaving marginalised artists vulnerable to the pressures of algorithm-driven marketability without the necessary resources to thrive.


Ultimately, the future of digital platforms depends on altering their structures to foster environments where marginalised artists are empowered to share their narratives without risking suppression being crushed by the threat of commercialisation. This requires individual and collective action and a commitment to creating digital spaces prioritising inclusivity, creativity, and autonomy. Only then can we ensure that digital platforms truly become catalysts for artistic innovation, social progress, and the celebration of marginalised voices.


Books:
  • Archey, Karen, and Robin Peckham, eds. Postinternet: Art After the Internet. K. Archey & R. Peckham, 2016.
  • Bourdieu, Pierre. The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. New York: Columbia University Press, 1993.
  • Fuchs, Christian. Social Media: A Critical Introduction. London: SAGE, 2017.
  • Harris, T. "Fandom and Art as a Digital Tool for Neurodivergent Expression." Journal of Fandom Studies 7, no. 1 (2019): 45-62.
  • Hong, Cathy Park. Minor Feelings: An Asian American Reckoning. New York: One World, 2020.
  • Meyer, Richard. Outlaw Representation: Censorship and Homosexuality in Twentieth-Century American Art. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.
  • Noble, Safiya Umoja. Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: NYU Press, 2018.
  • Rettberg, Jill W. Digital Media: A New Approach to Digital Art. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014.
  • Steyerl, Hito. The Wretched of the Screen. Berlin: Sternberg Press, 2012.

Journal Articles:
  • Kim, Christine Sun. "Digital Spaces and the Politics of Sound." Journal of Digital Culture 12, no. 3 (2015): 45-60.
  • Novalinga, Shina. "Inuit Throat Singing and Digital Identity." Indigenous Media Review 5, no. 2 (2021): 78-91.
  • Parker, Jason S. F. "Resisting the Mainstream: Fan Art, Community, and Identity." In Fan Studies: A Critical Introduction, edited by Mark J. P. Williams, 183-202. London: Routledge, 2020.

Reports and Articles from Websites:
  • "Meta Faces Backlash Over LGBTQ+ Content Moderation." The Pink News, January 2025. https://www.pinknews.co.uk.
  • "LGBTQ+ Groups Report Censorship on Facebook." ABC News, January 2025. https://www.abc.net.au.
  • "Decentralized Social Networks and Artistic Freedom." KnowTechie, 2023. https://www.knowtechie.com.
  • "Bluesky's Rapid Growth and the Tabletop Gaming Community." Polygon, 2023. https://www.polygon.com.
  • "NFTs and Gender Equity in the Art World." MDPI, 2023. https://www.mdpi.com.

Additional Citations:
  1. Sutton Trust (2024). Elitist Britain: The Role of Class in the Creative Industries. The Sutton Trust. Retrieved from https://www.suttontrust.com
  2. O'Brien, D., Laurison, D., Miles, A., & Friedman, S. (2016). Are the Creative Industries Meritocratic? An Analysis of Class Origin and Creative Careers. Cultural Trends, 25(2), 116-131.
  3. Jackson, S. J. (2021). Hashtag Activism: Networks of Race and Gender Justice. MIT Press.
  4. Working Artists and the Greater Economy (W.A.G.E.) (2024). Advocating for Fair Pay in the Arts. Retrieved from https://www.wageforwork.com
  5. On the Move (2024). Supporting Act Foundation: Impact Grants and Creative Bursaries. Retrieved from https://on-the-move.org
  6. Piazza, M. & McAndrew, C. (2023). The Art Market 2023. Art Basel & UBS.
  7. Creative Capital (2025). Creative Capital Awards for Artists. Retrieved from https://creative-capital.org
  8. Banks, M. (2017). Creative Justice: Cultural Industries, Work and Inequality. Rowman & Littlefield.