Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.121> Article
Research Article

Same Event, Different Worlds: How Platform Mindsets Produce Divergent Meanings and Digital Identities in Social Media Publics

Zhuoai Liu*
Guangdong University of Finance & Economics

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

In platformized communication, the same public event can have various meanings, forms of participation and digital identities in different social media platforms. This research investigates how different platform perspectives influence the cross-platform meaning creation and digital identity construction. Based on the analytical framework of *Platform Mindset → Discursive/Affective Environment → Digital Identity Construction*, a qualitative thematic analysis is conducted using 462 highly interactive comments selected from an original pool of 165,505 comments about the LV–Molly Tea trademark dispute on Douyin, Xiaohongshu and Weibo. The results show different recontextualization processes in these platforms. On Douyin, the controversy becomes a meme via humor, imitation and joint play, forming a participatory identity. On Xiaohongshu, it is redefined through common life, lifestyle and aesthetic activities, creating a consumer–brand co-creator identity. On Weibo, it is restated as a major public issue concerning cultural property rights, intellectual property, fairness and shared values, resulting in a value-oriented public identity. These findings indicate that platform perspectives not only affect the visibility and organization of public event discussions but also the discursive and emotional conditions through which users present and negotiate their digital identities. The study broadens the research on platform perspective by providing a cross-platform structure that links platform rules, meaning-making and identity formation.

Keywords: Platform Mindset; Cross-Platform Communication; Public Events; Digital Identity; Online Public Opinion
Published: September 29, 2026
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2026.37327
Volume: CHR Vol.121
pp. 166-177
Download PDF

References

  1. Matassi, M., & Boczkowski, P. J. (2021). An agenda for comparative social media studies: The value of understanding practices from cross-national, cross-media, and cross-platform perspectives.International Journal of Communication, 15, 207–228.
  2. Lippmann, W. (2017).Public opinion. Routledge.
  3. Klinger, U., & Svensson, J. (2018). The end of media logics? On algorithms and agency.New Media & Society, 20(12), 4653–4670. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818779750
  4. Zulli, D., & Zulli, D. J. (2022). Extending the internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform.New Media & Society, 24(8), 1872–1890. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820983603
  5. Bhandari, A., & Bimo, S. (2020). TikTok and the "algorithmized self": A new model of online interaction.AoIR Selected Papers of Internet Research, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5210/spir.v2020i0.11172
  6. Poell, T., Nieborg, D., & van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation.Internet Policy Review, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1425
  7. Tu, L., & Chu, L. (2025). Platform mindset and digital interaction: Cyber migration from TikTok to Rednote and its potential.Media Observer, 2025(6), 28–38. https://doi.org/10.19480/j.cnki.cmgc.2025.06.002
  8. Papacharissi, Z. (2022). Affective publics: Solidarity and distance. InThe Oxford handbook of digital media sociology. Oxford University Press.
  9. Shifman, L. (2014).Memes in digital culture. MIT Press.
  10. Bakhtin, M. (2025).Rabelais and his world. MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/12184.001.0001
  11. Production, consumption, prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital "prosumer."Journal of Consumer Culture, 10(1), 13–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540509354673
  12. Huang, Z., Yang, Z., & Meng, T. (2023). National identity of locality: The state, patriotism, and nationalism in cyber China.Journal of Chinese Political Science, 28(1), 51–83. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11366-022-09820-4
  13. Smyrnaios, N., & Baisnée, O. (2023). Critically understanding the platformization of the public sphere.European Journal of Communication, 38(5), 435–445. https://doi.org/10.1177/02673231231189046
  14. Rabe, M. (2024).The paradigm of visibility: Algorithms of protest[Master's dissertation, University of Pretoria].
  15. Wu, X., Deng, K., & Zhao, T. (2024). Mapping computational communication research: A methodological breakthrough and thematic exploration.Journal of Social Computing, 5(3), 242–260. https://doi.org/10.23919/JSC.2024.0021