top of page

MANAGING
AND
DESIGNING
CURATED
LIVES

Liviu Poenaru, Feb. 4, 2025

​

​

Managing and designing curated lives in the context of cybercapitalism involves navigating the intersection of digital technologies, consumer culture, and the commodification of personal identity. Cybercapitalism refers to an economic system where digital platforms, data, and online interactions drive value creation, often blurring the lines between public and private life. In this framework, individuals increasingly engage in self-branding, algorithmic optimization, and digital labor, shaping their online presence to conform to economic, social, and aesthetic expectations.

​

One of the defining features of cybercapitalism is the curation of personal identity for public consumption. Social media platforms such as Instagram, LinkedIn, and TikTok encourage users to construct idealized versions of themselves, engaging in what Marwick (2013) terms "self-branding," wherein individuals market themselves as products within the digital economy. This process is not simply a matter of self-expression; it is deeply shaped by algorithmic forces that dictate visibility and engagement. Bucher (2017) highlights how these algorithms create feedback loops that push users toward specific forms of self-presentation, privileging content that aligns with platform incentives. The consequence is an environment where personal identity is increasingly commodified, and success is often measured in metrics such as likes, shares, and follower counts.

​

Data, in this context, functions as currency. Platforms collect vast amounts of user-generated data to fuel targeted advertising, effectively monetizing curated lives (Zuboff, 2019). While users may perceive themselves as active participants in digital culture, their online behavior is systematically harvested and commodified, raising critical questions about privacy, autonomy, and the ethical implications of algorithm-driven content curation. The seamless integration of surveillance mechanisms into everyday online interactions further complicates the notion of free will, as individuals navigate digital spaces that are designed to maximize engagement and profitability rather than authenticity.

​

The very design of digital platforms reinforces the curation of online personas. As van Dijck (2013) notes, platform features such as filters, stories, and hashtags are not neutral tools but are engineered to promote specific forms of engagement. Gamification strategies—including likes, followers, and streaks—further incentivize performative behaviors, exploiting psychological mechanisms like the need for social validation (Whitson, 2013). Users, in turn, invest considerable time and effort into crafting their digital identities, often without recognizing that this unpaid labor directly benefits platforms and advertisers (Terranova, 2000). The labor of self-presentation becomes an invisible economic force, propelling the digital economy while reinforcing societal pressures to maintain a curated online existence.

​

The psychological toll of maintaining curated lives is profound. Research suggests that the disconnect between real life and idealized online personas can contribute to anxiety, depression, and social comparison (Vogel et al., 2014). The relentless pressure to perform for an imagined audience fosters a tension between authenticity and self-promotion, raising ethical dilemmas about what to share and how to present oneself (Marwick & Boyd, 2011). This performative nature of social media discourages vulnerability, often promoting a sanitized, aestheticized version of life that is detached from genuine human experience.

​

Beyond individual concerns, cybercapitalism exacerbates social inequalities. Digital stratification means that not all individuals have equal access to the tools and resources needed to curate an influential online presence (Hargittai, 2011). Those with privileged access to high-speed internet, advanced editing tools, and professional networking opportunities are more likely to succeed in the digital attention economy, reinforcing pre-existing disparities. Platforms exploit users’ psychological vulnerabilities, prioritizing engagement over well-being, particularly among adolescents who are especially susceptible to social media pressures (Andrejevic, 2013). This dynamic not only commercializes human interaction but also homogenizes cultural expression, as global platforms impose dominant aesthetic and behavioral norms at the expense of local diversity (Couldry & Hepp, 2016).

​

Resistance to these dynamics is emerging, even though it remains marginal compared to the firepower of Big Tech and its corporations. Digital detox movements encourage users to reduce their reliance on social media, recognizing the benefits of less curated, more spontaneous ways of living (Radovic et al., 2017). Decentralized platforms such as Mastodon and Diaspora offer alternative digital spaces where users have greater control over their data and interactions, challenging the monopolistic grip of corporate social media (Troncoso et al., 2017). Fostering critical awareness through media literacy programs can empower users to recognize and navigate the underlying mechanisms of cybercapitalism (Fuchs, 2014). By cultivating digital autonomy and questioning the structures that govern online engagement, individuals and communities can push for more ethical, equitable digital environments.

​

The management and design of curated lives in cybercapitalism reflect broader tensions between self-expression, economic exploitation, and social control. While digital platforms offer unprecedented opportunities for connection and creativity, they also impose systemic pressures that shape identity, labor, and mental well-being. As cybercapitalism continues to evolve, critical engagement with its implications remains essential, demanding systemic change that prioritizes human dignity over algorithmic profitability.

​

GO FURTHER

Andrejevic, M. (2013). Infoglut: How Too Much Information Is Changing the Way We Think and Know. Routledge.

Bucher, T. (2017). The algorithmic imaginary: Exploring the ordinary affects of Facebook algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 30-44.

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2016). The Mediated Construction of Reality. Polity Press.

Fuchs, C. (2014). Social Media: A Critical Introduction. Sage.

Hargittai, E. (2011). The digital reproduction of inequality. In D. B. Grusky & S. Szelényi (Eds.), The inequality reader (2nd ed., p. 11). Routledge.

Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age. Yale University Press.

Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133.

Radovic, A., Gmelin, T., Stein, B. D., & Miller, E. (2017). Depressed adolescents’ positive and negative use of social media. Journal of Adolescence, 55, 5-15.

Sundar, S. S., & Marathe, S. S. (2010). Personalization versus customization: The importance of agency, privacy, and power usage. Human Communication Research, 36(3), 298-322.

Terranova, T. (2000). Free labor: Producing culture for the digital economy. Social Text, 18(2), 33-58.

Troncoso, C., Isaakidis, M., Danezis, G., & Halpin, H. (2017). Systematizing decentralization and privacy: Lessons from 15 years of research and deployments. Proceedings on Privacy Enhancing Technologies, 2017(4), 404-426.

van Dijck, J. (2013). The Culture of Connectivity: A Critical History of Social Media. Oxford University Press.

Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206-222.

Whitson, J. (2013). Gaming the quantified self. Surveillance & Society, 11(1/2), 163–176.

Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. PublicAffairs.

​

​

​

​

​

We have been conditioned and imprinted, much like Pavlov's dogs and Lorenz's geese, to mostly unconscious economic stimuli, which have become a global consensus and a global source of diseases.

Poenaru, West: An Autoimmune Disease?

  • LinkedIn
bottom of page