FHSS | Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences
← Back to Volume 6, Issue 10

Thoughts on the Long-Term Governance Model of Social Media from the Perspective of Media-Cultural Ecology

Ziyao Yang
Vol. 6, No. 10, pp. 39-45, 2026 DOI: 10.54691/3cwbad86 October 19, 2026
Download PDF
Abstract.By the end of 2025, there will be around 1.125 billion Internet users across China and an Internet penetration rate of 80.1 per cent. WeChat had approximately 1.418 billion monthly active users, Weibo had around 567 million, and Xiaohongshu was over 400 million. The occurrence of false information, cyberbullying, algorithmic echo chambers and vulgar content in the large-scale digital public space indicates structural deficiencies in the traditional special rectification campaigns. Theoretically, media cultural ecology is used to view society and the world of media as an integrated cultural system. Systematically investigates the causes of the governance dilemma. The results show that the long-term governance of social media faces three kinds of structural tensions: the speed of technological iteration cannot keep up with the supply of systems; there is an inherent contradiction between the platform's traffic logic and the public value orientation; and the blurred boundaries of rights and responsibilities for various parties have led to fragmented governance. Based on this, a three-dimensional collaborative long-term governance path of "system-technology-culture" is proposed: to enhance the hierarchical and classified institutional norms, promote technological governance such as algorithm transparency and content identification, cultivate a rational and peaceful digital cultural atmosphere, and advance the governance of social media from phased rectification to institutionalised, routinised and ecologically oriented operation.
Keywords. Media cultural ecology; Social media; Long-term governance; Platform governance; Network ecology.
APA Citation Ziyao Yang (2026). Thoughts on the Long-Term Governance Model of Social Media from the Perspective of Media-Cultural Ecology. Frontiers in Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(10), 39-45. https://doi.org/10.54691/3cwbad86

References

  1. Pan, Q., Luo, W., Liu, Z., & Zhang, J. Z. (2025). Digital platform governance: Literature review and research outlook. Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce, 35(4), 407–431.
  2. Staab, P., & Thiel, T. (2022). Social media and the digital structural transformation of the public sphere. Theory, Culture & Society, 39(4), 129–143.
  3. Ye, Z., Huang, Q., & Krijnen, T. (2025). Douyin's playful platform governance: Platform's self-regulation and content creators’ participatory surveillance. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 28(1), 80–98.
  4. Flew, T., & Martin, F. R. (2022). Digital platform regulation: Global perspectives on internet governance. Palgrave Macmillan.
  5. [No author]. (n.d.). Information on. http:// news.cnnb.com.cn /system/2025/11 /05/ 030713561. shtml
  6. Kshetri, N., & Voas, J. (2017). The economics of “fake news”. IT Professional, 19(6), 8–12.
  7. Lauer, D. (2021). Facebook’s ethical failures are not accidental; they are part of the business model. AI and Ethics, 1(4), 395–403.
  8. Rahman, H. A., Karunakaran, A., & Cameron, L. D. (2024). Taming platform power: Taking accountability into account in the management of platforms. Academy of Management Annals, 18(1), 251–294.
  9. He, Q., Hong, Y., & Raghu, T. S. (2025). Platform governance with algorithm-based content moderation: An empirical study on Reddit. Information Systems Research, 36(2), 1078–1095.
  10. Zhao, L., & Zhang, R. (2025). Unpacking platform governance through meaningful human agency: How Chinese moderators make discretionary decisions in a dynamic network. New Media & Society, 27(12), 6472–6491.
  11. Liu, N. N., Lo, C. W. H., Zhan, X., & Wang, W. (2015). Campaign‐style enforcement and regulatory compliance. Public Administration Review, 75(1), 85–95.
  12. Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press.
  13. Gorwa, R. (2024). The politics of platform regulation: How governments shape online content moderation. Oxford University Press.
  14. Xu, J. (2024). Opening the ‘black box’ of algorithms: Regulation of algorithms in China. Communication Research and Practice, 10(3), 288–296.
  15. [No author]. (n.d.). Information on. https://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_32007753
  16. Xu, D., Tang, S., & Guttman, D. (2019). China's campaign-style Internet finance governance: Causes, effects, and lessons learned for new information-based approaches to governance. Computer Law & Security Review, 35(1), 3–14.
  17. Ang, P. H., & Haristya, S. (2024). The governance, legitimacy and efficacy of Facebook's Oversight Board: A model for global tech platforms?. Emerging Media, 2(2), 169–180.
  18. Van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & De Waal, M. (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world. Oxford University Press.
  19. Pohle, J., & Santaniello, M. (2024). From multistakeholderism to digital sovereignty: Toward a new discursive order in internet governance?. Policy & Internet, 16(4), 672–691.
  20. Lu, P., Zhou, L., & Fan, X. (2023). Platform governance and sociological participation. The Journal of Chinese Sociology, 10(1), 3.