Conference Program

Affective Fandom Dynamics and Democratic Stability in European Digital Politics

Elena VAROTTO
Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM)

Abstract (

This paper develops the notion of fanatic politics to describe an expanding mode of political engagement shaped by platform architectures, affective identification, and the cultural grammars of fandom. In contemporary digital ecosystems, political leaders and parties are increasingly consumed as symbolic brands, while policy debates are reframed through aestheticized storytelling, emotional intensification, and algorithmic amplification. Drawing on mediatization theory (Strömbäck 2008; Couldry & Hepp 2017), affective polarization research (Iyengar et al. 2019; Huddy et al. 2015), and fandom studies (Jenkins 2006; Sandvoss 2013), the paper argues that political participation is progressively reconfigured as a form of affective consumption rather than deliberative engagement.

The central research question is: How does the fan‑driven transformation of politics reshape economic priorities and democratic resilience within European political systems? To address this question, the paper employs a qualitative, multi‑layered methodology combining frame analysis, narrative reconstruction, and visual‑aesthetic coding. It examines how political actors mobilize symbolic repertoires, emotional grammars, and platform‑specific aesthetics across Instagram, TikTok, and Telegram. Particular attention is devoted to the construction of polarizing dichotomies, the personalization of conflict, and the conversion of political identity into a form of digital belonging.

Through case studies from Italy and Spain, the analysis shows how fan‑oriented narratives—such as anti‑taxation frames surrounding property levies or crisis‑centered energy discourses—can influence fiscal debates, redirect political attention, and weaken long‑term industrial strategies. These dynamics are situated within broader debates on platform governance (Gillespie 2018; van Dijck, Poell & de Waal 2018), digital capitalism (Fuchs 2014; Zuboff 2019), and geopolitical vulnerabilities, including European dependencies on private data‑analytics infrastructures, cyber‑security incidents, and the democratic implications of algorithmic opacity. Pedro Sánchez’s recent call for greater transparency in algorithmic decision‑making provides an institutional anchor for discussing democratic stability under conditions of platform power.

The paper contributes to digital politics scholarship in three main ways. First, it conceptualizes fanatic politics as a hybrid formation integrating affective, aesthetic, and algorithmic dimensions of political communication. Second, it demonstrates how fan‑based political narratives can shape economic policy agendas, generating distortions that privilege short‑term symbolic gains over long‑term strategic planning. Third, it proposes an analytical framework for assessing the vulnerabilities of democratic systems exposed to platform‑mediated polarization, emphasizing the need for institutional mechanisms capable of counterbalancing the emotional and economic pressures produced by digital fandoms.

Keywords

fanatic politics; affective polarization; digital platforms; political communication; democratic resilience

References

Couldry, N., & Hepp, A. (2017). The Mediated Construction of Reality.
Fuchs, C. (2014). Social Media: A Critical Introduction.
Gillespie, T. (2018). Custodians of the Internet.
Huddy, L., et al. (2015). “Expressive Partisanship.”
Iyengar, S., et al. (2019). “Affective Polarization in the Digital Age.”
Jenkins, H. (2006). Fans, Bloggers, and Gamers.
Sandvoss, C. (2013). Fans: The Mirror of Consumption.
Strömbäck, J. (2008). “Four Phases of Mediatization.”
van Dijck, J., Poell, T., & de Waal, M. (2018). The Platform Society.
Zuboff, S. (2019). The Age of Surveillance Capitalism.

Since the mid-twentieth century, conspiracism has been predominantly interpreted within the social sciences through pathologizing paradigms, which have tended to frame it in implicitly or explicitly negative terms. From the early 2000s onward, several scholars have begun to challenge these approaches, drawing attention to their potential political weaponization and questioning the axiological neutrality of literature. Nevertheless, systematic reflection on these underlying assumptions remains limited and fragmented, potentially contributing to the reproduction of misinterpretations in subsequent research.

This study aims to provide a historical and comparative analysis of the social scientific literature on conspiracism to assess whether, and to what extent, the phenomenon has been shaped by pre-existing axiological orientations that have constrained its analytical understanding. This has limited the possibility of scholars proposing critical instruments aimed at recognizing conspiracy thinking as an inter-partitical tool for gaining electoral consent in politics.

The guiding hypothesis is that a substantial portion of literature has constructed ideal-typical models of conspiracism based on non-essential characteristics of the phenomenon, selectively emphasized through value judgments antecedent to empirical observation. This process may have contributed to the crystallization of predominantly negative paradigms and to their systematic association with other similarly stereotyped phenomena, such as populism. Our primary goal is to reconstruct the main interpretive paradigms that have emerged since the publication of “The Paranoid Style in American Politics” (Hofstadter, 1965), a proper milestone of the above-mentioned negative approach to conspiracism in social science. More specifically, we aim to identify their theoretical, disciplinary, and geographical foundations, and (if any) the consequent presence and persistence of evaluative biases in literature.

Methodologically, the study adopts a quantitative approach based on a bibliometric analysis of papers in English and Italian produced in Europe and the United States. Using Bibliometrix, co-word and co-citation analyses will be conducted on datasets extracted from social science databases to identify recurring conceptual associations and dominant interpretative frameworks, as well as the most influential epistemic communities, references, and schools of thought. Further articulation of the analysis on a longitudinal and geographical basis, through the organisation of data into time intervals and geographical areas, will capture the phases of research development and conceptual evolution over time, identify regional clusters, and enable systematic comparison between regional normative and interpretative orientations.

The expected outcomes include the identification of recurring theoretical approaches and evaluative elements that can be interpreted as structural biases. The study introduces analytical frameworks designed to provide guidance and critical tools for analysing bibliographic production, to strengthen critical thinking and to foster an impartial, contextualized understanding of the use of conspiracy theories, since their deployment has significant implications for the quality of democracy and participation. By seeking to identify hypothetical value-based and epistemic biases, this study could make an important contribution to media literacy, promoting a critical view of the value-based categorization of certain social phenomena and how this is legitimized and disseminated through legacy and digital media.

This paper offers a theoretical reflection on the role of digital and virtual technologies in sports education, with a particular focus on their potential to promote inclusive processes. Although the topic of inclusion through sport is widely discussed at both institutional and scientific levels, studies that systematically analyse the effects of digital technologies in sports education environments remain limited (Mittler, 2005a, 2005b; Magnanini et al., 2018; Kozikoglu & Onur, 2019). Nevertheless, numerous educational projects and policies, particularly at the European and international levels, highlight a growing interest in technological innovation as a lever for ensuring equal opportunities for access, participation, and learning in sport. Inclusion is understood here as a process of social justice aimed at creating accessible, safe, and respectful sports environments that foster the active participation of all individuals, regardless of age, social background, or physical, motor, or cognitive abilities. From this perspective, sports education is required to adapt rules, spaces, and tools to promote active and collaborative learning experiences and counter stereotypes and prejudices, thereby strengthening empathy, communication, and awareness of both self and others.

The literature review indicates that e-learning platforms and mobile applications are the most widely used technologies in sports education, particularly for fostering content sharing and interaction between students and teachers. Exergames and gamification practices emerge as effective tools for enhancing motivation, movement, and interdisciplinarity, whereas monitoring devices, immersive technologies, and generative tools remain less commonly used, mainly due to economic, technological, and educational constraints. Despite their potential to support body awareness, personalised learning, and the inclusion of individuals with disabilities, these technologies are often employed in fragmented ways that are not fully aligned with educational objectives. The study also reveals a strong prevalence of cognitively oriented teaching approaches, to the detriment of interactionist, sociocultural, and hybrid methodologies, which appear more suitable for enhancing the relational, socio-environmental, and motivational dimensions of sports education (Geisen, Fox, & Klatt, 2023; Willaert et al., 2020; Petrini, 2025). In conclusion, the study highlights the need for a more informed, integrated, and pedagogically grounded use of digital technologies, identifying future research priorities focused on exploring the relational, motivational, and physical effects of digital and virtual learning environments from a longitudinal and inclusive perspective.

This contribution reframes psychological wellbeing and human flourishing within the challenges of educating
for democratic citizenship in an era of complexity, instability, and technoscientific opacity. Building on Self-
vs. Externally-Regulated Behavior Theory, the paper argues that learners’ capacity to inhabit complex
systems responsibly depends on the interplay between (a) self-regulatory competencies and (b) the
“regulatory quality” of learning environments—especially their emotional climate. Emotions are treated not
as secondary outcomes but as the neuropsychological infrastructure of learning: supportive affective states
enable exploration and deep understanding, while anxiety and stress—frequently triggered by uncertainty,
feedback loops, and perceived loss of control—can produce cognitive withdrawal and helplessness.
The paper proposes COTS board games as accessible “complexity simulators” for citizenship education: rule-
based worlds where players experience uncertainty, systemic risk, resource conflicts, ethical dilemmas,
cooperation/competition, and failure in a psychologically safe setting. Through structured play, students
encounter emotionally resonant decision-making situations that can be debriefed to strengthen emotional
intelligence (recognition, regulation, perspective-taking) and to transform mistakes into curiosity and
redesign rather than fear and avoidance. In this way, game design becomes a pro-regulatory educational
ecosystem that supports autonomy, competence, and relatedness while cultivating resilience, critical
awareness, and hope—key dispositions for democratic agency under complexity.
Finally, the paper explores how generative AI can function as a dialogic cognitive–emotional mediator
integrated into game-based learning: not as an authority that simplifies complexity technocratically, but as a
reflective scaffold that helps teachers and students articulate strategies, interpret emotional responses, test
alternative narratives, and reduce performance anxiety. By combining complex-systems play, motivational
design, and AI-supported reflection, the proposed framework expands learners’ ability to understand
technoscientific systems critically and to act with greater clarity, wellbeing, and responsibility in
contemporary democratic life.

The growing development of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly assuming a central role in media communication processes. The textual and visual information that we produce and disseminate daily represents an important educational challenge today, requiring greater critical awareness of the role of artificial intelligence and media in democratic participation processes (Panciroli & Rivoltella, 2023).

This context highlights the need to promote forms of thinking oriented toward solving complex problems and managing contemporary challenges. Data from ISTAT (2024) show the importance of strengthening digital competence in order to improve citizens’ democratic participation. Long and Magerko (2020) also emphasize the need to develop skills related to data interpretation, understanding machine learning processes, and reflecting on the ethical and social implications of algorithms. In this context, it becomes crucial to train future teachers to critically understand media languages within educational processes. The new DigComp 3.0 framework (European Commission, 2025) highlights the importance of reflecting on artificial intelligence across the five areas of digital competence.

This paper presents a teaching experience carried out within a university course on Educational Technologies, involving students enrolled in the Primary Teacher Education program. The activity was designed as a digital storytelling laboratory in which students created short educational video stories intended for primary school pupils, using generative artificial intelligence tools to produce images.

The activity aimed to enhance narrative design (Bruner, 1990; Robin, 2016), multimodal communication, and critical reflection on the role of AI in the creation of educational content. The choice to adopt a narrative methodology is linked to the role that storytelling plays in encouraging learners to ask questions, construct logical and causal relationships between events, and develop alternative perspectives. Recent studies highlight how the integration of generative artificial intelligence in storytelling activities can support students’ creative and metacognitive processes, fostering a comparison between human ideas and AI-generated suggestions (Niclós et al., 2024).

Accordingly, this study addresses the following research question: how can the use of generative artificial intelligence in digital storytelling activities contribute to the development of critical competencies related to media and algorithms in teacher education?

The exploratory study adopts a qualitative approach. A sample of 100 video stories created by the students was analyzed considering three main dimensions: a. the narrative coherence and educational intention of the produced stories; b. the relationship between textual prompts and the images generated by AI systems; and c. the integration of multimodal elements in line with principles of multimedia learning (Mayer, 2024). A questionnaire was administered to explore students’ perceptions of narrative meaning-making and the potential and critical aspects of AI in generating stories and images.

Preliminary findings indicate that narrative guided the construction of visual meaning in the videos, shaping the use of prompts and the generation of both referential and evocative images. The analysis also revealed the presence of bias in the generated images, offering students an opportunity to critically reflect on algorithmic processes and on the role of artificial intelligence in the production of media content.

In this paper, I draw upon contemporary engagements with Lefebvre’s spatiotemporal critique of capitalism to argue that the emptiness of our common spaces degrades democratic commitments. Drawing from a Heideggerean phenomenological perspective, Lefebvre (2004, 2014) is concerned with the formation of being in relation to everyday life amidst the spaces of the world. Unlike Heidegger, however, Lefebvre states that it is in the everyday encounter with the world, and with the cultivated spaces of one’s immediate environment, that capitalism asserts its control (Schmid, 2022). Here, I argue that capitalism has flattened our everyday environments by eliminating materials—what Heidegger (2001) calls the ready-to-hand—through programs of austerity and by impoverishing our imaginaries by tying life’s worth to labour and consumption. A fulsome lifeworld, I contend, cannot be constructed from the remains, from the shadows and echoes of meaningful engagements with the world around us and with others. To develop this argument, I begin by describing how capitalism makes incursions into the spaces of young people’s lives in two ways: first, through consumerist online worlds; second, through classrooms eroded by neoliberal conditions. For the former, I draw on Lefebvrian analyses to describe how capital’s rapacious tendency toward marketization has shaped online environments into vapid spaces where children are both labourers for and consumers of Big Tech, but have few opportunities for meaningful human connection. For the latter, I extend the Lefebvrian analysis to argue that the neoliberal iteration of capitalism has altered the material conditions of schools, ridding them of rich, experiential opportunities for the arts and hands-on learning through underfunding. These classrooms, I suggest, are now increasingly spaces for more blinkered, algorithmically-controlled online time, as students are rarely given materials outside of laptops or phones. Both online and classroom spaces then facilitate what Crary (2022) calls an “atomized crowd of individuals” (Ch. 3, para. 48). In the third section of the paper, I discuss how a lack of space to forge communities—to meaningfully experience the in-the-world phenomenon of being with—corrodes the foundations of democratic participation. That is, as fewer materials are available ready-to-hand, there are fewer opportunities for young people to encounter and forge care for the world. This lack of connection, of intention, and of imaginaries is a product of the emptiness of capitalist space, but not an accidental one. It is a way of insuring that democracies are less viable and that oligarchic regimes face fewer obstacles. I conclude my paper with an invitation to consider what Lefebvre’s relentless focus on space permits us to see: that cultivating time and place for togetherness, in respite from capitalist phenomena, is a promising way forward. I assert that place-based, material enrichments should form the basis for arguments in support of public education, and for how children might spend their leisure time as well.