ISSN: 2226-6348
Open access
Multi-Channel Networks (MCNs) have emerged as powerful yet ambivalent intermediaries in the platform economy, acting as both 'enablers' and 'disciplinarians' for creators. This tension is particularly acute for university student influencers, who navigate the precarious intersection of digital labor and educational pressures. While existing literature examines MCNs' structural power, it remains unclear how creators' subjective perceptions of MCNs mediate this power. This article argues that perception is not a passive outcome but an active mediating mechanism that translates institutional forces into concrete labor practices. Based on 15 in-depth interviews and two focus groups (N=25) with Chinese university student influencers, the study identifies three dominant perceptual frameworks: the MCN as (1) an 'Enabling Partner,' leading to the internalization of discipline; (2) a 'Controlling Boss,' fostering alienation and resistance; and (3) a 'Short-Term Springboard,' enabling strategic leveraging of resources. We demonstrate how these divergent perceptions systematically shape digital labor practices (alignment vs. resistance vs. risk-hedging) and subsequent career trajectories (professionalization vs. exit vs. entrepreneurship). The paper's primary contribution is the development of a 'Perceived Empowerment-Discipline' model, advancing digital labor theory by specifying the process through which subjective perception shapes agency within platformed infrastructures.
Abidin, C. (2018). Internet celebrity: Understanding fame online. Emerald Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-78756-076-520181008
Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475
Birt, L., Scott, S., Cavers, D., Campbell, C., & Walter, F. (2016). Member checking: A tool to enhance trustworthiness or merely a nod to validation? Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1802–1811. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732316654870
Bishop, S. (2019). Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society, 21(11–12), 2589–2606. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819854731
Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. University of California Press.
Boeije, H. (2002). A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Quality & Quantity, 36(4), 391–409. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020909529486
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health, 11(4), 589–597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019.1628806
Burgess, J., & Green, J. (2018). YouTube: Online video and participatory culture (2nd ed.). Polity Press.
Carter, N., Bryant-Lukosius, D., DiCenso, A., Blythe, J., & Neville, A. J. (2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547
Cotter, K. (2019). Playing the visibility game: How digital influencers and algorithms negotiate influence on Instagram. New Media & Society, 21(4), 895–913. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444818815684
Creswell, J. W., & Poth, C. N. (2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (4th ed.). SAGE.
Cunningham, S., & Craig, D. (2017). Being “really real” on YouTube: Authenticity, community and brand culture in social media entertainment. Media International Australia, 164(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X17709098
Cunningham, S., & Craig, D. (2019). Social media entertainment: The new intersection of Hollywood and Silicon Valley. New York University Press.
Cunningham, S., Craig, D., & Silver, J. (2016). YouTube, multichannel networks and the accelerated evolution of the new screen ecology. Convergence, 22(4), 376–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856516641620
Cyberspace Administration of China. (2022). Provisions on the administration of algorithm-generated recommendations for internet information services. https://www.cac.gov.cn/2022-01/04/c_1642894606364259.htm
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
Duffy, B. E. (2017). (Not) getting paid to do what you love: Gender, social media, and aspirational work. Yale University Press.
Fuchs, C. (2014). Social media: A critical introduction. SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446270066
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Aldine.
Goodman, L. A. (1961). Snowball sampling. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 32(1), 148–170. https://doi.org/10.1214/aoms/1177705148
Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
Hou, M. (2019). Social media celebrity and the institutionalization of YouTube. Convergence, 25(3), 534–553. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856517750368
Kitchin, R. (2017). Thinking critically about and researching algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154087
Kitzinger, J. (1994). The methodology of focus groups: The importance of interaction between research participants. Sociology of Health & Illness, 16(1), 103–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.ep11347023
Kuehn, K., & Corrigan, T. F. (2013). Hope Labor: The role of employment prospects in online social production. The Political Economy of Communication, 1(1). https://polecom.org/index.php/polecom/article/view/9
Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE.
Liang, F., & Ji, L. (2024). Manufacturing influencers: The gatekeeping roles of MCNs (multi-channel networks) in cultural production. Information, Communication & Society, 27(12), 2297–2313. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2024.2396614
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE.
Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 129–152. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.22.1.129
Nowell, L. S., Norris, J. M., White, D. E., & Moules, N. J. (2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847
Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L., & Wynaden, D. (2001). Ethics in qualitative research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 93–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2001.00093.x
Plantin, J.-C., Lagoze, C., Edwards, P. N., & Sandvig, C. (2018). Infrastructure studies meet platform studies in the age of Google and Facebook. New Media & Society, 20(1), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816661553
Poell, T., Nieborg, D. B., & van Dijck, J. (2019). Platformisation. Internet Policy Review, 8(4). https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.1425
Postman, N. (1970). The ecology of media. ETC: A Review of General Semantics, 27(1), 11–22.
QuestMobile. (2023). 2023 China mobile internet report. QuestMobile Industry Report.
Rappaport, J. (1987). Terms of empowerment/exemplars of prevention: Toward a theory for community psychology. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15(2), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00919275
Scolari, C. A. (2012). Media ecology: Exploring the metaphor to expand the theory. Communication Theory, 22(2), 204–225. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2012.01404.x
Sun, Y., & Zeng, J. (2023). Youth, platform labor and aspirational entrepreneurship in Chinese short video platforms. Convergence, 29(6), 1568–1585. https://doi.org/10.1177/13548565221145354
Terranova, T. (2000). Free labor: Producing culture for the digital economy. Social Text, 18(2), 33–58. https://doi.org/10.1215/01642472-18-2_63-33
van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001
Zhang, W., & Tong, T. (2024). Contesting the intermediary power: How Chinese MCNs interact with platforms, creators, and advertisers. Media, Culture & Society, 46(5), 1027–1044. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437241229306
Cao, Z., Alsagoff, S. A. S., & Hashim, N. (2025). From Perception to Practice: How Chinese University Student Short-form Video Influencers’ Perceptions of MCNs Shape Their digital labor and Career Trajectories. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 14(4), 1411–1425.
Copyright: © 2025 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode