Chinese social media platforms are taking the initiative to cultivate relationships with both the government and users by proactively elaborating on platform rules, aiming to enhance the legitimacy of governance. This article seeks to understand the proactive governance of Chinese social media platforms and the underlying power dynamics by analyzing how official administrators construct governance legitimacy through boundary discourse. We conduct a critical discourse analysis of video texts published by official administrators on three large social media platforms: Douyin, Kuaishou, and Bilibili. It is found that official administrators legitimize platform governance by shaping three types of boundary discourse: deviant expulsion, traffic rewards, and community pest clean-up. Proactive governance by official administrators represents efforts by social platforms to balance top-down regulatory pressures with the autonomy of platform governance and to seek ways to legitimize the governance framework in a manner that is more acceptable to users. Going beyond a technology-centric concept of platform governance, the article seeks to understand the governance system of Chinese social platforms through the boundary discourse of official administrators.
ÅkerlundM (2025) Politics of deliberate inaction: The disconnect between platform justifications and user imaginaries on content moderation in a “free speech” online forum. New Media & Society27: 1235–1255. Epub ahead of print 27 September. DOI: 10.1177/14614448231190905
2.
Bilibili Community Administrator (2022a) Community administrator says community episode 2: unveiling the wind discipline committee. Available at: https://b23.tv/E5bsqko (accessed 22 January 2024).
3.
Bilibili Community Administrator (2023a) Are ear-cleaning videos being restricted? Let me explain the community’s public order and moral standards in detail. Available at: https://b23.tv/5XP5es1 (accessed 5 February 2024).
4.
Bilibili Community Administrator (2023b) The new community guidelines are now live! Watch how Luo Xiang, the new administrator of the “black room,” handles cases. Available at: https://b23.tv/uPTxyim (accessed 5 February 2024).
5.
Bilibili Community Administrator (2023c) If I had known earlier, even gifting the most expensive sea-view apartment would get me caught. Available at: https://b23.tv/LjvSom6 (accessed 31 January 2024).
6.
BouvierG (2015) What is a discourse approach to Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and other social media: Connecting with other academic fields?Journal of Multicultural Discourses10(2): 149–162.
7.
CaiCWangT (2022) Moving toward a “middle ground”?—The governance of platforms in the United States and China. Policy & Internet14(2): 243–262.
8.
CaplanR (2023) Networked Platform Governance: The construction of the Democratic Platform. Journal of International Communication17: 3451–3472.
9.
ChanNKSuCCShoreA (2025) Shifting platform values in community guidelines: Examining the evolution of TikTok’s governance frameworks. New Media & Society27: 1127–1151. Epub ahead of print 1 August. DOI: 10.1177/14614448231189476
10.
ChenCWangZGnJ (2023) Serve the traffic: The logic of traffic and its politics on WeChat platform. Social Media + Society9(3): 1–11.
11.
ChenXValdovinos KayeDBZengJ (2021) #PositiveEnergy Douyin: Constructing “playful patriotism” in a Chinese short-video application. Chinese Journal of Communication14(1): 97–117.
12.
ChenZYangDL (2023) Governing Generation Z in China: Bilibili, bidirectional mediation, and online community governance. Information Society39(1): 1–16.
13.
CowlsJDariusPSantistevanD, et al (2024) Constitutional metaphors: Facebook’s “supreme court” and the legitimation of platform governance. New Media & Society26(5): 2448–2472.
14.
CrawfordKGillespieT (2016) What is a flag for? Social media reporting tools and the vocabulary of complaint. New Media & Society18(3): 410–428.
15.
DavisMXiaoJ (2021) De-Westernizing platform studies: History and logics of Chinese and U.S. platforms. Journal of International Communication15: 103–122.
16.
DeCookJRCotterKKanthawalaS, et al (2022) Safe from “harm”: The governance of violence by platforms. Policy & Internet14(1): 63–78.
17.
Douyin Safety Center (2022a) Stop flaunting your wealth; isn’t showing off some sugar oranges sweeter? Available at: https://v.douyin.com/ijR44T4P/U@y.TLGvS:/10/04 (accessed 13 February 2024).
18.
Douyin Safety Center (2022b) Who is the mysterious person comforting Lao Mei late at night? Available at: https://v.douyin.com/ijRgJA7k/ c@n.da11/13 ZZz:/ (accessed 18 February 2024).
19.
Douyin Safety Center (2022c) Douyin Announcement on Displaying Users’ Account IP Locations. Available at: https://v.douyin.com/iMdpAkGW/07/30 g@B.Gi Wzt:/ (accessed 25 February 2024).
20.
DuffyBEMeisnerC (2023) Platform governance at the margins: Social media creators’ experiences with algorithmic (in)visibility. Media Culture & Society45(2): 285–304.
21.
FaircloughN (2013) Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. London and New York: Routledge.
22.
FaircloughNMulderrigJWodakR (2011) Critical discourse analysis. In: Van DijkTA (ed.) Discourse Studies: A Multidisciplinary Introduction. London: Sage, pp.357–378.
23.
FlewTMartinFSuzorN (2019) Internet regulation as media policy: Rethinking the question of digital communication platform governance. Journal of Digital Media & Policy10(1): 33–50.
24.
GillespieT (2010) The politics of “platforms. New Media & Society12(3): 347–364.
25.
GillespieT (2018) Custodians of the Internet: Platforms, Content Moderation, and the Hidden Decisions That Shape Social Media. CT: Yale University Press.
26.
GillespieT (2022) Do not recommend? Reduction as a form of content moderation. Social Media + Society8(3): 1–22.
27.
GorwaR (2019a) What is platform governance?Information Communication & Society22(6): 854–871.
28.
GorwaR (2019b) The platform governance triangle: Conceptualising the informal regulation of online content. Internet Policy Review8(2): 1–22.
29.
GorwaRBinnsRKatzenbachC (2020) Algorithmic content moderation: Technical and political challenges in the automation of platform governance. Big Data & Society7(1): 1–15.
30.
GrimmelmannJ (2015) The virtues of Moderation. Journal of Law and Technology17: 42.
31.
HallinanBScharlachRShifmanL (2022) Beyond neutrality: Conceptualizing platform values. Communication Theory32(2): 201–222.
32.
HanX (2022) Platform as new “daddy”: China’s gendered Wanghong economy and patriarchal platforms behind. Internet Policy Review11(1): 1–34.
33.
HelbergerNPiersonJPoellT (2018) Governing online platforms: From contested to cooperative responsibility. Information Society34(1): 1–14.
34.
HeRTianH (2023) Social media influencer and source credibility: Endorsing content moderation on Douyin. Journal of International Communication17: 5760–5780.
35.
HoffmannALProferesNZimmerM (2018) “Making the world more open and connected”: Mark Zuckerberg and the discursive construction of Facebook and its users. New Media & Society20(1): 199–218.
36.
JacobsonD (1985) Boundary maintenance in support networks. Social Networks7(4): 341–351.
37.
Kuaishou Administrator (2022a) Being on Kuaishou, it’s essential to understand the community rules. Available at: https://v.kuaishou.com/Nggb9X (accessed 3 March 2024).
38.
Kuaishou Administrator (2023a) Will lip-syncing be restricted? Available at: https://v.kuaishou.com/NhWsoU (accessed 12 March 2024).
39.
Kuaishou Administrator (2023b) Will there still be traffic restrictions after deleting the violating video? Available at: https://v.kuaishou.com/OXPwNf (accessed 15 March 2024).
40.
Kuaishou Administrator (2023c) Don’t spread rumors recklessly. Available at: https://v.kuaishou.com/BX09fb (accessed 24 March 2024).
41.
LinZ (2021) Commercialization of creative videos in China in the digital platform age. Television & New Media22(8): 878–895.
42.
LiuJYangL (2022) “Dual-track” platform governance on content: A comparative study between China and United States. Policy & Internet14(2): 304–323.
43.
MaddoxJMalsonJ (2020) Guidelines without lines, communities without borders: The marketplace of ideas and digital manifest destiny in social media platform policies. Social Media + Society6(2): 1–10.
44.
MalinenS (2021) Boundary control as gatekeeping in Facebook groups. Media and Communication9(4): 73–81.
45.
McKnightSKenneyMBreznitzD (2023) Regulating the platform giants: Building and governing China’s online economy. Policy & Internet15(2): 243–265.
46.
Myers WestS (2018) Censored, suspended, shadowbanned: User interpretations of content moderation on social media platforms. New Media & Society20(11): 4366–4383.
47.
PetreCDuffyBEHundE (2019) “Gaming the system”: Platform Paternalism and the politics of algorithmic visibility. Social Media + Society5(4): 1–12.
48.
PlantinJCde SetaG (2019) WeChat as infrastructure: The techno-nationalist shaping of Chinese digital platforms. Chinese Journal of Communication12(3): 257–273.
49.
PoellTNieborgDBDuffyBE (2021) Platforms and Cultural Production. Cambridge: Polity Press.
50.
SavolainenL (2022) The shadow banning controversy: Perceived governance and algorithmic folklore. Media Culture & Society44(6): 1091–1109.
51.
ScharlachRHallinanBShifmanL (2024) Governing principles: Articulating values in social media platform policies. New Media & Society26: 6658–6677. Epub ahead of print 7 March. DOI: 10.1177/14614448231156580
52.
SeeringJWangTYoonJ, et al (2019) Moderator engagement and community development in the age of algorithms. New Media & Society21(7): 1417–1443.
53.
SuzorN (2018) Digital constitutionalism: Using the rule of law to evaluate the legitimacy of governance by platforms. Social Media + Society4(3): 1–11.
54.
SuzorNWestSQuodlingA, et al (2019) What do we mean when we talk about transparency? Toward meaningful transparency in commercial content moderation. Journal of International Communication13: 1526–1543.
55.
van DijkTA (1993) Principles of critical discourse analysis. Discourse & Society4(2): 249–283.
56.
Van LeeuwenT (2007) Legitimation in discourse and communication. Discourse & Communication1(1): 91–112.
57.
Van LeeuwenT (2008) Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
58.
WodakRMeyerM (eds.) (2015) Methods of Critical Discourse Studies. London: Sage.
59.
XuJQuLZhangG (2022) Governing social eating (Chibo) influencers: Policies, approach and politics of influencer governance in China. Policy & Internet14(3): 525–540.
60.
ZengJChanCFuK (2017) How social media construct “truth” around crisis events: Weibo’s rumor management strategies after the 2015 Tianjin blasts. Policy & Internet9(3): 297–320.
61.
ZhangWChenZXiY (2021) Traffic media: How algorithmic imaginations and practices change content production. Chinese Journal of Communication14(1): 58–74.
62.
ZhangZ (2021) Infrastructuralization of Tik Tok: Transformation, power relationships, and platformization of video entertainment in China. Media Culture & Society43(2): 219–236.
63.
ZhouMLiuS (2024) Regulating Tuwei culture and migrant youth through Kuaishou’s platform governance. Policy & Internet16(1): 104–120.
64.
ZuckermanERajendra-NicolucciC (2023) From community governance to customer service and back again: Re-examining pre-web models of online governance to address platforms’ crisis of legitimacy. Social Media + Society9(3): 1–12.
