Introduction

Problem statement and contemporary relevance

Digital communication transforms human interactions and the structuring of communities. Online platforms facilitate new forms of grouping and the development of collective identities (Imbaquingo Pérez, 2019). This environment, characterized by immediacy and accessibility, also introduces significant challenges to authenticity and trust (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). A particular phenomenon that disrupts the integrity of online communities is the decontextualization of screenshots (Oliveira, 2015). These images, removed from their original context, can manipulate perceptions and distort discourse, directly affecting cohesion and reliability within these digital spaces (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017) (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

Trust is a fundamental element for the functionality of any social system, including digital groups (Ganga & Capurro, 2015) and Mariñez Sánchez, 2012). In the digital realm, building trust becomes complex due to the absence of non-verbal cues and the ease with which information can be altered or presented in a misleading manner (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). The circulation of decontextualized screenshots has become a recurring tool for the spread of misinformation and the polarization of opinions, generating friction and mistrust among community members (Didier et al., 2020) and Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020. This practice erodes the ability to discern the truth and fosters an environment of skepticism, compromising the quality of interaction and the social capital accumulated in these groups (Ganga & Capurro, 2015).

Thesis and analytical objectives

The central thesis of this analysis argues that the widespread use and decontextualization of screenshots undermines trust in online communities, with adverse consequences for social cohesion and the integrity of discourse. It is observed how this practice alters the perception of shared reality, fragments consensus, and exacerbates polarization (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017) (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

To address this problem, the following analytical objectives are established:

1. Examine the theoretical mechanisms that underpin the building and maintenance of trust in digital ecosystems.
2. To characterize the proliferation and mechanics of decontextualizing screenshots as a form of digital evidence.
3. Analyze the multifaceted impact of decontextualization on cohesion, the spread of misinformation, and individual and collective implications.
4. Identify the responses and strategies implemented by institutions and communities to mitigate the negative effects of digital evidence manipulation.
5. Formulate recommendations to strengthen trust and integrity in online communities.

This work contributes to our understanding of the social-technological dynamics that underpin trust in digital environments and offers insights for fostering more resilient and authentic online spaces.

Thematic Review: Dynamics of Trust and Disinformation in Digital Environments

Building trust in digital communities: theoretical and sociotechnical approaches

Trust, understood as the positive expectation about the intentions or behavior of others in situations of uncertainty, is a pillar of human interaction (Riera Adrover et al., 2020). In digital communities, its construction is complicated by technological mediation and the absence of physical contact (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). Theoretical models suggest that digital trust is built on the benevolence, integrity, and competence of its members (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). The perception of honesty and reliability in the exchange of information are crucial for a virtual community to thrive (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020)(2015).

Personal relationships and successful prior experiences build trust among participants in transdisciplinary communities (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). Internal communication through digital platforms also contributes to knowledge management and the strengthening of organizational culture, which indirectly fosters trust (2015) (Pineda Henao, 2020). From a sociotechnical perspective, the very architectures of the platforms (algorithms, moderation systems, verification mechanisms) influence the perception of trustworthiness (Didier et al., 2020). However, the hypertextual nature of digital language and the ease of creating and sharing hybrid content (visual, oral, tactile) also open avenues for alteration and decontextualization, representing a constant challenge for trust (Oliveira, 2015). Trust becomes a functional and multidimensional concept that operates within the inherent complexity of these environments (Mariñez Sánchez, 2012).

Technological transformations and the proliferation of screenshots as evidence

Technological transformations have reconfigured the paradigms of communication and access to information (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) (Borén Alfaro, nd). The massive digitization of documents and the ubiquity of mobile devices have made screenshots an omnipresent form of “evidence” (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). The ability to instantly capture any content visible on a screen makes it a fast and seemingly direct means of documenting interactions, statements, or online posts (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011). This format, being an image, capitalizes on the predominant visual culture in contemporary communication, where visual content is often perceived as more impactful and convincing than textual content (Isensee & Rosumek, 2018) (Lima et al., 2020).

The ease of creating and distributing screenshots contrasts with the inherent difficulty of verifying their authenticity and original context (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). Although advances in information and communication technologies (ICTs) offer new opportunities for the analysis and dissemination of research, they also present challenges in assessing the quality of information (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017). The digital image, as a “source document,” can be subtly manipulated, making the distinction between what is real and what is altered increasingly ambiguous (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011) and Hernández-Muñiz et al., 2020). This ambiguity intensifies when images are extracted from their narrative sequence or from the entire dialogue, losing their original meaning and acquiring a new, potentially misleading one when reintroduced in a different context (Pérez Galán & Prieto Ramos, 2020). The proliferation of these visual fragments as substitutes for complete communication challenges credibility and veracity in online environments.

Digital decontextualization: mechanics, motivations and scope

Digital decontextualization operates by deliberately removing a piece of information, such as a screenshot, from its original communicative environment to present it in a new one, where its meaning is altered or distorted (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). The mechanics of this practice are varied, ranging from selective cropping of images to the omission of previous or subsequent conversations (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011). This process transforms visual information into malleable “evidence,” capable of serving pre-established narratives. The ease with which these fragments can be generated and distributed contributes to their rapid spread (Isensee & Rosumek, 2018).

The motivations behind decontextualization are diverse, including the intention to generate controversy, discredit individuals or groups, or influence public opinion (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017) (Didier et al., 2020). In contexts of disagreement, decontextualization can be a strategy for cyberbullying or incivility, where the aim is to break social courtesy by presenting a biased version of the facts (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). The scope of this practice is vast, affecting everything from personal interactions on social media to political debates and the reputation of institutions (González Hernández, 2016) (Cabezuelo Lorenzo & Ruiz Carreras, 2010). Decontextualized information can circulate quickly, gaining traction and being accepted as true before proper verification can be performed, making it a considerable challenge to online information authenticity (Didier et al., 2020)(Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020).

Regulations, ethics, and governance of information authenticity on online platforms

The growing prevalence of disinformation and the manipulation of digital content, including decontextualized screenshots, has catalyzed the need for regulations and ethical frameworks for the governance of information authenticity on online platforms (Didier et al., 2020). Public institutions and international organizations recognize the erosion of public trust and discursive polarization as a result of the circulation of misleading information (Mani & Echeverría, 2019) and Estella de Noriega, 2020. This has prompted the development of policies aimed at mitigating the effects of “fake news” and decontextualization in cyberspace (Didier et al., 2020).

The ethics of digital communication underscores the responsibility of users and platforms to verify and contextualize shared information (Pineda Henao, 2020). The governance of information authenticity is not limited to regulation but encompasses media literacy initiatives and the promotion of critical thinking among users (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) and Manchado Flores, 2018. Some platforms implement fact-checking systems or warning labels, but the scale and speed of disinformation often outstrips their capacity to respond (Didier et al., 2020). The complexity of the situation lies in balancing freedom of expression with the need to protect the integrity of public discourse and trust in information sources (Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020). Collaboration between civil society, technology companies, governments and academia is considered essential to establish a robust framework that promotes truthfulness and transparency in the digital environment (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017).

Critical Analysis: Systemic Impact of Decontextualized Screenshots on Community Integrity

Disruption of social cohesion and erosion of internal trust

The decontextualization of screenshots generates considerable disruption in the social cohesion of online communities. By presenting fragmented and misleading information, it cultivates an environment of suspicion that erodes trust between members (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017)(Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). Trust, an essential factor for the stability of social interactions, is compromised when participants doubt the veracity of the “evidence” presented (Riera Adrover et al., 2020)(Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). This erosion is particularly damaging in communities where communication is the primary vehicle for building identity and a sense of belonging (Imbaquingo Pérez, 2019)(Segarra Arnau, n.d.).

The perception that interactions can be arbitrarily taken out of context and used for malicious purposes discourages open and spontaneous participation. This reduces knowledge sharing and collaboration, which depend heavily on an environment of trust (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020)(2015). Internal trust within a community progressively deteriorates, making conflict resolution and consensus building difficult. The decontextualization of screenshots, by amplifying misunderstandings and fueling divisive narratives, contributes to the fragmentation of the community into polarized subgroups, each with its own interpretation of the facts and heightened mutual distrust (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017)(Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

Spread of disinformation and discursive polarization

The decontextualization of screenshots serves as an effective mechanism for the spread of disinformation. These images, lacking their original context, can be easily inserted into false or misleading narratives, acquiring an apparent visual credibility that makes them difficult to refute without in-depth research (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011) and Isensee & Rosumek, 2018). The speed with which information is shared on social media exacerbates this problem, allowing disinformation to reach vast audiences before interventions can occur (Didier et al., 2020).

This dynamic fosters discursive polarization. Users, influenced by their own political or ideological predispositions, tend to accept and disseminate information that validates their views, even if it is decontextualized (Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020). The digital environment becomes an “electronic agora” where unverified information and conflicting rhetoric can intensify social tensions (Didier et al., 2020) and Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017). Cyber-incivility, facilitated by anonymity or the perception of distance, increases, transforming disagreements into direct confrontations that fragment dialogue and deepen divisions (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). The ability of communities to function as spaces for constructive exchange is severely compromised by the constant threat of discursive manipulation.

Legal, reputational and psychological repercussions for individuals and groups

The decontextualization of screenshots has significant repercussions on several levels. Legally, the dissemination of manipulated information can constitute defamation or slander, especially when it affects the reputation of individuals or entities. The difficulty of tracing the origin and authorship of a decontextualized screenshot complicates the application of legal measures, although there are precedents in cases of defamation on social media (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

On a reputational level, the damage can be devastating. A decontextualized screenshot can destroy the public image of a person, a company, or an organization in a matter of hours, with lasting effects (González Hernández, 2016). This vulnerability creates a climate of caution and distrust, forcing individuals to self-censor to avoid falling victim to manipulation. Psychologically, those affected may experience stress, anxiety, and even isolation as their identity or words are distorted and used against them (Imbaquingo Pérez, 2019). For groups, decontextualization can sow internal discord, generate conflicts between factions, and divert resources and energy from community goals to managing reputational crises (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017). The integrity of communication is compromised, impacting the mental health of participants and the viability of digital communities as safe and productive spaces.

Institutional and community responses to the manipulation of digital evidence

In the face of the manipulation of digital evidence, various institutional and community responses are emerging to safeguard the integrity of information. Institutionally, online platforms have introduced content moderation measures and reporting systems to identify and remove decontextualized or misleading material (Didier et al., 2020). Some governments and supranational bodies are exploring regulatory frameworks to hold platforms accountable for the spread of disinformation (Estella de Noriega, 2020). Furthermore, digital and media literacy is being promoted to equip users with the necessary skills to discern the authenticity of information and understand the dynamics of decontextualization (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) and Manchado Flores, 2018.

At the community level, online groups themselves develop self-defense mechanisms. This includes creating explicit rules of coexistence that penalize decontextualization, encouraging peer verification, and appointing community moderators (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). Communities of practice, for example, rely on the integrity and benevolence of their members for knowledge sharing, which drives them to develop strategies to maintain trust (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). Some groups implement awareness campaigns about the dangers of misinformation and the impact of decontextualized screenshots (Didier et al., 2020). Collaboration between platform administrators and community leaders has proven effective in managing trust crises, although the challenge persists due to the dynamic and decentralized nature of online communication (Pineda Henao, 2020).

Conclusion

Argumentative synthesis and evaluation of the current state

Research has clarified how the decontextualization of screenshots emerges as a significant threat to the integrity of online communities and digital trust. The ease with which these visual fragments are generated and distributed allows for the manipulation of narratives, impacting social cohesion and exacerbating polarization (Isensee & Rosumek, 2018) and Sanmartín Sáez, 2019. Trust, an essential construct for interaction and social capital, is compromised by sowing doubt about the authenticity of information and the intentions of communicators (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020) and Mariñez Sánchez, 2012.

The analysis of trust building in digital environments highlights the importance of benevolence, integrity, and positive experience in interactions (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). However, technological transformations have facilitated the proliferation of visual “evidence” susceptible to manipulation (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011). The mechanisms of decontextualization, driven by diverse motivations, have a broad scope, affecting both individuals and groups in their legal, reputational, and psychological dimensions (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019) and Didier et al., 2020).

The current state of affairs reveals a continuous effort by institutions and communities to counter this problem through content moderation, digital literacy, and the promotion of standards of conduct. However, the speed and scale of disinformation in a constantly evolving digital environment represent a persistent challenge (Didier et al., 2020). The complexity of the problem demands a multifaceted approach that combines technological regulation with user education and strengthening community resilience. The ability of online communities to maintain their vitality and purpose critically depends on their ability to cultivate and preserve trust in an uncertain communication landscape.

Strategic recommendations to strengthen community digital integrity

To strengthen digital integrity and trust in online communities, the following strategic recommendations are suggested:

1. Development of authenticity verification tools: Platforms should invest in advanced technologies that can detect manipulations in images and videos, such as digital watermarks or verifiable metadata. A system for tracing the original source of images could help contextualize and verify visual “evidence” (Hernández-Muñiz et al., 2020).
2. Promoting media and digital literacy: Implement robust educational programs that teach users to identify misinformation, critically evaluate sources, and understand the mechanics of decontextualization. This includes promoting skeptical thinking and cross-checking information (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) and Manchado Flores, 2018.
3. Establishing clear and enforceable community standards: Online communities should formalize codes of conduct that explicitly address the decontextualization of content and its consequences. Consistent enforcement of these standards, with transparent reporting mechanisms and mediation processes, strengthens the integrity of the discourse (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).
4. Promoting contextualized communication: Encourage users to share complete and contextualized information, discouraging the use of isolated, potentially misleading fragments. Platforms can facilitate this by using features that automatically link screenshots to their source or to entire discussions.
5. Investing in artificial intelligence research for disinformation detection: Using machine learning models to identify patterns of decontextualization and disinformation spread, enabling faster and more efficient responses by content moderators (Didier et al., 2020).
6. Multidisciplinary collaboration: Promote cooperation between technologists, sociologists, psychologists, educators and lawyers to develop comprehensive solutions that address both the technical and human aspects of digital distrust (Sadi Durón & Baca Velázquez, 2020) (Fernández Riquelme, 2019).

These actions, implemented in a coordinated manner, will contribute to building more trustworthy digital environments and preserving the valuable role of online communities as spaces for interaction and collective development.

Introduction

Problem statement and contemporary relevance

Digital communication transforms human interactions and the structuring of communities. Online platforms facilitate new forms of grouping and the development of collective identities (Imbaquingo Pérez, 2019). This environment, characterized by immediacy and accessibility, also introduces significant challenges to authenticity and trust (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). A particular phenomenon that disrupts the integrity of online communities is the decontextualization of screenshots (Oliveira, 2015). These images, removed from their original context, can manipulate perceptions and distort discourse, directly affecting cohesion and reliability within these digital spaces (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017) (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

Trust is a fundamental element for the functionality of any social system, including digital groups (Ganga & Capurro, 2015) and Mariñez Sánchez, 2012). In the digital realm, building trust becomes complex due to the absence of non-verbal cues and the ease with which information can be altered or presented in a misleading manner (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). The circulation of decontextualized screenshots has become a recurring tool for the spread of misinformation and the polarization of opinions, generating friction and mistrust among community members (Didier et al., 2020) and Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020. This practice erodes the ability to discern the truth and fosters an environment of skepticism, compromising the quality of interaction and the social capital accumulated in these groups (Ganga & Capurro, 2015).

Thesis and analytical objectives

The central thesis of this analysis argues that the widespread use and decontextualization of screenshots undermines trust in online communities, with adverse consequences for social cohesion and the integrity of discourse. It is observed how this practice alters the perception of shared reality, fragments consensus, and exacerbates polarization (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017) (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

To address this problem, the following analytical objectives are established:

1. Examine the theoretical mechanisms that underpin the building and maintenance of trust in digital ecosystems.
2. To characterize the proliferation and mechanics of decontextualizing screenshots as a form of digital evidence.
3. Analyze the multifaceted impact of decontextualization on cohesion, the spread of misinformation, and individual and collective implications.
4. Identify the responses and strategies implemented by institutions and communities to mitigate the negative effects of digital evidence manipulation.
5. Formulate recommendations to strengthen trust and integrity in online communities.

This work contributes to our understanding of the sociotechnical dynamics that underpin trust in digital environments and offers insights for fostering more resilient and authentic online spaces.

Thematic Review: Dynamics of Trust and Disinformation in Digital Environments

Building trust in digital communities: theoretical and sociotechnical approaches

Trust, understood as the positive expectation about the intentions or behavior of others in situations of uncertainty, is a pillar of human interaction (Riera Adrover et al., 2020). In digital communities, its construction is complicated by technological mediation and the absence of physical contact (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). Theoretical models suggest that digital trust is built on the benevolence, integrity, and competence of its members (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). The perception of honesty and reliability in the exchange of information are crucial for a virtual community to thrive (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020)(2015).

Personal relationships and successful prior experiences build trust among participants in transdisciplinary communities (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). Internal communication through digital platforms also contributes to knowledge management and the strengthening of organizational culture, which indirectly fosters trust (2015) (Pineda Henao, 2020). From a sociotechnical perspective, the very architectures of the platforms (algorithms, moderation systems, verification mechanisms) influence the perception of trustworthiness (Didier et al., 2020). However, the hypertextual nature of digital language and the ease of creating and sharing hybrid content (visual, oral, tactile) also open avenues for alteration and decontextualization, representing a constant challenge for trust (Oliveira, 2015). Trust becomes a functional and multidimensional concept that operates within the inherent complexity of these environments (Mariñez Sánchez, 2012).

Technological transformations and the proliferation of screenshots as evidence

Technological transformations have reconfigured the paradigms of communication and access to information (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) (Borén Alfaro, nd). The massive digitization of documents and the ubiquity of mobile devices have made screenshots an omnipresent form of “evidence” (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). The ability to instantly capture any content visible on a screen makes it a fast and seemingly direct means of documenting interactions, statements, or online posts (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011). This format, being an image, capitalizes on the predominant visual culture in contemporary communication, where visual content is often perceived as more impactful and convincing than textual content (Isensee & Rosumek, 2018) (Lima et al., 2020).

The ease of creating and distributing screenshots contrasts with the inherent difficulty of verifying their authenticity and original context (Voutssas-Marquez, 2017). Although advances in information and communication technologies (ICTs) offer new opportunities for the analysis and dissemination of research, they also present challenges in assessing the quality of information (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017). The digital image, as a “source document,” can be subtly manipulated, making the distinction between what is real and what is altered increasingly ambiguous (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011) and Hernández-Muñiz et al., 2020). This ambiguity intensifies when images are extracted from their narrative sequence or from the entire dialogue, losing their original meaning and acquiring a new, potentially misleading one when reintroduced in a different context (Pérez Galán & Prieto Ramos, 2020). The proliferation of these visual fragments as substitutes for complete communication challenges credibility and veracity in online environments.

Digital decontextualization: mechanics, motivations and scope

Digital decontextualization operates by deliberately removing a piece of information, such as a screenshot, from its original communicative environment to present it in a new one, where its meaning is altered or distorted (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). The mechanics of this practice are varied, ranging from selective cropping of images to the omission of previous or subsequent conversations (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011). This process transforms visual information into malleable “evidence,” capable of serving pre-established narratives. The ease with which these fragments can be generated and distributed contributes to their rapid spread (Isensee & Rosumek, 2018).

The motivations behind decontextualization are diverse, including the intention to generate controversy, discredit individuals or groups, or influence public opinion (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017) (Didier et al., 2020). In contexts of disagreement, decontextualization can be a strategy for cyberbullying or incivility, where the aim is to break social courtesy by presenting a biased version of the facts (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). The scope of this practice is vast, affecting everything from personal interactions on social media to political debates and the reputation of institutions (González Hernández, 2016) (Cabezuelo Lorenzo & Ruiz Carreras, 2010). Decontextualized information can circulate quickly, gaining traction and being accepted as true before proper verification can be performed, making it a considerable challenge to online information authenticity (Didier et al., 2020)(Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020).

Regulations, ethics, and governance of information authenticity on online platforms

The growing prevalence of disinformation and the manipulation of digital content, including decontextualized screenshots, has catalyzed the need for regulations and ethical frameworks for the governance of information authenticity on online platforms (Didier et al., 2020). Public institutions and international organizations recognize the erosion of public trust and discursive polarization as a result of the circulation of misleading information (Mani & Echeverría, 2019) and Estella de Noriega, 2020. This has prompted the development of policies aimed at mitigating the effects of “fake news” and decontextualization in cyberspace (Didier et al., 2020).

The ethics of digital communication underscores the responsibility of users and platforms to verify and contextualize shared information (Pineda Henao, 2020). The governance of information authenticity is not limited to regulation but encompasses media literacy initiatives and the promotion of critical thinking among users (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) and Manchado Flores, 2018. Some platforms implement fact-checking systems or warning labels, but the scale and speed of disinformation often outstrips their capacity to respond (Didier et al., 2020). The complexity of the situation lies in balancing freedom of expression with the need to protect the integrity of public discourse and trust in information sources (Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020). Collaboration between civil society, technology companies, governments and academia is considered essential to establish a robust framework that promotes truthfulness and transparency in the digital environment (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017).

Critical Analysis: Systemic Impact of Decontextualized Screenshots on Community Integrity

Disruption of social cohesion and erosion of internal trust

The decontextualization of screenshots generates considerable disruption in the social cohesion of online communities. By presenting fragmented and misleading information, it cultivates an environment of suspicion that erodes trust between members (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017)(Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). Trust, an essential factor for the stability of social interactions, is compromised when participants doubt the veracity of the “evidence” presented (Riera Adrover et al., 2020)(Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). This erosion is particularly damaging in communities where communication is the primary vehicle for building identity and a sense of belonging (Imbaquingo Pérez, 2019)(Segarra Arnau, n.d.).

The perception that interactions can be arbitrarily taken out of context and used for malicious purposes discourages open and spontaneous participation. This reduces knowledge sharing and collaboration, which depend heavily on an environment of trust (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020)(2015). Internal trust within a community progressively deteriorates, making conflict resolution and consensus building difficult. The decontextualization of screenshots, by amplifying misunderstandings and fueling divisive narratives, contributes to the fragmentation of the community into polarized subgroups, each with its own interpretation of the facts and heightened mutual distrust (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017)(Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

Spread of disinformation and discursive polarization

The decontextualization of screenshots serves as an effective mechanism for the spread of disinformation. These images, lacking their original context, can be easily inserted into false or misleading narratives, acquiring an apparent visual credibility that makes them difficult to refute without in-depth research (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011) and Isensee & Rosumek, 2018). The speed with which information is shared on social media exacerbates this problem, allowing disinformation to reach vast audiences before interventions can occur (Didier et al., 2020).

This dynamic fosters discursive polarization. Users, influenced by their own political or ideological predispositions, tend to accept and disseminate information that validates their views, even if it is decontextualized (Moreno-Moreno & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, 2020). The digital environment becomes an “electronic agora” where unverified information and conflicting rhetoric can intensify social tensions (Didier et al., 2020) and Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017). Cyber-incivility, facilitated by anonymity or the perception of distance, increases, transforming disagreements into direct confrontations that fragment dialogue and deepen divisions (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). The ability of communities to function as spaces for constructive exchange is severely compromised by the constant threat of discursive manipulation.

Legal, reputational and psychological repercussions for individuals and groups

The decontextualization of screenshots has significant repercussions on several levels. Legally, the dissemination of manipulated information can constitute defamation or slander, especially when it affects the reputation of individuals or entities. The difficulty of tracing the origin and authorship of a decontextualized screenshot complicates the application of legal measures, although there are precedents in cases of defamation on social media (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).

On a reputational level, the damage can be devastating. A decontextualized screenshot can destroy the public image of a person, a company, or an organization in a matter of hours, with lasting effects (González Hernández, 2016). This vulnerability creates a climate of caution and distrust, forcing individuals to self-censor to avoid falling victim to manipulation. Psychologically, those affected may experience stress, anxiety, and even isolation as their identity or words are distorted and used against them (Imbaquingo Pérez, 2019). For groups, decontextualization can sow internal discord, generate conflicts between factions, and divert resources and energy from community goals to managing reputational crises (Pilgun & Dzyaloshinsky, 2017). The integrity of communication is compromised, impacting the mental health of participants and the viability of digital communities as safe and productive spaces.

Institutional and community responses to the manipulation of digital evidence

In the face of the manipulation of digital evidence, various institutional and community responses are emerging to safeguard the integrity of information. Institutionally, online platforms have introduced content moderation measures and reporting systems to identify and remove decontextualized or misleading material (Didier et al., 2020). Some governments and supranational bodies are exploring regulatory frameworks to hold platforms accountable for the spread of disinformation (Estella de Noriega, 2020). Furthermore, digital and media literacy is being promoted to equip users with the necessary skills to discern the authenticity of information and understand the dynamics of decontextualization (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) and Manchado Flores, 2018.

At the community level, online groups themselves develop self-defense mechanisms. This includes creating explicit rules of coexistence that penalize decontextualization, encouraging peer verification, and appointing community moderators (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019). Communities of practice, for example, rely on the integrity and benevolence of their members for knowledge sharing, which drives them to develop strategies to maintain trust (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). Some groups implement awareness campaigns about the dangers of misinformation and the impact of decontextualized screenshots (Didier et al., 2020). Collaboration between platform administrators and community leaders has proven effective in managing trust crises, although the challenge persists due to the dynamic and decentralized nature of online communication (Pineda Henao, 2020).

Conclusion

Argumentative synthesis and evaluation of the current state

Research has clarified how the decontextualization of screenshots emerges as a significant threat to the integrity of online communities and digital trust. The ease with which these visual fragments are generated and distributed allows for the manipulation of narratives, impacting social cohesion and exacerbating polarization (Isensee & Rosumek, 2018) and Sanmartín Sáez, 2019. Trust, an essential construct for interaction and social capital, is compromised by sowing doubt about the authenticity of information and the intentions of communicators (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020) and Mariñez Sánchez, 2012.

The analysis of trust building in digital environments highlights the importance of benevolence, integrity, and positive experience in interactions (Hernández-Soto et al., 2020). However, technological transformations have facilitated the proliferation of visual “evidence” susceptible to manipulation (Cárdenas & Duarte, 2011). The mechanisms of decontextualization, driven by diverse motivations, have a broad scope, affecting both individuals and groups in their legal, reputational, and psychological dimensions (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019) and Didier et al., 2020).

The current state of affairs reveals a continuous effort by institutions and communities to counter this problem through content moderation, digital literacy, and the promotion of standards of conduct. However, the speed and scale of disinformation in a constantly evolving digital environment represent a persistent challenge (Didier et al., 2020). The complexity of the problem demands a multifaceted approach that combines technological regulation with user education and strengthening community resilience. The ability of online communities to maintain their vitality and purpose critically depends on their ability to cultivate and preserve trust in an uncertain communication landscape.

Strategic recommendations to strengthen community digital integrity

To strengthen digital integrity and trust in online communities, the following strategic recommendations are suggested:

1. Development of authenticity verification tools: Platforms should invest in advanced technologies that can detect manipulations in images and videos, such as digital watermarks or verifiable metadata. A system for tracing the original source of images could help contextualize and verify visual “evidence” (Hernández-Muñiz et al., 2020).
2. Promoting media and digital literacy: Implement robust educational programs that teach users to identify misinformation, critically evaluate sources, and understand the mechanics of decontextualization. This includes promoting skeptical thinking and cross-checking information (Alonso-Arévalo, 2017) and Manchado Flores, 2018.
3. Establishing clear and enforceable community standards: Online communities should formalize codes of conduct that explicitly address the decontextualization of content and its consequences. Consistent enforcement of these standards, with transparent reporting mechanisms and mediation processes, strengthens the integrity of the discourse (Sanmartín Sáez, 2019).
4. Promoting contextualized communication: Encourage users to share complete and contextualized information, discouraging the use of isolated, potentially misleading fragments. Platforms can facilitate this by using features that automatically link screenshots to their source or to entire discussions.
5. Investing in artificial intelligence research for disinformation detection: Using machine learning models to identify patterns of decontextualization and disinformation spread, enabling faster and more efficient responses by content moderators (Didier et al., 2020).
6. Multidisciplinary collaboration: Promote cooperation between technologists, sociologists, psychologists, educators and lawyers to develop comprehensive solutions that address both the technical and human aspects of digital distrust (Sadi Durón & Baca Velázquez, 2020) (Fernández Riquelme, 2019).

These actions, implemented in a coordinated manner, will contribute to building more trustworthy digital environments and preserving the valuable role of online communities as spaces for interaction and collective development.

References

Imbaquingo Pérez, M.I. (2019). Motherhood on the web. Online parenting communities as forums for deconstructing identity in motherhood. In FEMERIS: Revista Multidisciplinar de Estudios de Género (Vol. 4, Issue 1, p. 8). Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. https://doi.org/10.20318/femeris.2019.4564

Voutssas-Marquez, J. (2017). Trust and Digital Information: Libraries, Archives, and the Web . Institute for Library and Information Research. https://doi.org/10.22201/iibi.9786070297571e.2017

Oliveira, FR (2015). Texts, textures and intertexts. In Intexto (pp. 209–224). Faculdade de Biblioteconomia Comunicacao. https://doi.org/10.19132/1807-8583201533.209-224

Pilgun, M., & Dzyaloshinsky, I.M. (2017). Digital communication and social reality in communication among Russian-speaking social media users: Representation of historical content. In Revista Latina de Comunicación Social (Issue 72, pp. 1010–1026). Forum XXI. https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-2017-1205

Sanmartín Sáez, J. (2019). Contrastive analysis of (im)courtesy in digital comments on the newspaper 20minutos.es and the Facebook page viajacontumascota.com: anonymity and virtual community. In ELUA (Issue 33, p. 173). University of Alicante Publications Service. https://doi.org/10.14198/elua2019.33.9

Ganga, F., & Capurro, A.C. (2015). Trust, social capital, and democracy: A complex articulation for development. In Revista Debates (Vol. 9, Issue 2, p. 115). Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul. https://doi.org/10.22456/1982-5269.55731

Mariñez Sánchez, C.D. (2012). Trust: Theoretical approaches and a systemic proposal for addressing it in the social sciences. In Século XXI – Revista de Ciências Sociais (Vol. 2, Issue 1, p. 168). Federal University of Santa Maria. https://doi.org/10.5902/223667256388

Didier, L., Ficoseco, V.S., & Souza Couto, E. (2020). The “Advanced Secondary Education Program with an emphasis on Information and Communication Technologies” (PROA) and its presence on Facebook. In Latin American Journal of Educational Technology – RELATEC (Vol. 19, Issue 1, pp. 107–120). University of Extremadura – Publications Service. https://doi.org/10.17398/1695-288x.19.1.107

Moreno-Moreno, E., & Sanjurjo-San-Martín, E.-L. (2020). Selective consumption of newspaper brands in Spain: trust, political orientation, and degree of digital consumption. In The Information Professional . Ediciones Profesionales de la Informacion SL. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2020.sep.24

Riera Adrover, J.A., Casado de Staritzky, T., & Campos Vidal, J.F. (2020). An exploratory systematic review: Trust building in mediation. In Trabajo Social Hoy (Vol. 89, Issue Primer Cuatrimestre, pp. 9–26). Professional Association of Social Workers of Madrid. https://doi.org/10.12960/tsh.2020.0001

Hernández-Soto, R., Rodríguez-Medina, J., & Gutiérrez-Ortega, M. (2020). Trust and knowledge sharing in a transdisciplinary community of practice: A parallel convergent case study. In Latin American Journal of Educational Technology – RELATEC (Vol. 19, Issue 2, pp. 47–63). University of Extremadura – Publications Service. https://doi.org/10.17398/1695-288x.19.2.47

Muñoz Zapata, DE, & Valencia Rey, JE (2015). Organizational knowledge management: A necessary meeting of digital platforms, communication, education, and culture. In Lasallian Journal of Research (Vol. 12, Issue 2, pp. 105–111). Unilasallista University Corporation. https://doi.org/10.22507/rli.v12n2a11

Pineda Henao, A.E. (2020). Organizational communication in business management: challenges and opportunities in the digital landscape. In GEON Magazine (Management, Organizations and Business) (Vol. 7, Issue 1, pp. 9–25). Universidad de los Llanos. https://doi.org/10.22579/23463910.182

Alonso-Arévalo, J. (2017). Literacy in Scientific Communication: Accreditation, OA, Social Media, Altmetrics, Embedded Librarians, and Digital Identity Management . Center for Open Science. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/8nvek

Borén Alfaro, I. (nd). Conference organization and communication in a digital world: analysis of the impact of ICT on conference management in Castellón de la Plana . Universitat Jaume I. https://doi.org/10.6035/14111.2018.104135

Cárdenas, C., & Duarte, C. (2011). Ethnography of Audiovisual Communication: An Assessment of the Relationships Between Reflexivity, Image, and Anthropology. In Nexus Comunicación Magazine (Issue 10). Universidad del Valle. https://doi.org/10.25100/nc.v0i10.811

Isensee, GS, & Rosumek, GB (2018). Visual Content: a study of tools and concepts understood by an international digital communication agency | Visual Content: a study of the tools and concepts understood by an international digital communication agency. In InfoDesign – Revista Brasileira de Design da Informação (Vol. 15, Issue 1, pp. 125–142). Sociedade Brasileira de Design da Informacao. https://doi.org/10.51358/id.v15i1.623

Lima, CBP, Alves, PT de A., Jucá, SCS, & Silva, SA da. (2020). Teaching with images: visual communication as a teaching-learning tool in the teaching book of Philosophy in the integrated courses of IFCE. In Research, Society and Development (Vol. 9, Issue 7, p. e700974518). Research, Society and Development. https://doi.org/10.33448/rsd-v9i7.4518

Hernández-Muñiz, F., López Carrato, M. del L., & Orcesi, T. (2020). Archival identification, descriptive representation, and evaluation based on digitized images of microfilmed documents that make up the so-called Berrutti Archives of the Ministry of National Defense of Uruguay. In Informatio (Vol. 25, Issue 2). Informatio. https://doi.org/10.35643/info.25.2.5

Pérez Galán, B., & Prieto Ramos, Y. (2020). A collaborative ethnography audiovisual project under construction: the documentary series Indigenous Communication. In Spanish Journal of American Anthropology (Vol. 50, pp. 229–240). Complutense University of Madrid (UCM). https://doi.org/10.5209/reaa.70366

González Hernández, A. (2016). The role of communication offices specialized in health. The power of credibility: to inform and convince. In SPANISH JOURNAL OF HEALTH COMMUNICATION (Vol. 7, Issue Sup1). Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. https://doi.org/10.20318/recs.2016.3127

Cabezuelo Lorenzo, F., & Ruiz Carreras, M. (2010). Digital Communication and Politics in Aragon. A Formula for Bidirectional Interaction between Politicians and Citizens . Latin American Journal of Communication. https://doi.org/10.4185/rlcs-65-2010-904-240-353

Mani, E., & Echeverría, M. (2019). Political trust and the media. Theory, findings, and methodologies. In Journal of Political Communication (Vol. 1, Issue 1, pp. 53–74). Autonomous University of Nuevo Leon. https://doi.org/10.29105/rcp1-3

Estella de Noriega, A. (2020). Institutional Trust in Latin America: A Comparative Analysis. In Working Papers . Carolina Foundation. https://doi.org/10.33960/issn-e.1885-9119.dt34

Manchado Flores, M. Á. (2018). Connected: A Community Project of Digital Literacy. In Trabajo Social Hoy (Vol. 84, Issue Two Quarter, pp. 7–30). Professional Association of Social Workers of Madrid. https://doi.org/10.12960/tsh.2018.0007

Segarra Arnau, T. (nd). With the heart under the shoe. A case study on learning, integration, and identity in the Moroccan community of Sant Mateu . Universitat Jaume I. https://doi.org/10.6035/14034.2017.9005

Sadi Durón, J., & Baca Velázquez, J.A. (2020). Transmediality in social networks, as emerging knowledge communities. From the playful to the transcendental. Digital ethnographic approach. In CONEICC Communication Research Yearbook (Issue XXVII, pp. 04–21). National Council for Teaching and Research in Communication Sciences. https://doi.org/10.38056/2020aiccxxvii213

Fernández Riquelme, S. (2019). Learn, Integrate, and Divulge Digital Technologies for Investigation and Intervention in Social Work. In Trabajo Social Hoy (Vol. 88, Third Quarter Issue, pp. 43–68). Professional Association of Social Workers of Madrid. https://doi.org/10.12960/tsh.2019.0015