Online identity is becoming permanent digital genealogy controlled by algorithms

A new study examines how digital life reshapes human identity through algorithms, performance, and exhaustion. The research offers a sharp critique of what it calls “digital genealogy” - the process by which online identities are continuously recreated, archived, and exploited by social platforms.

Published in Genealogy, the study titled “Digital Genealogy: Aura, Liquidity, and Burnout in Online Identity” argues that social media has redefined selfhood as both transient and permanent, fleeting in user perception but enduring in platform databases. The author connects the works of Walter Benjamin, Zygmunt Bauman, Byung-Chul Han, and José van Dijck to build a framework showing how identity construction online mirrors a genealogical process of constant editing, reproduction, and fatigue.

How digital aura becomes an algorithmic illusion

The study revisits Walter Benjamin’s notion of aura, the authenticity attached to unique works of art before the age of mass reproduction. The author argues that digital platforms have erased that aura, replacing uniqueness with an algorithmic imitation of authenticity. Every act of posting, liking, or sharing becomes part of a continuous cycle of replication, where value depends not on originality but on visibility.

In this context, the self becomes a reproducible object, constantly tailored for engagement metrics. The author describes this as the rise of algorithmic aura, a perception of authenticity that is, in truth, engineered by the recommendation systems that decide what remains visible and what disappears.

The paper shows that the aura of the digital self is never stable. It shifts with trends, algorithms, and social validation loops. Identity becomes a feed of curated fragments, continuously updated to remain relevant in a system driven by novelty. The online persona thus acquires liquidity: it can flow, adapt, and rebrand, but at the cost of psychological and temporal exhaustion.

From liquid modernity to the burnout of the digital self

Based on Zygmunt Bauman’s concept of liquid modernity, the author situates digital identity within a society that rewards flexibility and punishes permanence. In Bauman’s view, modern individuals are expected to reinvent themselves endlessly. The study finds that social media amplifies this demand through design: every post invites reinvention, every algorithmic update reshapes what counts as visible or valuable.

The result, The author explains, is a paradox. Users feel empowered by constant self-presentation yet remain trapped in a cycle of optimization that never ends. The more they perform identity, the more their data feeds the same platforms that quantify and monetize their expression.

Here, the study invokes Byung-Chul Han’s idea of the burnout society, in which freedom turns into self-exploitation. Digital genealogy, in this sense, is not only a chain of memories but a record of labor, endless micro-actions of curation, comparison, and emotional regulation. Identity ceases to be a narrative; it becomes a dataset optimized for attention.

The burnout stems from an impossible balance: to stay authentic while being algorithmically compliant. The author’s analysis reveals that what feels like self-expression often mirrors platform logic. Users manage multiple profiles, alternate between aesthetic trends, and adapt to algorithmic expectations without recognizing the depth of their conformity. The constant pressure to remain seen, updated, and relevant transforms autonomy into performance fatigue.

Genealogical Memory in the Age of Artificial Intelligence

The author extends the discussion to the implications of artificial intelligence and automated memory. Referencing José van Dijck’s theory of mediated memory, the paper argues that memory itself has become an active, algorithmic process - not a passive archive. Every digital trace, from photos to conversations, is stored, categorized, and resurfaced by AI systems that decide what remains part of the user’s history.

This transformation replaces organic memory with what the author calls simulated continuity. While users perceive their digital presence as ephemeral, their data forms a permanent, computable genealogy managed by platforms. The research warns that this duality, fleeting visibility and enduring storage, marks a shift from self-authored identity to machine-curated biography.

AI-generated recommendations, automated reminders, and resurfaced memories create the illusion of control while deepening dependence on algorithms. The study calls this myopic memory: users see only fragments chosen for them, not the full record of their online existence. This selective visibility undermines autonomy and historical context, producing identities that feel spontaneous but are preconditioned by system design.

The author’s model of digital genealogy maps these dynamics as an inheritance structure: platforms inherit, store, and recombine user behavior to create generational layers of data. Each layer feeds the next, shaping how future users and algorithms will understand authenticity, value, and recognition.

The paradox of selfhood and the future of identity research

The core of this argument lies in a sociotechnical paradox: digital identity is both ephemeral and eternal. Users experience their self-expression as casual and momentary, yet every trace contributes to an expanding genealogical record managed by opaque systems. The genealogical metaphor reveals the persistence of digital identity, every post is an ancestor of future iterations, every like a descendant of prior performances.

The study places this paradox within the broader debates on platform capitalism and the attention economy. Algorithms do not simply mediate memory; they govern it, transforming visibility into a commodity. Recognition becomes transactional, a measurable form of digital capital traded through likes, follows, and engagement. This monetization of attention ensures that users remain active participants in their own exploitation, continuously producing data that sustains the system.

The author calls for future interdisciplinary research that combines sociology, psychology, media studies, and artificial intelligence ethics to address how digital systems manipulate memory and identity formation. The author argues that without critical reflection, societies risk normalizing an environment where selfhood becomes a service and memory a marketplace.