Commodified Compassion: Platform Capitalism and Moral Giving in Indonesian Digital Philanthropy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47655/dialog.v48i2.1210Keywords:
digital philanthropy, affective labor, empathy economy, platform capitalism, emotional fatigue, IndonesiaAbstract
This article examines how platform capitalism mediates the emotional and moral experiences of donors within Indonesia’s digital philanthropy ecosystem. Drawing on digital ethnography and semi-structured interviews with active donors across platforms such as Kitabisa, Instagram, and TikTok, the research identifies three interrelated dynamics: immediate empathic resonance triggered by visual content, a sense of moral urgency shaped by platform logics, and emotional fatigue that often results in selective disengagement. Findings show that while emotionally charged narratives effectively mobilize donations, they also risk commodifying compassion and exhausting donors psychologically, raising concerns about the sustainability of affective giving. The study foregrounds how digital empathy is not merely a spontaneous emotion, but a socially structured and platform-mediated practice shaped by religious norms, user interface design, and algorithmic incentives. By framing empathy as a collective ethical engagement, this study contributes to critical debates on emotional labor, platform governance, and the moral economy of digital giving. It also calls for platform architectures that support donor well-being, ensure ethical representation, and foster more equitable forms of digital solidarity within Indonesia’s evolving philanthropic landscape.
Downloads
References
Bibliography
Adinugraha, H. H., Shulhoni, M., & Achmad, D. (2023). Islamic social finance in Indonesia: Opportunities, challenges, and its role in empowering society. Review of Islamic Social Finance and Entrepreneurship, 2(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.20885/RISFE.vol2.iss1.art4
Ahmed, S. (2004). The Cultural Politics of Emotion. Edinburgh University Press.
Balaskas, S., Koutroumani, M., & Rigou, M. (2024). The Mediating Role of Emotional Arousal and Donation Anxiety on Blood Donation Intentions: Expanding on the Theory of Planned Behavior. Behavioral Sciences, 14(3), 242. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14030242
Banerjee, S. A. (2021). Intimate Technologies for Affective Development: How Crowdfunding Platforms Commodify Interpersonal Connections. Third World Quarterly, 43(3), 580–598. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2021.1947137
Berlant, L. (2014). Compassion: The culture and politics of an emotion. In Compassion: The Culture and Politics of an Emotion. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203871096
Bhati, A., & McDonnell, D. (2019). Success in an Online Giving Day: The Role of Social Media in Fundraising. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 49(1), 74–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0899764019868849
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.
Capraro, V., Jagfeld, G., Klein, R., Mul, M., & Pol, I. v. d. (2019). Increasing Altruistic and Cooperative Behaviour With Simple Moral Nudges. Scientific Reports, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48094-4
Chen, H., Li, W., Lyu, T., & Zheng, X. (2021). Understanding People’s Participation in Online Charities: A Dual-Process Approach of Trust and Empathic Concern. Industrial Management & Data Systems, 121(7), 1642–1663. https://doi.org/10.1108/imds-09-2020-0513
Chetioui, Y., Satt, H., Lebdaoui, H., Baijou, M., Dassouli, S., & Katona, S. (2022). Antecedents of Giving Charitable Donations (Sadaqah) During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Does Islamic Religiosity Matter? Journal of Islamic Marketing, 14(5), 1169–1187. https://doi.org/10.1108/jima-09-2021-0296
Chingwere, F., Nicholls, N., & Yitbarek, E. (2025). Moral Disengagement and Charitable Giving: Experimental Evidence From South Africa. International Social Science Journal, 75(256), 361–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12557
Cho, Y., Kim, Y., & Ye, C. (2024). Influencers and Donations: The Impact of Source and Product Benefits. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(2). https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.13039
Chouliaraki, L. (2010). The Humanitarian Imaginary: Producing Affective Dispositions through Television. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 27(4), 377–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/15295030903583587
Cowden, R. G., Fung, E. N., Bechara, A. O., Cook, K. V, Kurniati, N. M. T., Suwartono, C., Widyarini, N., & VanderWeele, T. J. (2025). Does Meaning in Life Mediate Associations Between Suffering and Subsequent Mental Well‐Being? Longitudinal Evidence From Two Non‐Western Samples. Stress and Health, 41(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.3530
Deng, Y., & Zhang, F. (2019). Effects of Visual Prompt on Recycling Behavior of Waste Batteries. Psychology, 10(12), 1565–1571. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2019.1012102
Feng, Z., & Zhang, F. (2019). Can Light-Shaped Visual Prompt Promote Individuals’ Lights Off Behaviors More Effectively Than Ordinary One? Psychology, 10(01), 79–87. https://doi.org/10.4236/psych.2019.101006
Ferrara, I., & Missios, P. (2019). Trust, Ability‐to‐pay, and Charitable Giving. Journal of Public Economic Theory, 22(3), 583–629. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpet.12393
Grenfell, R., & Wardana, A. (2021). Impacts of platform capitalism on community activism in Indonesia. South East Asian Media Studies Journal, 3(1), 53–68.
Gu, Y., & Chen, R. (2021). How Does Money Phrasing Influence Intention to Donate: The Role of Construal Level and Fit. Psychology and Marketing, 38(11), 1911–1927. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21551
Habib, Z. (2025). Ethics of Artificial Intelligence in Maqāṣid Al-Sharīa’s Perspective. KARSA Journal of Social and Islamic Culture, 33(1), 105–134.
Jones, J., & Koenig, A. M. (2018). The Effect of “Socially Moral” Purchases on Future Financial Donations. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 23(4).
Kasri, R. A., & Indriani, E. (2021). Empathy or Perceived Credibility? An Empirical Study of Muslim Donating Behaviour Through Online Charitable Crowdfunding in Indonesia. International Journal of Islamic and Middle Eastern Finance and Management, 15(5), 829–846. https://doi.org/10.1108/imefm-09-2020-0468
Koch, G., & Buchanan, S. E. (Eds.). (2013). Pathways to empathy: New studies on commodification, emotional labor, and time binds (Vol. 6). Campus Verlag.
Kolan, N. F., Jailani, N., Bakar, M. A., & Latih, R. (2018). Trust Model Based on Islamic Business Ethics and Social Network Analysis. International Journal on Advanced Science Engineering and Information Technology, 8(6), 2323–2331. https://doi.org/10.18517/ijaseit.8.6.6412
Kurniawan, R., Hidayat, I., & Rheksa, S. I. (2025). Digital Benevolence: What Drives TikTok Users to Donate to Online Beggars? Linguistics and Culture Review, 9(1), 23–34. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v9n1.2317
Kurniawati, D. T., Rosita, N. H., & Anggraeni, R. (2021). The Role of Emotional Marketing and UTAUT on Donation Intention Through Social Media. International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), 10(1), 38–46. https://doi.org/10.20525/ijrbs.v10i1.1026
Leach, J., Liddell, B. J., & Schubert, E. (2023). Collective compassion: Responding to structural barriers to compassion with agentic action in context. Emotion Review, 15(2), 143–152. https://doi.org/10.1177/17540739221134558
Lee, R. (2019). Commodifying compassion: Affective economies of human milk exchange. IJFAB: International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics, 12(2), 92–116.
Moore, S. E. H. (2008). Ribbon culture: Charity, compassion, and public awareness. Palgrave Macmillan.
Nilsson, A., Erlandsson, A., & Västfjäll, D. (2020). Moral Foundations Theory and the Psychology of Charitable Giving. European Journal of Personality, 34(3), 431–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2256
Palinkas, L. A., Horwitz, S. M., Green, C. A., Wisdom, J. P., Duan, N., & Hoagwood, K. (2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y
Papacharissi, Z. (2014). Affective Publics: Sentiment, Technology, and Politics. Oxford University Press.
Pink, S., Sinanan, J., Hjorth, L., & Horst, H. (2016). Tactile digital ethnography: Researching mobile media through the hand. Mobile Media & Communication, 4(2), 237–251.
Shaquila, D. P. (2023). Empathy or Perceived Credibility? An Empirical Study of Muslim Donating Behavior through Online Charitable Crowdfunding at Universitas Andalas. Universitas Andalas.
Shi, Y., & Wu, C. (2023). The Influencing Factor Model and Empirical Research of TikTok Charity Live Streaming Impact Users’ Online Charitable Donation. Plos One, 18(11), e0294186. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0294186
Slovic, P. (2007). If I Look at the Mass I Will Never Act: Psychic Numbing and Genocide. Judgment and Decision Making, 2(2), 79–95.
Tang, F., & Hou, J. (2024). Show Me the Outputs! The Influence of Charitable Outputs and Charitable Cause Phrasing on Charitable Giving. Psychology and Marketing, 41(10), 2368–2380. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.22054
Tondoyekti, K., Sakti, R. A., & Irianti, N. N. (2024). Business Ethics in Fintech and Missappropriation of Donation Funds: A Case Study of Kitabisa.com Crowdfunding Platform. Jurnal Ilmiah Ekonomi Global Masa Kini, 15(2), 125–133.
Winterich, K. P., Mittal, V., & Aquino, K. (2013). When Does Recognition Increase Charitable Behavior? Toward a Moral Identity-Based Model. Journal of Marketing, 77(3), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.1509/jm.11.0477
Yıldırım, P., Simonov, A., Petrova, M., & Pérez-Truglia, R. (2024). Are Political and Charitable Giving Substitutes? Evidence From the United States. Management Science, 70(11), 8030–8043. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2021.00845
Zhao, C., Guo, J., & Qu, X. (2020). Stock Market Reaction to Corporate Philanthropic Response and Silence: Does Charity Style Matter? Applied Economics Letters, 28(16), 1344–1350. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2020.1814943.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Dialog
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
