Pop Culture as Meaning Systems

A Governance Model for Interpretation in Mass-Scale Cultural Environments

Authors: Jordan Vallejo and the Transformation Management Institute Research Group

Status: Monograph C3 | December 2025

Abstract

Pop culture is widely treated as entertainment, yet it functions as one of the most influential modern meaning systems. Early moviegoing created a rare interpretive condition: large groups received the same structured signals in the same order, at the same time, inside a controlled environment. That synchronization produced shared baselines that later cultural ecosystems inherited.

As pop culture expanded across franchises, platforms, and global audiences, the stabilizers that once constrained disagreement weakened. Interpretation became asynchronous, participatory, and distributed. In that environment, drift rises quickly as a rate under participation and asynchrony, and audiences compensate through boundary enforcement, fandom norms, template mutation, remix, and collective reinterpretation.

This monograph analyzes pop culture through the variables of Meaning System Science and shows how cultural ecosystems maintain or lose interpretive stability under scale and participation. Through case studies of Star Wars, Pokémon, Studio Ghibli, Game of Thrones, Clair Obscur: Expedition 33, memes, and participatory communities, it demonstrates that interpretive stability is not a product of quality or popularity. It is the outcome of proportional conditions that keep meaning usable over time.

For System Existence Theory purposes, “meaning systems” are treated here as bounded cultural units with legible membership and closure rules, such as a franchise, platform, or interpretive community. Pop culture is analyzed as multiple coupled systems rather than a single unified unit.

Pop culture is one of the clearest public laboratories for Meaning-System Governance because its meaning systems are visible, fast, and emotionally consequential. The same dynamics are increasingly present in institutions, platforms, and AI-mediated environments. Understanding their structure is essential for governing meaning in the century ahead.

I. Introduction

Moviegoing was one of the first modern environments where large groups interpreted the same sequence of signals at the same time under controlled conditions. The darkened theater constrained external cues, synchronized attention, and reduced interpretive variance during the experience. The screen delivered information through a fixed pathway that all participants received in the same order. That structure produced a shared baseline among audiences who had no prior coordination with one another.

Pop culture became a mass-scale meaning system because it stabilized promised reference, signals, structure, and affect simultaneously. Competing inputs were minimized. Drift was constrained by design.

As media expanded beyond theaters into television, franchises, games, streaming platforms, and networked digital spaces, the same meaning-system architecture persisted while the stabilizing environment dissolved. Two structural shifts followed. Interpretation became asynchronous, and authorship became distributed across creators, platforms, and audiences. Meaning production increased, and the conditions that once limited drift weakened.

Modern cultural ecosystems therefore exhibit the full architecture of a meaning system. They maintain internal promised reference conditions through canon and rulebooks. They coordinate interpretation through alignment signals such as genre conventions, iconography, character templates, and recognizable loops. They rely on continuity structures to carry meaning across installments and formats. They experience drift through reinterpretation, retconning, and subsystem formation. They regulate collective capacity for interpretation through tone, pacing, and emotional invariants.

Pop culture is a uniquely visible domain for Meaning-System Governance because it operates at scale, under participation, without formal authority. It shows how meaning behaves when stabilization depends on distributed infrastructure rather than institutional design.

II. What Makes Pop Culture a Meaning System

Pop culture qualifies as a meaning system because interpretation inside it shapes coordinated understanding at scale. Audiences do not merely consume content. They inherit baselines, enforce continuity, negotiate boundaries, and transmit meaning across time and communities. These dynamics follow the same structural rules that govern interpretation in institutions, organizations, and synthetic systems.

• Truth Fidelity (T)
  Fiction establishes internal promised reference conditions: what is allowed to count as real inside the world. Canon, lore, and rulebooks function as reference conditions. When truth conditions become ambiguous, communities diverge and drift pressure increases.

• Signal Alignment (P)
  Pop culture stabilizes interpretation through an authority and action-weight field: signals that determine what counts as binding, what is amplified, and what is sanctioned. In practice, P is carried by canon declarations, creator speech, platform ranking and recommendation mechanics, moderation norms, influencer consensus, awards, and enforcement cycles.

• Structural Coherence (C)
  Structural coherence is the continuity labor that keeps a baseline usable across time: compatible character arcs, stable world logic, and legible pathways that connect installments. It also includes the reusable decoding key that keeps interpretation legible across eras and formats, such as genre conventions, iconography, motifs, and character templates.

• Drift (D)
  Drift is the inconsistency accumulation rate: the rate at which unresolved contradictions and non-equivalences accumulate faster than correction throughput can resolve them. In cultural systems it appears as incompatible canon, abrupt tonal reclassification, factional interpretation, and fragmentation into sub-communities with distinct reference points.

• Affective Regulation (A)
  Cultural systems regulate collective capacity for interpretation. Tone, pacing, and emotional invariants shape whether complexity can be integrated without exceeding regulatory capacity. When affect becomes unstable, reinterpretation increases and discourse becomes more punitive.

The absence of formal governance does not remove these variables. It shifts stabilization to audience behavior. This makes pop culture a clear demonstration of meaning-system dynamics under distributed authorship and high interpretive velocity.

III. Star Wars

Star Wars is a long-running meaning system with high interpretive load. It spans films, television, novels, comics, games, theme parks, and decades of audience inheritance. At this scale, coherence (C) becomes a governance problem rather than a storytelling preference. Without continuity rules and continuity labor, the system cannot sustain a shared baseline.

The sequel trilogy became a high-visibility coherence event because it presented itself as a closing arc while shifting evaluation constraints across installments. The system did not only add new story. It revised what counted as binding inside the world, then asked audiences to treat those revisions as continuous with prior reference conditions.

A major pressure point was the late reclassification of Rey’s origin. One installment framed her lineage as non-authoritative, shifting the system’s identity logic toward chosen commitment rather than inherited status. The final installment reversed that truth condition by tying her to Palpatine, then resolved the conflict through an adoption claim rather than through a continuity chain that many viewers experienced as reconstructable across the trilogy. The dispute that followed was not primarily about preference. It was about what the system’s truth conditions were allowed to be, and whether they remained stable enough to travel across the arc.

The return of Palpatine compounded the same issue. For many viewers, the causal pathway for a major state change was not made legible at the level of the films’ own continuity requirements. When promised reference conditions change faster than the system’s coherence pathways can justify, communities respond by building substitute stabilizers: external explanations become authority proxies, tie-in media becomes repair infrastructure, and factional baselines form around whichever installment is treated as the governing reference.

Star Wars fandom makes this governance labor visible because it operates at scale without a single adjudication layer. Fan encyclopedias, wiki editorial rules, canon explainers, and timeline debates are continuity infrastructure. During high-dispute periods, that infrastructure is joined by enforcement behaviors like review campaigns and status sorting, which function as attempts to stabilize boundaries when a shared baseline feels non-viable.

Governance Lessons from Star Wars
Canon boundaries are governance boundaries: reference conditions must be published clearly and maintained consistently across media. Continuity labor must be resourced, because coherence does not persist by default at franchise scale. Audience participation becomes a co-authoring layer in distributed environments, and ignoring that layer increases drift and accelerates subsystem formation. Affective stability remains a baseline variable: when tonal and moral invariants change without preparation, coherence disputes intensify. Boundary transparency reduces drift pressure; when truth-fidelity rules are unclear, audiences fill gaps with competing narratives.

IV. Pokémon

Pokémon stays interpretable at global scale because it protects a small, learnable signal dictionary and uses it to govern endless variation. Many franchises expand by increasing narrative complexity. Pokémon expands by increasing inventory while keeping the decoding key stable.

Pokémon’s alignment system is rules-based and icon-based. Its core rules function as promised reference conditions (T), and its advantage is a stable decoding key that keeps interpretation legible across generations, formats, and localization.

Types and effectiveness provide a universal reading rule for conflict outcomes. The capture loop standardizes what encounters mean: rarity, risk, reward, and ownership transfer. Evolution encodes progress as a recognizable transformation path with consistent expectations. Battle constraints keep decisions legible: limited moves, turn structure, and bounded team sizes.

These elements operate as alignment infrastructure. Once learned, they reduce interpretive variance across regions, generations, and formats.

Pokémon repeatedly introduces new creatures, moves, regions, mechanics, and media adaptations without requiring audiences to renegotiate the basics. New content is designed to remain readable through existing signals. A new Pokémon does not require backstory to be interpretable. Its type, silhouette, and move patterns often provide enough alignment for competent play and shared discussion. This produces a compounding effect: the longer the system runs, the faster audiences can coordinate interpretation because the dictionary remains reusable.

Pokémon’s biggest instability moments tend to appear when players believe the dictionary is being rewritten rather than extended. The “National Dex” controversy around Pokémon Sword and Shield is representative. The conflict was not only about quantity. It was about continuity of interpretive expectations tied to collection, transfer, and long-term ownership across generations.

When a meaning system trains audiences to treat prior investments as portable, removing that portability is experienced as a signal-alignment break even if the battle rules remain intact. The system can stay mechanically coherent and still trigger alignment backlash if the long-term promise of the loop changes.

Pokémon GO demonstrates how a stable decoding key can remain usable even when the environment changes completely. Niantic added new location-based signals (PokéStops, Gyms) but anchored them to the established dictionary: catch, evolve, battle, team affiliation, and event-based rarity. The result was immediate shared interpretability in public spaces among strangers who did not need shared narrative context to coordinate behavior.

GO then added recurring synchronization governance through Community Day: a predictable global time window, a featured Pokémon, and standardized bonuses. That mechanism creates temporary mass alignment without requiring centralized narrative coordination.

Governance Lessons from Pokémon
A small set of signals carries most interpretive load, and those signals remain stable across media, time, and localization. Expansions function best when they are additive rather than replacements of the decoding key. Synchronization rituals become valuable when scale would otherwise increase divergence.

V. Studio Ghibli

Studio Ghibli is a meaning system that stays stable without relying on franchise canon. The films are mostly standalone, but audiences still recognize “this is Ghibli” within minutes. That consistency is not brand mystique. It is affective regulation (A) functioning as a participation condition: the work protects the viewer’s capacity to interpret, even when the story includes threat, grief, ambiguity, or moral conflict.

Ghibli maintains a recognizable emotional climate by controlling pace, volume, and escalation. Many scenes refuse the modern pressure to constantly “advance.” Characters cook, wait, travel, watch weather, notice animals, and finish chores. These moments create integration time so the audience can absorb what the film is asking without emotional saturation.

Miyazaki has described this as ma: intentional emptiness, the space between beats that prevents a story from becoming busyness. Structurally, ma functions as integration time. It keeps tension from staying at maximum and reduces the drift that often follows overload: numbness, cynicism, and reactive reinterpretation. The viewer stays oriented long enough to register nuance rather than outcome alone.

This regulatory design also changes what disagreement looks like. Ghibli audiences rarely fight over “what counts” in the manner of franchise fandoms, because the films do not require a shared timeline to preserve belonging. Interpretation remains plural without becoming a jurisdictional contest over canon. The stabilizer is not an external rulebook. It is a predictable participation condition: the films do not punish attention, and they do not demand constant alarm to stay engaged.

Ghibli’s cross-cultural travel benefits from the same structure. Emotional cues remain legible without heavy dependence on dialogue or insider context. The films do not require prior mastery of the world; they require presence inside it. When the affective environment is stable, translation becomes less risky because the audience’s role remains clear even when cultural symbols differ.

That stability also makes the films unusually effective as informal language teachers: viewers can track intent through tone, gesture, and pacing, then attach words to scenes that already make sense, which helps explain why many people credit Ghibli dubs and subtitles with supporting English or Japanese practice while building a real felt connection to another culture.

Governance Lessons from Studio Ghibli
Affective consistency functions as governance because tone and pacing set participation conditions. Integration time prevents overload and preserves attention for nuance. Escalation limits matter because continuous intensity increases numbness and increases hostile discourse around meaning. Standalone worlds reduce canon conflict because belonging is not gated by timeline mastery. Participation conditions shape drift: when engagement is emotionally stable, audiences have less reason to invent coercive rules to stay coordinated.

VI. Game of Thrones

Game of Thrones became appointment television in an era that rarely supports it. The final season’s premiere drew over seventeen million viewers across HBO platforms, and the finale reached over nineteen million across platforms. The meaning system was not struggling to reach people. The problem was maintaining a shared baseline once it reached them.

The core governance problem was interpretive compression. The final two seasons were reduced to thirteen total episodes, with Season 8 limited to six. Public reporting captured the tension between a fixed-length framing and HBO’s stated willingness to fund more episodes. Regardless of intent, the structural outcome was the same: the system increased resolution velocity while reducing the bandwidth required to justify resolution.

That shift pushed drift (D) ahead of coherence (C). Earlier seasons trained audiences into a style of explanation: slow causal build, political consequence chains, and character change that was legible as a sequence. The last season asked for major state changes without preserving the same legibility requirements. When a meaning system changes its own proof standards, trust drops even among viewers who accept the broad endpoints.

The stress was visible in its promised reference conditions. Long-running promises functioned as internal truth constraints, not trivia: the threat of the White Walkers, the moral logic of power, and the cost structure of survival. When those constraints appeared to dissolve quickly, the audience lost the ability to predict what counts from one episode to the next. Once prediction fails, interpretation becomes factional because communities rebuild stability locally.

The backlash was therefore not only aesthetic. It was a governance response to perceived baseline invalidation. A Change.org petition calling for the final season to be remade reached well over a million verified signatures, and cast members publicly addressed the petition as disrespectful to production labor. Review aggregation also recorded a large critic-to-audience gap. The dispute became a secondary meaning system that competed with the story itself.

Even small production errors became governance symbols. Widely circulated continuity artifacts mattered because they were read as signals about attention, care, and internal coherence discipline. In high-trust environments, these are jokes. In low-trust environments, they become evidence in a larger explanatory fight about what happened to the system.

Game of Thrones is a clear example of baseline failure at peak scale. The audience did not disappear. The shared baseline became non-viable.

Governance Lessons from Game of Thrones
Interpretive velocity is a budget. When resolution speed increases, justification capacity must increase with it, or drift will outpace coherence. Promises function as truth conditions: long-running systems accumulate interpretive debt, and debt cannot be cleared by spectacle. Compression changes proof standards; if the system stops showing the causal steps it previously required, audiences treat outcomes as ungrounded even when outcomes remain plausible. When trust is low, small continuity errors become structural signals. When formal governance is absent, dispute becomes governance: petitions, rating campaigns, and factional communities are audience attempts to restore a stable account of reality conditions.

VII. Clair Obscur: Expedition 33

Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 is a useful smaller-scale case study because it is not a multi-decade franchise. It is a single new title that reached mass visibility fast, including a Game of the Year win. That combination makes governance dynamics easy to see: a meaning system can form and scale in months rather than decades.

A key part of the system’s early stability was not only the game itself, but the public story of how it was made. Reporting around the team’s improbable origin produced a powerful alignment signal: outsiders, discovered through online posts, building something that “shouldn’t exist.” That origin narrative becomes part of the decoding key. It invites protective fandom behavior, increases expectations, and compresses the distance between creators and audience, which increases participatory pressure.

At the level of content, the game concentrates governance stress into a single interpretive fork: the Maelle versus Verso ending debate. The community argues about promised reference conditions: what should count as real, what kinds of suffering are admissible as the price of continuity, and whether mercy means preservation or release. The system is structured to provoke moral evaluation, so audiences predictably try to enforce a shared verdict.

What makes the debate instructive is that it does not stay inside story talk. It becomes a legitimacy contest over what a good ending is supposed to be. The same scenes are read through incompatible baseline assumptions, so discussion often shifts toward governance by social pressure rather than interpretation inside shared reference.

Developer remarks acknowledging internal disagreement about the endings reinforce a core governance fact: the system refuses a single mandated moral resolution. That design choice increases drift pressure because it transfers part of the stabilization burden onto the audience. Local communities respond by forming subsystem baselines (“Maelle is the humane choice,” “Verso is the responsible choice,” “both are valid,” “both are failures”), each with internal criteria for coherence.

The creator and performer commentary layer adds an informal authority field. When highly visible contributors publicly express preferences, their statements function as alignment signals. Even when framed lightly, those signals can become evidence in a moral trial. The system then contains two overlapping meaning environments: the in-world canon and the out-of-world interpretive authority field.

A late-2025 controversy illustrates modern boundary pressure tied directly to generative AI usage: the Indie Game Awards rescinded Expedition 33 honors after reporting that generative AI assets were included at launch and then patched. Regardless of one’s judgment of that decision, the event is structurally legible as governance by boundary rule. Institutions and communities are attempting to formalize what counts as acceptable provenance and production practice under synthetic tooling.

As the audience layer thickens, governance becomes less about eliminating disagreement and more about making disagreement interpretable. Spoiler norms, ending-label conventions, community moderation, and “good/bad ending” shorthand are attempts to compress variance into manageable forms so conversation can continue without constant re-litigation of reality conditions.

Governance Lessons from Clair Obscur: Expedition 33
Origin narratives operate as alignment infrastructure. Viral creation stories increase participation and loyalty while also increasing interpretive intensity and perceived ownership. Moral forks operate as governance events; when a system asks audiences to judge outcomes ethically, baseline divergence becomes likely unless the system provides interpretive scaffolding. Public creator and performer speech alters the signal field and can stabilize or intensify disagreement. Subsystem formation is predictable when reference conditions are contested. Stability improves when boundary tools are visible: clear spoiler language, stable naming conventions for interpretive forks, and lightweight interpretive notes that reduce drift without imposing a single correct reading.

VIII. Memes

Memes are the clearest public demonstration of what meaning does when there is no stable authority, no fixed canon, and no shared obligation to preserve continuity. They are not jokes that happen to spread. They are a production format where reinterpretation is the default behavior and mutation is the distribution mechanism.

In a franchise, drift is often treated as a failure condition. In meme ecosystems, drift is the design. A meme template is built to be copied, altered, recontextualized, and redistributed with minimal friction. The unit that persists is not the message. It is the structure that invites variation.

In play contexts, this is the humor. The same image can support incompatible captions, opposing stances, and layered irony without requiring a final answer. Subcultures treat remixing as play, recognition as belonging, and variance as social reward. Meaning stays usable because nobody expects the template to support a single stable truth.

This makes memes a drift catalyst (β₆): a mechanism that increases interpretive velocity faster than stabilizers can keep up. When a template takes hold, it produces meaning faster than communities can agree on reference conditions, and it does so across platforms with different norms, incentives, and moderation practices.

Two features make this powerful at scale.

1. First, memes depend on shared recognition more than shared truth. A viewer needs to recognize the format to participate. The content can be sincere, ironic, hostile, affectionate, or incoherent, and the meme still functions as long as it is recognizable. This creates a meaning environment where surface recognizability can be high even when truth-fidelity constraints are intentionally minimal.

2. Second, memes exploit context removal as a feature. Screenshots, cropped clips, reaction images, and stitched videos circulate detached from origin conditions. That detachment increases propagation speed, and it increases divergence because different audiences import different implied contexts to stabilize what they are seeing.

As memes spread, they also become boundary tools. Communities use memetic fluency as cultural capital: knowing the template, using it correctly, and detecting irony become membership tests. The same template can carry incompatible meanings across subgroups, while each subgroup treats its interpretation as baseline.

Platform mechanics intensify this. Algorithmic feeds reward engagement loops, repetition, and recognizable formats. Reinforcement dynamics can narrow exposure and accelerate template reuse, which increases volume and speed while decreasing shared baselines across audiences. The result is a high-throughput meaning engine without shared governance.

Memes are therefore not a cultural curiosity. They are a working model of what meaning looks like when velocity is high, reference conditions are intentionally minimal, and participation is unconstrained. This can remain harmless or delightful in play contexts, and it becomes governance-relevant when meme logic is treated as evidence, accusation, or coordination signal in environments that require shared proof standards.

Governance Lessons from Memes
Meaning without stable reference conditions becomes highly context-sensitive. Context controls are governance controls: provenance, timestamping, and source visibility reduce divergence by preserving origin conditions. Surface alignment can hide deep instability; template recognition does not imply shared understanding. As production speed increases, stabilizers must become simpler and more explicit to function. Platforms are governance actors: recommendation systems, remix tools, and moderation choices shape drift rates even when no one intends to govern meaning.

IX. Participation as Meaning Governance

Pop culture stops being content the moment audiences begin doing continuity work on its behalf. The scale problem is simple: once a meaning system spreads across millions of people, no studio, publisher, or showrunner can single-handedly maintain the shared baseline. The audience layer becomes the distributed infrastructure that keeps the system interpretable, usable, and socially transmissible.

Failure Modes Under High Participation

When participatory load increases, two distinct failure modes predictably appear.

1. Closure Failure (CF) occurs when communities attempt to stabilize meaning by sealing correction pathways. Canon becomes jurisdictional, reinterpretation becomes socially risky, and enforcement substitutes for repair even as inconsistency and resentment accumulate.

2. Constraint Failure (KF) occurs when evaluation constraints are under-specified. Provenance weakens, context is stripped, remix and reframing multiply, and drift rises because the system cannot preserve shared limits for what should count as equivalent across audiences and platforms.

Participation is a family of practices that performs four governance functions at once: replication (keeping alignment signals recognizable), extension (adding new material without official authorization), correction (disputing inconsistencies and enforcing boundaries), and synchronization (creating shared moments that re-stabilize the baseline).

Cosplay

Cosplay is alignment governance in embodied form. A costume translates a character into an interpretable signal packet that can be recognized quickly by strangers. That recognition does not depend on plot recall. It depends on portable cues: silhouette, color logic, emblem placement, and gesture conventions.

Convention culture treated costuming as a ritual of shared membership. Over time, communities developed standards of recognizability and taught them to newcomers through praise, critique, and imitation.

As conventions expanded and then moved into platform visibility, cosplay also became a distributed quality system. Tutorials, build logs, pattern-sharing, judging rubrics, and community norms operate like an informal standards body. Even when the norm is “everyone is welcome,” the system still teaches interpretive boundaries: what counts as a faithful reproduction, what counts as an intentional remix, and what counts as off-system noise.

Cosplay stabilizes shared decoding cues while also testing C. When different eras of a franchise conflict, cosplay often surfaces the conflict faster than discourse, because incompatible baselines show up in the same room.

Fanart

Fanart is controlled drift that keeps a system alive between official releases. It extends the meaning system by exploring alternative framings while preserving recognizability. It can exaggerate a trait, shift a tone, re-stage a scene, or repair an omission, while keeping enough signals intact that the work remains legible as from the system.

This functions as governance because it creates a parallel archive of interpretation. Fanart becomes a memory substrate for the community: the emotions that mattered, the dynamics that felt stable, the versions of characters the audience treats as reliable. When official production later shifts tone or revises meaning, fanart archives often become evidence in baseline disputes.

Fanart also exposes hidden rule sets. Communities develop informal limits on what counts as in character, what counts as respectful, and what counts as distortion. Those limits vary across subgroups, and that variance is itself a map of subsystem boundaries.

Fanfiction

Fanfiction is participatory governance at maximum intensity because it operationalizes authorship. It does not only interpret the text, it continues it.

Before major platforms, fandom built print zines, mailing lists, and convention networks that treated writing as communal practice. The internet converted that practice into large archives with tagging, filtering, and content warnings, creating a new governance layer: readers and writers coordinate interpretation through shared metadata rather than centralized authority.

Fanfiction performs three governance functions that official creators struggle to provide at scale.

• Stress testing canon: stories probe contradictions in world rules, character motivations, and moral geometry. Where canon is brittle, fanfiction pressure finds the fault line.

• Completing the system: audiences write the scenes the official work avoids staging: aftermath, repair, domestic continuity, emotional processing, or alternative ethical outcomes. This completion preserves affective stability when canon increases velocity past integration capacity.

• Creating interpretive institutions: tag taxonomies, recommendation lists, ship communities, and moderation norms operate as governance structures. They shape what counts as searchable, discussable, and safe enough to share.

Fanfiction is therefore not unstructured drift. It is audience-run authoring under constraints negotiated and enforced by the community itself.

Fandoms

Fandoms behave like proto-governance systems because they do work that formal institutions do, without formal authority. They publish what is true in accessible formats (wikis, timelines, explainers). They enforce norms (spoiler rules, content warnings, harassment boundaries, community bans). They adjudicate disputes (moderation, meta essays, canon arguments). They build legitimacy narratives (who the real fans are, what interpretation is earned, what counts as betrayal).

When reference conditions are contested, fandoms invent courts, rules, and enforcement mechanisms in real time. This also explains why fandom environments can become overwhelming. High participation increases meaning production rate. If stabilizers do not scale with that rate, communities default to blunt instruments: social sorting, moral labeling, and status enforcement. These behaviors are not the essence of fandom. They are failure responses when governance demand exceeds governance capacity.

Audience Enforcement

In mass fandom environments, audiences do not only interpret meaning. They enforce it. When a meaning system has no adjudication layer, communities still face the same structural problem: drift rises, reference conditions become contested, and participation becomes unstable. Reputational sanction is a predictable enforcement pattern that emerges at that point.

This enforcement is a bundle of actions that attempt to restore a usable baseline through social and economic pressure: coordinated withdrawal, platform removal demands, review and rating campaigns, sponsor and employer pressure, community exclusion, archive work that assembles receipts, and public warning labels.

These actions function as improvised governance because they attempt to stabilize meaning faster than clarification processes can. Sanction cycles often arise when audiences perceive either truth-condition violation without acknowledgment, or collapsing alignment norms with ambiguous participation that may spread. In both cases, the community is trying to prevent subsystem divergence by creating a boundary quickly.

Relation to MSS variables:

• Fast alignment (P): sanction compresses a complex dispute into a legible public signal about what stances are acceptable inside the community.

• Reference stabilization (T): many sanction cycles begin as an argument over what is true about an event, intent, pattern, or harm claim. When truth fidelity cannot be stabilized through shared evidence rules, consequence becomes the stabilizer.

• Coherence repair (C): sanction protects internal consistency by forcing a single explanatory story about what happened and why it matters.

• Drift control under speed (D): sanction attempts to slow competing framings through deterrence and social cost.

• Affective discharge and order restoration (A): high arousal environments demand action; consequence provides closure even when ambiguity remains.

This explains why reputational sanction produces mixed outcomes. It can temporarily stabilize participation by clarifying boundaries. It can also increase drift by triggering counter-communities, increasing retaliation cycles, and converting interpretive disagreement into durable identity conflict.

Governance Lessons from Participation
Participation becomes structural at scale: the audience becomes the co-authoring layer whether creators endorse it or not. Cosplay stabilizes signals through embodiment and exposes baseline conflict quickly. Fanart preserves affective memory and becomes evidence during disputes. Fanfiction extends canon under community constraints and creates informal interpretive institutions. Fandoms build continuity infrastructure when none is provided. If a franchise wants stability, it must design for participatory governance: publish clear boundaries, support community infrastructure, and avoid sudden shifts that force the audience to legislate reality conditions in public.

X. Conclusion

Pop culture is one of the largest environments where shared interpretation is produced and contested in public. At mass scale, it stabilizes baselines, trains decoding habits, and distributes legitimacy narratives about what counts, what is earned, and what belongs. The visible conflicts surrounding franchises, endings, canon disputes, meme mutation, and fandom enforcement are not only taste wars. They are governance demand expressed through the tools available.

The structural driver is participation under asynchrony. As audiences expand across platforms, time zones, and remix channels, meaning production accelerates while shared constraints weaken. When a baseline becomes non-viable, communities compensate. They build continuity infrastructure (wikis, timelines, explainers). They invent norms (spoiler rules, tag systems, moderation). They extend the system (fanart, fanfiction, cosplay). When repair paths feel absent, they escalate into enforcement because consequence becomes the fastest available stabilizer.

This is why pop culture is not trivial in the MSS canon. It is a public laboratory for Meaning-System Governance. The same dynamics now appear in institutions, workplaces, and AI-mediated platforms: distributed authorship, continuous reinterpretation, and legitimacy contests without shared comparators. Pop culture shows the pattern early because the systems are visible, high-volume, and emotionally consequential.

Effective interventions are rarely abstract. Publish reference conditions clearly and maintain them consistently. Protect a shared decoding key so new material stays readable without renegotiating fundamentals. Resource continuity and correction work as infrastructure rather than cleanup. Design participation conditions that preserve integration capacity. Provide repair paths and adjudication norms so disputes do not default to coercion. Use synchronization rituals intentionally when scale would otherwise fracture baselines. Preserve provenance and context so interpretation is not forced to guess origin conditions.

At scale, meaning is no longer authored only by creators. It is co-authored by participants. The question is not whether participation will shape the system. The question is whether the system will give participation stable structures to operate inside.

Citation

Vallejo, J. (2025). Monograph C3: Pop Culture as Meaning Systems. TMI Scientific Monograph Series. Transformation Management Institute.

References

• Althoff, T., White, R. W., & Horvitz, E. (2016). Influence of Pokémon Go on physical activity: Study and implications. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 18(12), e315.

• Baumann, F., Arora, N., Rahwan, I., & Czaplicka, A. (2025). Dynamics of algorithmic content amplification on TikTok. arXiv (2503.20231).

• Benioff, D., & Weiss, D. B. (2019). Interview on final episode counts and series length framing. Entertainment Weekly.

• Carpenter, N. (2025, November 27). Expedition 33 Maelle actor Jennifer English chooses her favorite ending. GamesRadar+.

• Carpenter, N. (2025, December). Expedition 33’s director reveals it isn’t just the fans arguing over which is the “good” ending. GamesRadar+.

• Cavallaro, D. (2006). The Anime Art of Hayao Miyazaki. McFarland.

• Clark, M. D. (2020). DRAG THEM: A brief etymology of so-called “cancel culture.” Social Media + Society.

• Denison, R. (2011). Anime tourism: Discursive construction and reception of the Studio Ghibli Art Museum. Japan Forum, 23(1).

• Denison, R. (2023). Studio Ghibli: An Industrial History. Palgrave Macmillan.

• Delwiche, A., & Henderson, J. J. (Eds.). (2013). The Participatory Cultures Handbook. Routledge.

• Ebert, R. (2012, December 14). Hayao Miyazaki interview. RogerEbert.com.

• Frank, A. (2025, May 13). The steampunk game that died so Clair Obscur could live. Polygon.

• Gach, E. (2025, May 12). Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 interview with narrative lead Jennifer Svedberg-Yen. TheGamer.

• Jenkins, H. (1992). Textual Poachers: Television Fans and Participatory Culture. Routledge.

• Masuda, J. (2019, June 28). A message for Pokémon video game fans. Pokémon.com.

• Milner, R. M. (2016). The World Made Meme: Public Conversations and Participatory Media. MIT Press.

• Mittell, J. (2013). Wikis and participatory fandom. In The Participatory Cultures Handbook (pp. xx–xx). Routledge.

• Napier, S. J. (2018). Miyazakiworld: A Life in Art. Yale University Press.

• Ng, E. (2022). Cancel Culture: A Critical Analysis. Palgrave Macmillan.

• Niantic. (2018, January 12). Introducing Pokémon GO Community Day! Pokémon GO Live.

• Niantic. (2018, December 11). Thank you for an exciting year of Community Day events. Niantic.

• Niantic. (n.d.). Visiting PokéStops and Gyms. Pokémon GO Help Center.

• Nissenbaum, A., & Shifman, L. (2017). Internet memes as contested cultural capital: The case of 4chan’s /b/ board. New Media & Society, 19(4), 483–501.

• Phillips, W., & Milner, R. M. (2017). The Ambivalent Internet: Mischief, Oddity, and Antagonism Online. Polity Press.

• Pokémon Database. (n.d.). Type chart: Strengths and weaknesses.

• The Pokémon Company. (n.d.). Pokémon types and type chart. Pokémon Portal.

• Ronson, J. (2015). So You’ve Been Publicly Shamed. Riverhead Books.

• Shifman, L. (2013). Memes in Digital Culture. MIT Press.

• StarWars.com. (2014, April 25). The legendary Star Wars Expanded Universe turns a new page.

• Ars Technica. (2014, April 25). Lucasfilm makes it official: New Star Wars films ignore Expanded Universe. Ars Technica

• Vanity Fair. (2020, September 21). Daisy Ridley Says Star Wars Almost Revealed Rey Was Obi-Wan’s Relative. Vanity Fair

• Stuart, K. (2025, May 6). Clair Obscur: Expedition 33’s director found its composer on SoundCloud and lead writer on Reddit. PC Gamer.

• The Game Awards. (2025). Winners list and category pages. The Game Awards.

• Wiggins, B. E., & Bowers, G. B. (2015). Memes as genre: A structurational analysis of the memescape. New Media & Society, 17(11), 1886–1906.

• Williams, T. C. (2020). Thomas Chatterton Williams on race, identity, and “cancel culture.” The New Yorker.

• Wired. (2017, December 20). Reporting on alleged user-review manipulation dynamics and platform incentives. Wired.

• Wookieepedia. (n.d.). Canon policy.

• Wookieepedia. (n.d.). Holocron continuity database.