Detailed programme
Deepfake Front Incursions and Harming the Apparatus of Self-Presentation
Jeroen Hopster
Jeroen is Assistant Professor of Ethics at the Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies of Utrecht University. He does research in technology ethics (within the ESDiT programme) as well as climate ethics (with a VENI grant). He coordinates ESDiT’s Conceptual Disruption research line.
For more about the research of the conceptual disruption line:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8q9l33TA8sk&t=18s
Most recent publications (2026):
Climate disinformation and moral distortion
JKG Hopster, C Martini
Environmental Politics, 1-21
Differential Disruption and Epistemic Injustice
J Hopster, M De Proost
Digital Society 5 (2), 17
Conceptual mediation in technomoral change: reply to Danaher and Sætra
JKG Hopster, J Rueda, R Hillenbrink
Ethical theory and moral practice 29 (2), 423-431
Defining socially disruptive technologies and reframing the ethical challenges they pose
J Anderson, J Hopster, B Lundgren
Technology in Society, 103216
Human Disenhancement, Socially Disruptive Technologies, and Legitimate Expectations
J Hopster
AJOB neuroscience 17 (1), 65-67
Digital Well-Being and Emotional Engagement: A Social Turn
J Hopster
The Future of Digital Well-Being, 48-60
The potential harms inflicted on individuals and groups of individuals through the creation and distribution of nonconsensual deepfake pornography are multifaceted. They range from straightforward reputation damage, to a plethora of mental health concerns, including, for example, feelings of shame, and diminishment in a victim’s sense of self-efficacy. Beyond individuals, deepfake pornography may also harm groups of individuals, most notably, individuals identifying as women. Deepfake pornography, like pornography itself, is a gendered form of entertainment, and may contribute to the normalisation of women as sexual objects rather than volitional agents (Öhman, 2019). That nonconsensual deepfake pornography can cause the above harms is sufficient for its moral outlawing. Simply listing the harms is, however, insufficient to the task of specifying the severity of the crime. Deepfake pornography does not merely threaten to inconvenience its victims, but may furthermore represent an attack on their identity. Specifically, it treats the digital image of another person as a means to an end, thereby infringing upon their “right to digital self-representation” (de Ruiter, 2021). The aim of the present paper will be to deepen this line of critique, and through that better conceptualise the full extent of the wrong in nonconsensual deepfake pornography. In this connection, a recent paper by Macalester Bell (2025) on the harm of nonconsensual photography will prove useful. Following Erving Goffman, Bell conceives of a person’s front (the public presentation of one’s self to the world) as fundamentally deserving of respect. For Bell, nonconsensual photography disrespects persons by undermining their control over this ‘front’. I submit a similar harm may occur through the creation of regular nonconsensual deepfakes, and that a still greater and more layered form of harm can occur through the use of another’s front for the purpose of creating sexualised synthetic content.