This paper explores the emergence of "Hybrid Cosmologies" within the digital practices of Siberian Indigenous communities as a strategy for navigating the "shifting grounds" of political and ecological uncertainty. Responding to the conference theme of "infrastructures of engagement," this study examines how digital platforms serve as alternative spaces where marginalized communities co-construct knowledge and assert presence.

The study argues that contemporary Siberian digital creators are engaging in Indigenous Data Sovereignty, effectively operationalizing the CARE principles (Collective Benefit, Authority to Control, Responsibility, Ethics) outside of traditional institutional frameworks. Understood here as the right of Indigenous peoples to govern data about their communities, this practice manifests as reclaiming the power to curate memory archives. However, the paper addresses the paradox of asserting such sovereignty on corporate platforms (YouTube, TikTok), asking how commercial tools can be repurposed into resilient infrastructures for public good.

Drawing on "decolonial computing" (Ali, 2016) and Kathleen Fitzpatrick’s notion of research in conversation with the public, the paper posits that social media functions as a networked medium that challenges static historical narratives. Engaging with Andrew Hoskins’ (2011) "connective turn," the analysis demonstrates how memory becomes a dynamic process of connectivity rather than a stored object. The research employs digital ethnography of content produced by key Siberian influencers, specifically the group Otyken and grassroots eco-activists.

The analysis distinguishes between "performative exoticism" and "deep revitalization." It demonstrates how actors like Otyken strategically blend commercial pop-shamanism with authentic linguistic heritage to "hack" recommendation algorithms. This "digital show" serves as a Trojan horse: capturing global attention to redirect it toward local crises (wildfires, industrial pollution). Ultimately, this paper suggests that these participatory practices are not just forms of resistance, but are actively shaping collective memory and identity, offering a model for how digital humanities can support ethical, community-driven scholarship in authoritarian contexts.

References:
1. Ali, S. M. (2016). A brief introduction to decolonial computing. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students, 22(4), 16-21.
2. Hoskins, A. (2011). Media, Memory, Metaphor: Remembering and the Connective Turn. Parallax, 17(4), 19-31.
3. Kukutai, T., & Taylor, J. (Eds.). (2016). Indigenous Data Sovereignty: Toward an agenda. ANU Press.
4. Risam, R. (2018). New Digital Worlds: Postcolonial Digital Humanities in Theory, Praxis, and Pedagogy. Northwestern University Press.