The evolution of social media self-consciousness

From Brett Borders’ brief history of social media to Jeremiah’s Owang’s five eras of the social web, the evolution of social technologies is well documented. However, there’s still little examination into how the motivations behind social sharing have changed; and there has in fact been a steep growth in the self-consciousness of our brand-based word of mouth online.

Categorising social media participants as the professionals, the paid, and the plebs has become inadequate. The activity of all three groups is becoming highly diffuse and complex. Online journalists often have a personal blog and other presences unaffiliated to their media mothership; PRs no longer stick to the company blog but tweet and comment on others’ posts too; and as industry players add brands to their consulting portfolio, their case studies and criticisms lose objectivity. The mingling of personal and professional selves is social media’s calling card, and it is making the career conversationalists increasingly difficult to define.

The second tier – ‘paid’ but not ‘professional’ voices – is undergoing the biggest change. In a recent Wall Street Journal article Mark Penn calculated that 1.7 million American bloggers are profiting from their work, with 452,000 of those using it as their primary source of income. Although questioned by some, his numbers carry the startling implication that the ‘independent consumer’ is disappearing under a mountain of advocates-for-hire. Advertising on your blog, or indulging in a spot of pay-per-post, used to be seen as a cash-boosting sideline, but combining different sorts of corporate sponsorship is now becoming a viable career in its own right. Moreover, thousands of people are approaching social media as a personal marketing machine. Although these individuals-as-microbrands may not yet be profiting from the content they share, they are keenly aware that their voice is their currency: what they say and do builds their future value in the social media marketplace.

Even blithely oblivious users are becoming aware that recommending a product might lead to a freebie, or that publicly criticising their employer online could jeopardise their job . Sure, there are innocents out there who still haven’t checked their Facebook privacy settings and who discuss products without a thought for who might be listening, but they’re being offset by the millions approaching social media in a much more self-conscious way.

So where does this leave marketers? Far from making the case for sponsored conversation, the ubiquity of subtly incentivised WOM makes the opinions of independent, passionate individuals and fiercely autonomous communities more vital to both their peers and brands. Clearly, different sorts of word of mouth – brand produced, brand sponsored, and determinedly independent – hold different value, and the distinctions between them need clear articulation. The foundation that underpins the word of mouth marketing industry – the evidence that consumers trust peer to peer conversation above all else when deciding whether to buy into a brand – is predicated on maintaining a clear boundary between advertising-by-any-other-name and unpaid, critically unfettered collaboration.

Our lives have always been forged from conflicting alliances and multiple selves – just look at your average dinner party – but this mixture of uninhibited and self-conscious behaviour gives online ‘transparency’ a whole new meaning. The lines dividing what is authentic and what is not will continue to blur, and brands need a clear understanding of the type of advocacy and relationships in which they want to invest.

Brought into the world on Wednesday, June 10th, 2009 and filed under Uncategorized.