Looking at my personal favourite artists on Twitter and Instagram, I can now see things that I would never have seen. Unless, of course, you count those ridiculous three page spreads in a magazine, emphasising the ‘downfalls’ in the celebrity going to the grocery shops looking like a normal human being. I recently started following Patrick Stump, lead singer of Fall Out Boy. He, like his other band members post pictures of professional matters such as concerts and interviews. But I can also see things such as pictures from their harmless fun at parties to more personal images such as pictures with their partners, being lazy in their pyjamas and everyone’s favourite, no make-up! If you ask my opinion, I don’t think it is a big deal. It is refreshing and it shows that the artist has no shame in being a real person.
However, Page (2011) wrote a statement questioning speaker authenticity on Twitter. Page (2011) suggests in their work that the celebrities we see online are still not being their true selves, regardless of how personal the post may be. She writes ‘unlike the Friend networks on Facebook, where the members usually know each other in the offline world and where authenticity is strongly encouraged, there is no guarantee that the celebrity tweets are written by celebrities themselves’ (Page 2011, p.97). She continues on to say that it seems as though teams of people write tweets for the celebrity. This statement poses many difficulties. Firstly, she is suggesting that celebrities are not really being their true selves, fooling the public into thinking that celebrities are finally opening up to show the world they are average people. But most importantly, she is suggesting that peoples personas on Facebook are real and our ‘friends’ on Facebook truly know the identity of the person they interact with online, which is the exact opposite of my argument.
But what is the point of calling someone a ‘real person’ if they are going to use their online profiles to be dishonest? I have seen this occur in so many cases on Facebook, so many in fact, that it seems almost ridiculous to say that I even know the person anymore. But in the cases where I have known the person for years and I know their true self, I then compare their online profile to my knowledge, and I know that they are lying. Every person has the right of privacy, however, when the online profile of the person is completely different to their real self, you start to question their honesty and decency. I, like many others, use my Facebook to interact with people I know. But isn’t it unfair to say ‘This is my Facebook. This is my life. This is me’, when your ‘friends’ only get to see half of what you are actually doing in your life? Does it make you two-faced?
I can already think of thousands of examples of people I have as friends on Facebook and I know that their online identity is untrue. One example is twin girls I know who I met through a Twin club when I was a toddler. Being a twin myself, I know how online identities and interaction between the siblings can be represented one way, when to be honest, the personalities and interactions of the twins offline can vary to such a degree. Both girls love to show their love, affections and playfulness to each other to all of their friends and family. But having been on holidays with their family and knowing them since I was three years old, I know that those two fight like cat and dog! To further explain, one of the twins is very girly, open, rebellious and wild. The other is quite shy, mysterious, but when she gets comfortable, she becomes more open. But when I look at both of their Facebook profiles and status updates, they share similarities. Both girls do not share many photos and they treat each other in a respectful manner. However, the open twin posts many things about how she is feeling, while the other twin shares funny memes and comments on posts. Similarly, my twin and I are the same. My twin is more open on Facebook while I mostly share memes and random thoughts. To conclude, most people, not even twins, show their true identities on social media. In saying all of this, I’m not denying the fact that I keep some things in my life private. I do not have anything to be ashamed about. But there are some things which the world does not need to know.
To further prove my point, research conducted by Zhao ( ) supports my statements and experiences. Zhao (2008) conducted a study to investigate online identity construction on Facebook. Results showed that ‘Facebook users sought to make certain implicit identity claims aimed at generating desired impressions on their viewers especially in terms of the depth and extent of their social ties’ (Zhao 2008, p.1825). The ‘About me’ section on Facebook was also used for the experiment. Results showed that most people kept the descriptions brief and vague. For example, one participant stated ‘What you see is what you get, 50% of the time’ (Zhao 2008, p.1826) and another said ‘It’s for me to know and for you to find out’ (Zhao 2008, p.1826). The amount of photos posted and profile picture choices were also examined. On average, users displayed 88.4 pictures with an additional average of 4.5 photo albums on the account. Most pictures were ‘group pictures, showing a user having fun with his or her friends’ (Zhao 2008, p.1827). Single person pictures were rarely seen. Even profile picture photos did not show a single person. Only 42.9% of the users had a photo of just themselves, 38.1% showed two or more people in the picture, 14.3% showed an avatar and 4.8% had a blank profile picture. This study shows that there is more secrecy and privacy by users on online profiles more than that they show in real life situations.
.jpg)
Going back to celebrity personas in the virtual world, Page’s (2011) may very well be true about other people posting on behalf of the celebrity in some cases, but in others, it is quite clear that the celebrity is posting personal details out of their own will. The most recent example everyone can remember is the story of Angelina Jolie and her decision to have a double mastectomy. As the story goes, Jolie announced three weeks after her procedure that she had undergone surgery to remove both breast to improve her chances of developing breast cancer, since her chances were above 80%. She was the first person to tell the world of her news. Not the paparazzi, but Angelina. The news was released when she was ready, when she ‘decided to be proactive’ (Kluger et al 2013, p.1). There are any other stories where celebrities have announced their news without paparazzi speculation first. Celebrities are beginning to announce publicly topics such as marriage, pregnancy and tour plans without having to be interviewed first.
Lots of celebrities post things honestly to engage with their fans more, but I do question the purpose of social media for some celebrities. Is everything they’re posting true? Is it pure? Or do they really just want to make more money? Well, Casserly (2013) seems to think so. She argues that celebrities are using social media to endorse products. She began to speculate after ‘Kim Kardashian's denied rumors she makes $10,000 a tweet’ (Casserly 2013, p.1). Regardless, I think celebrities just use social media to make more money. I feel that when I see a post by my favourite celebrities they are being genuine and honest
Celebrities are not the only people that have had a reputation of hiding their personal lives to the public. People like you and me most likely do the same. Celebrities, just like everyone else would like the opportunity to keep some information from their lives private. But many celebrities are now posting information or photos before the paparazzi can get a chance, or just in their own personal time because they want to share how they live an average life just like everyone else. It makes perfect sense to me. If I was a celebrity, I would probably do the same thing. I would get in before the paparazzi do. Joke’s on them.
References
Casserly, M 2013, ‘What Does Celebrity Shilling Look Like In A Post-Snooki Age? Adly Speaks Up’, Business Source Complete
Kluger et al 2013, ‘The Angelina Affect’, Time, vol.181, no.20, retrieved 22 September 2013, http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?sid=4fa7f3cc-7398-4b0e-bf7e-28d4bb6557a7%40sessionmgr104&vid=1&hid=102&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=a9h&AN=87708475
Marshal 2010, ‘The Specular Economy’, Society, vol.47, no,6, retrieved 22 September 2013, https://d2l.deakin.edu.au/d2l/le/content/143750/viewContent/1985498/View
https://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&site=imghp&tbm=isch&source=hp&biw=1241&bih=584&q=angelina+jolie+double+mastectomy&oq=angelina+jolie+dou&gs_l=img.1.0.0l10.4684.9968.0.12668.18.16.0.2.2.1.304.2415.4j6j5j1.16.0....0...1ac.1.27.img..6.12.1194.TFYLwO-WOgo#hl=en&q=patrick+stump+pyjamas&tbm=isch&imgdii=_
Page, R 2011, ‘Stories and Social Media: Identities and
Interaction’, Taylor and Francis
Zhao et al 2008, ‘Identity
Construction on Facebook: Digital Empowerment In Anchored Relationships, Computers In Human Behaviour, vol.24,
no.5, retrieved 6 October 2013, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563208000204
