Recently there has been a discussion if the owner of one of the social media platforms will be changing its logo. The “iconic” image is to be replaced with something new; undoubtedly this will also change in due course for as long as the medium is still relevant. Whilst people feel strong about brand representation that is something peripheral to what social media represent in recent years.  Social media for a long time have been accused of harboring the worst of human interaction, tolerating intolerable actions from hate speech to incitement to violence.  Is this however a fair representation of social media?  

We build/cultivate and imagine in social media. They are the key to our online identity and in some ways will explain our conduct with others. Some link different media together, so that you can check Facebook to get an idea of who they are, can check their LinkedIn on education and work experience, you can read their tweets/retweets, you can follow their conversations on yammer, you can get updates of their lives on Snapchat, check their Instagram to see their photos and for the more active ones TikTok where  communication is encapsulated within small video fragments. If you were to combine these social media together you can get a very good idea about a person without ever knowing them in person. Social media have ushered the era of virtual representation and people becoming clearer of how this representation works. Clearly there are those who thrive in these and others who struggle.

The ones who manage to use social media effectively can develop a personal brand and even become “social influencers”. A person that has influence over others to promote goods and services…to do so they have to build a reputation and social media works towards establishing just that.  Connecting different parts of social media works to their advantage as their profile works towards their credibility of being a “real” person.  The people who make it become the protagonists assuming the role of a hero, a modern-day prince/princess with a back story that is endearing.  Whilst they drip feed their story of adversity with personal details of some private aspects of their lives, they also provide their followers with the commodities that they promote.  I lost someone important to me, had a terrible experience at school, faced health problems but look at my stylish hat.  These are the cargo trousers I left an abusive relationship in, and my cropped t-shirt is a strong statement to being environmentally
sensitive.  Obviously, I deliberately exaggerate the statements here and in fairness no one will be (at least I hope) so deliberate in their product placement. What is very clear is that our social media influencers spend a significant amount of time building content and by devoting more time to that they need the necessary financial support. The top influencers have millions of people following them, a reach that
very few people have ever had before.  Never before, a young person offering make-up tips, a reality star or a dancer had so many people interested in their lives.  The very top of them have more than 500 million followers and we are close to the point that some of them will be reaching over a billion!  What started as a personal (cottage) industry of one topic issue, has evolved into an all-consuming enterprise.  The more the followers, the greater the demand for additional information.  The more information, the more  exposed the influencer becomes.  Then marketing follows as the reward.  The heroes of social media have to find ways to make an income and endorsing products seems to be the main way to do so. 

The kingdom of social media doesn’t only contain heroes; there are also villains in the story.  The people whose profile is not personal, doesn’t include any private details and who seem to have as their main focus to attack others.  The term troll appeared in the early 90s when online identities seemed to be separate from our social ones.  It was expected in a new domain that people will assume roles and whilst some went for the hero of the community others took a different turn. The early trolls under the protection of cyber identities hid their frustrations and brought to the community something we have in the real world, bullying.  The evolution of social media that requires a different presence and the rules the internet community tried to deal with them meant that some of the original forms of trolling started disappearing, but were never extinguished. In fact, they became an equally useful commodity, almost equal to the influencers.  Our heroes play the part of the product promoter; they look good and provide us with goodwill stories; on occasion when the appeal of the hero wanes, and people try to use social media to mobilise on social issues or promote alternative stories that’s when the trolls come in!
Out of their caves they come, trying to shut down conversations, mislead people and even intimidate  people into silencing them. 

This brings me to the main point of this blog; originally the internet seemed to be a worldwide  phenomenon that was all inclusive and slightly anarchical.  People found on the internet a companion, an ally, an adversary. It became a foundation for a virtual ecumenical community.  Well, that was until big business moved in and brought in their usual tactics. The cyber world became more like our physical world and the cyber identities were quickly replaced by professional ones.  At this point the internet is much more regulated and monitored than ever before. Which begs the question; how come there are so many accusations of misinformation, and intimidation now?  How come such a regulated medium allows bullying and intimidation to continue?  I am astounded even now to see on social media reactions on social medial about stories that do not simply lack social sensitivity they are intentionally inflammatory to coax reactions and offend people.  I am still astounded to see the political alliances of the troll army and their reactions to open conversations.  Therefore, it is not surprising that several minority groups have accused social media of doing very little to protect them from attacks and the use of pejorative language that has its place in a history of shame.  Maybe because social media provides a fairytale with princesses and trolls, they do not have the space for those who do not promote a marketed lifestyle. Life is  surprisingly diverse, and marketing is only one side of it.  Ignoring some of the bigger social issues, using
trolls to shut down the conversations our global community needs, will not do.  In academia the sign of a good debate lies in the ability to bring in evidence and support all claims with accurate and relevant information.  Some of our colleagues are trying to take some of their knowledge outside the classroom into social media; I salute them, as we have been trying to engage as much as we can, but I also worry that the actual model that social media is built upon also at fault. Maybe it needs some rethink; there is no question that we are all equal, but we do not all have the same knowledge.