Does social media disguise or reveal our true nature?

Much is made of how we present a filtered version of our lives on social media. We share the glossy holiday photos on the beach, with no mention of the delayed flight and long drive to get there; the beautifully shot plate of pancakes, piled high with fruit and syrup, ignoring the burnt first attempts now discarded in the bin.

While there is certainly truth to the idea that we airbrush our lives for general consumption, in a recent article in The Economist’s 1843 Magazine journalist Derek Thompson laid out a more unusual argument: he claimed that social media allows us to reveal other sides of our personalities, things that we might not reveal in general conversation. Our penchant for comedy might come out in witty one-liners on Twitter. Our secret ambitions as an amateur chef might be revealed through our Instagram account. And then there are the more sinister elements of humanity that social media can bring to the fore; the thoughtless retorts, long strings of judgemental commentary under people’s posts, the backhanded ‘subtweets’*.

I believe the real story – as usual – lies somewhere in the middle: not everything we reveal on social media is artificial, but nor is all authentic. It is not even, as Thompson asserts, always a reflection of our deeper and darker sides. In one way, social media reflects our genuine tastes, interests, passions and lifestages – it’s just you have to go beyond the obvious to see it.

When it comes to brands and organisations using social media, activity has currently been almost entirely restricted to a two-strand approach: using social media channels to get their messages out into the world and social listening to monitor consumers’ opinions and behaviour. Brands have been using social listening tools to keep up to date with what consumers are saying about them and their competitors, and to inspire and create opportunities and content for their target audiences.

Social listening is not without merit, but it has a fatal flaw: 80% of social media users are listeners and watchers, not creators and amplifiers (Starcount Insights). Only 5% of users actually produce content themselves, but by listening to the 5% and judging them as the whole, brands get a skewed perception of the truth.

What’s more, as Thompson notes, often our behaviour online is altered to affect and impact what others think of us – or, ‘the mere knowledge that we are being observed changes what we say’. So, those people who are vocally active online are presenting a certain version of themselves, whether that version is entirely inaccurate or only a part of the truth.

In order to get to know your audience properly, you need to look at what people follow as well as what they say.

While we often monitor what we say online, softening our opinions for general consumption, we tend to only follow accounts that genuinely spark our interest. Consequently, looking at the unique combination of brands, celebrities and media titles followed by an individual reveals far more about them than monitoring the content of their tweets. Take politics for example: the majority of us shy away from expressing extreme (or even mild) political opinions online, not wishing to provoke unwanted animosity. When we do speak, we tend to be influenced by our own communities and curate our timelines to reflect our own opinions, leading to the echo chamber effect. Looking at who individuals follow, however, allows us to bypass that monotonous perspective for a much more varied – and honest – picture.

According to insights from my company, Starcount, politics is one of the largest passions on social media. However, by grouping people by their shared interests and the particular social accounts that they have in common, you can break that passion down to a granular level and see why and how particular individuals are politically motivated. For example, while two people might both follow a range of left-wing UK and US media titles, one might also follow celebrities who publicly express feminist viewpoints, such as Emma Watson, Caitlin Moran and Laurie Penny, while the other follows eco-friendly brands, organisations and influencers, including People Tree, Method, Caroline Lucas and Greenpeace. While these two individuals have a shared liberal approach to global events, their mindsets differ when it comes to key political concerns.   

This approach can be applied to any passion or interest, across social media. With a combination of data science and expert human analysis you can not only see that people are passionate about a particular subject but also understand why.

So, viewed in this way, social media can tell us more than most of us realise about our true selves – which brands we favour, which influencers have our ear, our impact on our fellow consumers, where and how we treat ourselves and what passions drive our purchases.

*Posting a comment on Twitter that refers to a particular user without directly mentioning them or using their Twitter handle – a digital way of talking about someone behind their back.

My company, Starcount, is working on a new data science of social intelligence to explore and understand customers' mindsets and motivations. You can read more about it here.

Follow me on Twitter at @Edwina_Dunn.