How internet personas easily manipulate us
we keep taking the bait, but first let’s understand why
The internet has become a parallel universe over the past two decades.
With the rise of social media empires such as YouTube, Twitter and Instagram, branding your content at a globalized scale has become easily accessible to pretty much anyone. What was once known to us as a vast library of information in its early days, has since become something more and rather obscure than that.
Much like the throws of living in the physical world (or irl), the internet has encountered some of the tit-for-tat playground antics of injustices on a compact and virtual scale.
The beautiful thing about the internet which cannot wholly be replicated (irl) is the sense of security and safety that it brings. There’s a choose-your-own narrative to the life that you live in the digital universe. The option to block out certain advertisements or unsubscribe to content that frankly doesn’t appeal to us is at our disposal. Even more so, we are entranced with the pseudo-power that the screen permits us to feel, barricading our opinions from the people that we throw them towards.
Since the rise of YouTube in 2005, many online personas have appeared on the scene, some more controversial than others. If like myself you were born in the nineties and grew alongside the internet, then you’ve probably grown-up at an influential time with some of these so-called internet “celebrities”. For me, it started with the early days of lonelygirl15.
Remember her? No?
Oh boy, when YouTube first appeared. Lonelygirl15 (also known as Bree) was a vlogger who appeared to have a mundane life, but soon turned into a story of her family being involved with occult practices before their sudden disappearance. Bree’s vlogs were later revealed to be fictional, despite its audience being lead to believe otherwise. Speculation began in the comments section on whether or not it could be a hoax. Followers and fans alike would gather in online forums and suss out certain clues in her videos, eventually alluding to the grand reveal… that… it was in fact, all a hoax.
Lonelygirl15 became a web series that ran for two years and nothing more. It was just a little harmless entertainment in those days. You know, to see how one could easily reinvent themselves online. We all have a story to tell, after all, and in those days advertising wasn’t a huge commodity online as it is now. Since advertising wasn’t a thing on those platforms back in 2005, there was no real incentive to create a make-believe story, as nobody was being paid to do so.
The internet in its early days was — in my eyes — silly-putty. A bit of harmless fun for the entertainer and the viewer to engage in.
Though, as time has gone on, the ‘nets evolution has become a virtual reality-TV playground for the curious and the furious. If this were a virtual replication of Capitalism, then it is divided between the social influencer and the consumer; those who are paid for their content versus those that suck it all in.
Instagram is a prime example of how someone can find fame in fabricating an identity or brand, in exchange for wealth or fame. Some of the top-tier personas earn on average $670 per post on Instagram and $57K a year for a YouTuber with over 1 Million subscribers. Since these platforms are free, the way in which income is generated is through sponsorship and advertising. The internet personas promote material goods in exchange for monetary gains such as “freebies”, or beyond this, it becomes a salary for some.
But, how is this different from regular capital gains? …the exchange is the same, surely it cuts out the middle-man since most of these people work for themselves… isn’t that better?
Not necessarily.
Although a lot of our decisions are ultimately down to us, the insidious tactics of manipulators can pull the wall over our eyes more times than not. The feeling of a safe-space imitation barricade that our screen poses for us, can and is often invaded through various tactics without us even realising it.
Whether we think we’re supporting a certain cause, or showing empathy towards a particular struggle, tactics such as playing the victim, gas-lighting and clever marketing are often used to garner viewers attention to generate traffic.
Unfortunately, we live in a world ruled by monetary value. Internet personas thrive on how many views or followers their content generates, naturally because that’s their primary source of income. Some are even personally manipulated themselves by the prospect of wealth and fame, but since we’re focusing on the consumers in this article, lets dissect what it means for us, who encounter some of these phonies.
When content becomes formulaic, an easy way to get people talking about you again is to create controversies.
While it may be that some controversies are nothing more than an oversight dug up by trolls, a good way to identify a not-so innocent controversy is to see if a pattern begins to develop around said-person. You’ll find that the stars who are constantly under the radar and trending negatively on Twitter are often the most manipulative. They get away with this purely through fan-base.
Notable personas such as President Trump (though not a vlogger but a serial tweeter), Onision and Shane Dawson are to name but a few. I’m going to use the popular vlogger and twitch personality Eugenia Cooney, as a primary example here:
She started vlogging in 2012 at the age of 18. Over the years there was a notable decline in her weight, which lead her to be labelled as far as being “emaciated”. Controversy stirred an unexpected influx of viewers who sparked speculation over a possible eating disorder. A petition arose to ban her from YT for triggering young women by unconsciously promoting eating disorders, to which her response was met with a tear-filled video, stating that she “didn’t understand why people would ban her.” Time went on before she took a five month hiatus from social media. Upon her return, she appeared alongside social influencer Shane Dawson, who interviewed her about her time in rehab, to which she finally admitted to having an eating disorder.
Viewers were engaged in her story not for the fluffy content of makeup tutorials and try-on hauls, but the waiting-game she posed for whether or not she would see this disorder through to the end.
Her story has since become an ongoing controversy with her implied naivety that she wasn’t aware of what she was or is doing to her health and her viewers. Questions have since been raised, such as “Why isn’t her mom intervening when her daughters at risk?” since her mother is a notable guest alongside some of her videos, and the person she lives with.
All the while, companies send products to personas as such, enabling brand promotions while undermining the potentially triggering and hazardous content which affects vulnerable consumers.
Controversy = Traffic = Hits = Income or “freebies”.
People are easily manipulated in to watching how these peoples lives unfurl, all from the comfort of our own sitting. But why? Who… cares?
A lot of us thrive in having our say on social media, because confrontation is just too real face-to-face. Who needs that drama when you can safeguard yourself behind a screen? Much like reality TV where we are allegedly painted an unbiased story of a persons life (whilst being filmed), the same goes for internet personas. Sensationalism paints a rather indulgent story for some, giving rise to groups such as cancel culture and trolls.
We find it difficult to deny commentary when most of us live such uneventful lives. The safe-guarding space of our computer screens allows us the right to comment as we please, thinking we have a part to play in how others act, when the real person with power is sitting behind the camera making shit tonnes from your aggressive comments.
How can we break this cycle?
Sometimes our genuine concerns can go awry, leaving many people at a loss as to how they can stop to think past their anger or resentment. It’s these exact heartstrings of ours that are constantly being tugged for attention, that we find ourselves warped in to taking such baits, or speculating stories that simply aren’t true. Our involvement has become our self-entitlement. It’s really rather obsessive, addictive behavior to engage in.
All because it keeps us as viewers constantly mulling over every last tweet and hiccup that we encounter. Some (personas) are so good at it they have the wall over your eyes without you even realising it.
Why go through such efforts? surely the gains aren’t worth the distress of constantly being under the radar?
There is something to be said for having a sense of control in a world of chaos. People find obscure ways to feel in control of their own lives. For the internet persona, their sense of control rests in their audience. That isn’t to say every online persona is out to get you, of course there is genuine content out there which people make an earnest living from. This article is about being wise enough to spot a fraudster, and questions you should ask yourself before you become their primary source of income.
Don’t take the bait. Don’t become clickbait for these individuals who thrive on generating freebies and dollar signs at the expense of your frustration. It’s not worth being manipulated in to thinking or feeling a certain way about a fabricated story, or worse, being tricked in to buying things from these individuals. I believe we are becoming more aware as consumers, but its putting this awareness to the test and seeing that our expressed interest is valued by the person trying to sell to us.
Remember, we, as the consumer, have a fundamental advantage in terms of numbers, and its within this recognition that we can take back our thoughts and feelings which are being bartered.
