Youtube And Content Creators’ Self-concept

The evolution of technology has forever changed the landscape of modern communication and interaction. From past eras dominated by media such as newspaper, radio, and television, subsequent technological advancements has brought about new innovations, for example, the now ubiquitous smartphone. Such evolution of technology has altered the way we communicate, even birthing whole new platforms for communication and socialization (Baran, 2006). Humans are first and foremost social beings; there exists an intrinsic need for interaction.

Jones (2015) acknowledges this fact in her research on social media practices and its impact on users’ self-concept. The need for interaction and expression is easily satisfied by modern technology. The means to allow people to connect with others and the world is now at their fingertips, be it through television screens or through our smartphones. This advancement of technology coupled with people’s inherent need to interact and communicate with others gave rise to the dawn of the era of mass self-communication; testament to this era would be the infamous social media platforms we are familiar with today. 

Akram and Kumar (2017) define social media as an online platform which allows people to create social networks or relations on the internet. On these platforms individuals are able to interact with a variety of people online: friends, family, and even strangers who share the same interests and background. These interactions take place on various social media platforms some prominent examples being Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and YouTube. It is on these platforms individuals are able to post self-produced media and share it with an audience; it is an accessible avenue for interaction between content creators and content consumers. So much interaction takes place in this digital setting that it becomes its own community in itself.

These aforementioned pieces of information was made the main concern of Jones in her 2015 work. To delineate, the prior usage of the term “community” in the context of social media suggests the existence of a shared culture between media users — a culture developed through the social interactions, the socialization, that take place in these forms of online media. Socialization is defined as the process of internalization of norms and tradition. Based on this definition it may be deduced that the usage of social media directly influences individuals’ self-concept or identity directly. Jones took this deduction into consideration and further analyzed it in the context of the video sharing online platform, YouTube.

In the analysis of the effect of YouTube on its content creators’ self-concept, Jones utilized James’ (as stated in Jones, 2015) theory of the empirical self as a conceptual framework. This empirical self is made up of three aspects: the material me, social me, and spiritual me. Each aspect encompasses specific areas that make up an individual’s identity. By applying said theory into her methods, her results show that YouTube primarily has a positive effect on its users, specifically its content creators. In the context of the material self, it helped the participants see themselves in a better light. It allowed YouTubers to gain such things such as awareness in social situations and greater self-appreciation. For the social self, it provided users something to share with their viewers along with a venue to interact with others. As for the spiritual self, it allowed YouTubers to create an impact on a larger scale in the realization of something beyond themselves. Overall, I agree with the findings of the study; YouTube indeed has effects on social media producers. However, I believe that its effects are not completely positive. Though the good far outweighs the bad in this context, negative aspects undoubtedly still remain.

An issue brought up in Jones’ work was the existence of a discrepancy between the creator’s perceived self or self-identity and with how their viewers see them. Inconsistencies were reported to exist between how the participants see themselves and how others judged them. These aforementioned “inconsistencies” were defined and further discussed in Jung and Hecht’s (2004) research on the Communication Theory of Identity or CTI. In the context of CTI these discrepancies were defined as identity gaps. These are described to be a product of the interpenetrating frames of an individual’s identity. In the realm of communication, inconsistencies and contradictions within a person’s identity are inevitable. People are rarely ever consistent in all forms of communication they engage in, thus the existence of identity gaps. In the context of Jones’ work, the specific type of identity gap would be personal-relational. According to Higgen’s (1987), self-discrepancy theory such gaps leads to discomfort and even depression in individuals. This is because people start to subconsciously compare their “actual” or “ideal” selves, who they see themselves as, and their “ought” selves, what others believe they should be. In the context of YouTube this may be particularly true. Content creators with a big enough following or fan base may feel pressured to keep up with how their viewers regard them. Though the support from their audience may encourage YouTubers, it may also become the source of stress and negative emotions.

This idea was likewise expound upon by Simonsen (2012). He stated that this particular social media platform allows the user to change oneself dependent on the situation and context. He likewise acknowledged the existence of multiple selves in the realm of YouTube as a result of this. The content creator has control over the characteristics of the selves he or she presents to the audience. This is related to the symbolic interactionism theory. Goffman (1959) expounded on the idea of people acting out roles based on the way they are perceived by others. The version of oneself presented is dependent on which audience the individual is “performing” for, much like a character in a stage play. This suggests that the personality of content creators on YouTube are not entirely authentic; it is a mere performance for the audience. To reiterate, the self-presented online is the role an individual wants to be perceived as by others.

This goes hand-in-hand with the theory of the looking-glass self (Cooley, 1902). Individuals’ sense of self is based on their sense of how others view them. Judgement from other people, regardless of the level of intimacy of the relationship, is internalized by an individual and is used as a basis for identity development and construction. In the context of this paper, the self-presented by YouTube “personalities” was formed through the judgement and perception of their viewers. Through this dynamic, individuals online form their own cyberself or cyberpersonas separate from who they are in real life.

We are never free from the judgement and criticism of others and this especially true in the realm of social media. Content posted online is immediately available to the millions of people all around the globe — our thoughts, opinions, and of course, our presented selves are immediately available to appeal to their judgement. As there exists a discrepancy between how we view ourselves and how others see us, the online self or cyber self may be moulded accordingly to keep up with their perception, with our “ought” self, or who they believe we should be. It is as if we were acting out a role in a play. The version of ourselves we perform online is based on the judgement of the other. Though YouTube primarily has positive effects on an individual’s self-concept, one may not detach it from such underlying concepts that affect one’s identity. It is not simply a positive force; it has effects our psyche. In my opinion, it instils the idea of having to be someone else to appeal to others — something quite negative. This, however, should not encourage people from using YouTube to engage with others. Though I see a few aspects that may harm an individual, I must admit that the good truly outweighs the bad.

References:

• Akram, W., & Kumar, R. (2017). A Study on Positive and Negative Effects of Social Media on Society. International Journal of Computer Sciences and Engineering. 5 (10), 347-354. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323903323_A_Study_on_Positive_and_Negati ve_Effects_of_Social_Media_on_Society
• Baran, S. (2006). Introduction to mass communication: Media literacy and culture. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
• Cooley, C. (1902). The Looking-Glass Self. Philadelphia: Westview Press.
• Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden City, N.Y: Doubleday. Retrieved from https://monoskop.org/images/1/19/Goffman_Erving_The_Presentation_of_Self_in_Every day_Life.pdf
• Higgens, E. (1987). Self-Discrepancy: A Theory Relating to Self and Affect. Psychological Review. 94 (3), 319-340. Retrieved from http://persweb.wabash.edu/facstaff/hortonr/articles%20for%20class/Higgins.pdf
• Jones, M. (2015). The Looking Glass Lens: Self-concept Changes Due to Social Media Practices. Journal of Social Media in Society. 4 (1), 100-123.
• Jung, E., & Hecht, M. (2004). Elaborating the Communication Theory of Identity: Identity Gaps and Communication Outcomes. Communication Quarterly. 52 (3), 265-283.
• Robinson, L. (2007). The Cyberself: the Self-ing Project Goes Online, Symbolic Interaction in the Digital Age. New Media & Society. 9 (1), 93-110. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249689657_The_Cyberself_The_Self- ing_Project_Goes_Online_Symbolic_Interaction_in_the_Digital_Age
• Simonsen, T. (2012). Identity-formation on YouTube: investigating audiovisual presentations of the self (Doctoral dissertation, Aalborg University, Denmark). Retrieved from https://vbn.aau.dk/ws/portalfiles/portal/66761185/Phd_dissertation_Identity_formation_o n_YouTube_.pdf