Following and Followers and the Integrity of an Internet Identity

A terrible thing has happened to me; I have discovered Twitter Analytics.

I used to be so free... but now? Now it's all numbers of retweets and engagement...

There's nothing like validation, as I've discussed previously on this blog, and really there isn't. It feels good when lots of people like your work, and there's nothing like the satisfaction of sharing something that means something to you with other people, and finding that it means something to them too. But, as a blogger, tweeter, instagrammer (sp?) or anyone else with an online identity (so... just about everyone) we have to wonder whether our focus is really in the right place when it's on creating lots of followers/likes/engagement/etc.

Maybe I just don't get it. (I don't.) But I have a blog, twitter account, facebook account, youtube channel and I am an online instructor. Views/likes/follows matter to me. But though obsessive stats checking may have happened one or twice (daily) (hourly) in the past, I don't think it has ever helped me create better content.

The social media marketers of the world seem to believe that you can learn what people like and give them more of that. (Well at least that explains this latest Hobbit movie.) But there's a big danger here: it's easy to confuse popular content with good content. For example, I am quite sure I would get a lot more views on my blog and my youtube channel if featured more explosions, or cars. But that would not make my content any better. And it certainly would not make me more satisfied with my internet identity or of what I put "out there" into the world.

Now keep your knickers on! I'm not bashing  popular - I think popularity is often a good indicator of quality. However, I don't think that correlation is a simple one. Let me explain: I believe popularity is a good indicator of quality over time. In other words, quality correlates really well with enduring popularity. But in the short term? Maybe yes, and maybe no. I'm not sure.

Let's be serious for one moment. According to Ryan and Deci (2000), humans have three basic psychological needs: autonomy, relatedness, and competence. Autonomy means the right to self-determination; I see it a lot as the right to be authentically oneself. Relatedness means friends, community, other people; I see it as love in all it's wonderful forms. And competence means a feeling of being good at something; I see it a lot as the feeling of being an effective agent in the world (or at least in one small part of it). Yes, these three needs cuddle up close to each other and overlap, just as thirst and hunger might.

The question that I think we have to be asking ourselves is: how well do our creations, be they online content, writing, art, research, or other, feed these needs? As a content producer, you should be authentic, you should feel autonomous about what you produce (i.e., you are writing/creating content that is meaningful to you). The idea of relatedness means that we are trying to somehow, somewhere, on some level relate to others (i.e., sharing it should be rewarding from the sense of connection it brings). And the idea of competence means that you should feel like what you create is darn good (i.e., kind of like I feel about what I have to say on this blog).

This is a big topic, and there's a lot to say. Stay tuned for more, next week.