Hey, have you heard the news?
I have a new website! It's called Cash and Joy and its mission is to increase the awesomeness of the world - of course - through glorious and meaningful marketing.

Why did I focus on marketing? Because marketing can be the most fun and meaningful activity of your business instead of the most dreaded and icky... if you do it right.

Aftermath of heresy, part 1: Questions about social media

So yesterday I blurted out a highly emotional post about social media and what I described as the big lie: Anyone with 10,000 followers on Twitter will not be your buddy.

I wrote, with very strong NSFW language, about some specific events that I had experienced recently and how I felt about them.

Lots of people (including two of the people I had named), commented to agree with me. A few disagreed with me. And one of the people I named was hurt, and thought I was using objectionable tactics to get the attention of the people that, you know, I was writing about desiring the attention of. (I wasn’t doing so consciously. But on some level he’s probably right.) The comments are really interesting, and worth reading.

From this post and its 64 comments, I have a few thoughts.

Seemed like a good idea at the time…

I wish I hadn’t written the post. No, I’m glad I did. I wish I hadn’t tweeted it. No, glad I did! My grandchildren and employers and posterity can read it and that’s bad. No, it’s great! Worst thing I ever wrote. Best thing I ever wrote!

Argh.

There is a part of all of us that is incredibly naive. That always, always thinks that it’s going to work out for the best, that doesn’t see the need for the seatbelt, that stands there in the rubble saying, “How did that happen?” And it has a partner: the voice that will say incredibly ugly, mean, hurtful and selfish things, because we’re thinking them.

These are a part of me. They’re a part of you. So what do we do with those parts of ourselves?

Do we drown our inner voices as wrong and bad?
Do we choose our audiences oh-so-carefully, and target parts of ourselves accordingly?
And how does that mesh with the ideas of “authenticity”?

The inner voice speaks

That post was so very, very emotional because it was about thoughts I’d been having for months and suppressing. In the first six hours of aftermath, where the comments were positive, I felt about 10kg lighter. I’d Gotten it Off My Chest. I was back to my usual self: impossibly cheery, liking everyone, enjoying the interactions. I’d purged the bile that was choking me and I felt better. It was all okay.

And then someone felt hurt and it got complicated and fraught and oh-so-human. Should I have not published it? Just writing the post didn’t make the feelings go away. It was expressing them to the world (and, specifically, to the people I was thinking about) that brought the intense relief.

Did I have the right to do that? To publically air my dirty laundry, to specifically name people and tell them I’d done so? Are my feelings enough justification to say whatever I want? And if they aren’t, what do we do with them?

Targeted authenticity

That post was authentic: it was my thoughts, expressed in the way I thought them. It was ugly, and forceful, and mean, and honest. There are ways in which I could have tailored the message: a different forum, a selected audience, toned-down delivery. I’ve used them before. I did not use them this time. Does that make me a hero for authenticity? A bold voice in the wilderness, saying That Which No-one Hath Dared Say? Or just a really public asshole?

Depends on who you ask, apparently. Maybe all of them.

How do you reconcile the desire for complexity, to be a fully-realised human being, with Brand Me? Brand Catherine is the happy smiling face, the cheerful over-user of the word “awesome”, the helpful chatterer. Brand Catherine never talks about anything ugly. And Brand Catherine leaves the other 5% of me, the selfish grasping petulant sensuous imperfect depressed and irritating parts, with nowhere to go.

It used to be said that for this purpose you had a personal blog. Somewhere to talk about your haemorrhoids and phobias and your vulnerable, imperfect, human side. But does that work in the new 2.0 world? In the world of transparency, social media, personality marketing, authenticity… does that require that all of you be on show? Or are we all playing roles, carefully contructed personas, with all the bad stuff happening behind the facade? Oh, we can talk about bad events in web 2.0. But bad thoughts, bad feelings? Do we just all pretend that we never wanted to shove someone into traffic so they’d stop yammering at us?

And if so, what does that say about the relationships we form there?

I have no answers. I would love to hear yours.

  • http://www.ubervu.com/conversations/www.beawesomeonline.com/questions-about-social-media-part-1 uberVU – social comments

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by CatherineCaine: Aftermath of heresy, part 1: Questions about social media http://is.gd/ahJT3...

    [WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment’s server IP (174.129.78.58) doesn’t match the comment’s URL host IP (174.129.41.174) and so is spam.

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    Wow. Umm, I have no answers. I feel like this sometimes – I've run into a few people who I feel are doing other burlesque performers a disservice through unprofessionalism, but knowing the scene just naming them would cause more drama without anything being solved! Hell when I spent a couple of months last year calling out subtle racism people got very personally upset and I didn't even name them! so i suppose it depends on what you want to achieve and what you're willing to live with. Rock and a hard place. :

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    How do you keep the balance? I've seen you continue to write interesting posts about racism and privilege, but I'm guessing you see a lot of stuff and don't talk about it.

    Where do you put your frustration?

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    A lot of stuff ends up being rants on Facebook or to my friends (usually my
    long-suffering boyfriend, who has no idea how the burlesque scene works and
    spends his time coding!). I sometimes feel a tinge of a responsibility to be
    a whistleblower – “Be careful of volunteering for this Big Name, she'll
    totally fuck you over” – but it's hard when nobody wants to cause any more
    drama and people are too afraid to speak up in case they lose opportunities!

    I am a relatively “smaller fry” – while my work is different enough from the
    mainstream that being totally excluded by them may not be a complete
    disaster, I'm still connected and I don't know whether my thoughts would be
    taken so well. I have had big names tell me “be careful what you write about
    online” only because I said something that pissed them off. You can't even
    do a critique on the general scene without people thinking you're attacking
    them personally! Yet I hear so much bitching and gossip personally, I can't
    keep up with the politics. For a scene that's so caught up in not “creating”
    drama it sure has a lot of it.

  • http://earthnative.livejournal.com/ Nemo

    re: “Brand Catherine” …

    I know alot of people who use seperate names for the different roles in their life. Some may see it as deceitful (or mentally unstable!) but depending how it's handled, can be incredibly useful too. For my own experience, I found that making distinctions between “this is nemo, the guy answering the phone at work”, “this is nemo, dutiful son” and “this is nemo, the polyhugslut (my word, you can use it) and artist” can be tricky. otoh, calling those faces (respectively) Cameron, Owen, and Nemo, helped to identify parts of me to myself easier.

    (That said, I've since pretty much dropped the nomenclature distinction these days (for eg: going by 'Cameron' at work was mostly used when I was regularly handling direct customer calls). But I built up a frame work to identify and learn about different parts of myself, and that was the important thing (and so for example, last year I split my wiki contents into two seperate wikis specifically to re-leverage the distinction which had gotten a bit lost, and used that framework to classify stuff between them

    So, should you have posted, or not? Hard to say now, and too late to matter – this time. But learning from it is the key here – not just to avoid this SAME dilemma again, but to learn a general method of all such dilemmas… to post – or not…

    (I like how this now has a button saying 'Post as Nemo' …I feel to be approprate, there should be a 'Post as Owen' and 'Post as Cameron' buttons alongside… ;)

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    I too like using the ear of the Very Patient Partner. I would be a complete wreck without one person to whisper my demons to… :)

    Hard thing in a community as tight-knit as yours. If you blow the whistle on bad behaviour, how do you cope when you're right next to each other next week in a show? But if you DON'T, do you feel complicit because you didn't warn people?

    Stupid world with its unsolvable contradictions, mutter mutter…

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    Oh and I just saw the original post. Aww honey I can totally relate to the Cool Kids thing! It's in any scene really – there's a group that seems to be the center of attention, and while they sometimes interact with you you can never tell if they're just pandering to you or if it's sincere. Especially when money is involved.

    And the whole thing about affecting “your brand”…see, this is why I find the whole Personal Branding thing rather problematic. It assumes that dark shadow emotions like anger or fear or hurt are bad, unwanted, OMGS HORRIBLE, and that to ever delve into them is to commit yourself to disaster. But no one can be happy-go-lucky all the time. We are all able to be assholes, to be fearful, to come apart. And I don't necessarily think that's a completely bad thing. Yeah sure I might not want to talk to you (in the general) for now, but at least acknowledge that's what's happening and don't get up in arms about “OMG HOW DARE YOU CALL ME BAD I AM NOT BAD!!”. Shit happens and we're not perfect. Accept that people will dish it and sometimes you will have to consider taking it, or at least acknowledging “ok, so you feel frustrated about XYZ about me.”.

    And hey, if it means a totally deeply emotional post on your blog, so be it. Why should it cancel out the fact that you have a keen eye on websites and can articulate what needs to be done? It might be a dealbreaker for some people, but it's not like Being Awesome Online OR the Cool Kids post is 100% you. We're all complex, with awesome and uncomfortable parts, and expecting people to be spotless is counterproductive.

  • http://website-in-a-weekend.net/ Dave Doolin

    I surf. They don't.

    Find your surf, don't worry about it.

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    “If you blow the whistle on bad behaviour, how do you cope when you're right
    next to each other next week in a show? But if you DON'T, do you feel
    complicit because you didn't warn people?”

    BINGO EXACTLY. And when some of those people are the ones that make the
    opportunities, and you're not quite in the position to be a
    competitor…WHARGH!

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    I am so many different Catherines. I really want to know if they can live together anywhere other than (as Tiara mentioned) in the ear of the Very Patient Partner.

    One of the premises of social media is transparency, and I'm not sure that's compatible with complexity. Can you be a totally genuine, 3-dimensional person online? Or must you settle for being six very niche people?

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    Sir, I bow to your simplicity. It is one of the many things that makes you admirable.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    It's part of the beauty (and the incredible furstration) of life that there are so few simple answers. This is why people join cults! Then as long as you have your potato, everything will be right in the end.

    I really want a potato. I shall have to settle for being a complex, flawed, inconsistent and problematic human.

  • http://earthnative.livejournal.com/ Nemo

    it seemed to get solved on the livejournal community pretty well, way-back-when…

    people would have their public livejournal, then they'd often have a second locked-to-close-friends-only livejournal, and maybe even a third 'nobody knows about it at all' journal… (and I know that wasn't just me!) …but livejournal was never pretending to have a 'professional' veneer. it was all about the personal.

    The new 2.0 social media has that professional veneer about though, but it has alot of the same methods that LJ and similar personal blogs brought about… and I think maybe we, as people, have brought some personal-blog-style baggage with us.

    I think you can be 6 niche people, as long as they aren't ENTIRELY segregated. (I mentioned my multiple wikis before… they're seperate by content, domain, etc. but they still refer and link to each other where needed)

    And maybe that's the key. It's not that you should or shouldn't be emotional or GAR at the world sometimes, or that if you are that it should be hidden and/or anonymised. Rather, they should both exist, but have a seperation layer… (to which there may or may not be adequate technological means to realise quite exactly how we want to… but… them's the breaks :)

  • http://earthnative.livejournal.com/ Nemo

    PS: I use LJ cos it's a convenient example, rather than because I actively use it for anything other than an openID login anymore… (hence the link from my name)

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    I haven't had lunch yet and now you've made me want chips. NOM NOM.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    Potato solves ALL problems, yum.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    That's a great structure for content. Not sure how it copes with the “I'm just one person on Twitter… or am I?” problem.

  • DarrenSproat

    Catherine,
    What a great post… and yes, my recent post applies here as well. How, if we want to express ourselves truly, authentically, do we remain helpful and not hrutful in all circumstances?? I am someone who tries to ooze authenticity at every opportunity and I have been called out on it a few times…

    Bottom line for me is the simplest of being your authentic self and that is being true to YOURSELF!

    I am reminded of two other posts of mine…
    http://blog.darrensproat.com/2009/03/14/be-your…
    http://blog.darrensproat.com/2009/04/26/are-onl…

    I don't know how pertinent they'd be today (both are a year old) but there may be something in there useful.

    Regards,
    Darren

  • http://earthnative.livejournal.com/ Nemo

    at current count I have… 4 twitter accounts… (admittedly it's a different dynamic, only one is “me”, the others are jokes/sub-projects/automatic) …but the same or seperation is viable, surely.

    (I cite 'amandapalmer' and 'afpwire' as two twitter accounts that try to keep a seperation… I can't comment yet on how well it works, since I only just discovered AFPwire…

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    Do you think we're incapable of being fully-fleshed people on the internet? It seems like a sad thought to me.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    I think they're still very pertinent. However, I think I may have decided that being COMPLETELY true to myself involves a bit too much 2-year-old-tantrum-throwing, so I might try being less authentic and more reserved for a bit and see how that goes. :)

  • http://earthnative.livejournal.com/ Nemo

    not at all.

    we are fully fleshed people that maintain seperate internal identities depending on context, be it home, work, the bedroom, talking to the bank, etc. The internet is just another context for which the right balance needs be found.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    But what is there that integrates and unites all those identities? Are they lonely little islands of Us-ness in the archipelago of Self?

    Whew, got a little pompous there.

  • The Dude

    Heya Catherine,

    Figured it was about time to post here, and since this is an important thing to you it gets to be number one.

    I absolutely think you should be able to say what you think and feel at all times.

    “It's not what you say, but how you say it.” I think this is possibly the best rule ever invented for communicating. Quite often people will take something we have said in the wrong way because of how we've phrased it or because our cluttered brain has decided to throw things in that we don't really mean. I think possibly you had a bit of that yesterday and the whole thing would have gone down easier if you had just gone back over it. Not, and I repeat NOT, to edit it, but just to change the format.

    I agree with the foundation of what you said, unequal friend time. It's not possible, no matter how awesome they are, to give as much to each of their 10,000 followers as the followers give to them. And I applaud you for pointing it out so that people in the future can be warned and settle with unequal friend time instead of expecting the same level of attention that they're giving.

    Rock it out, and be Awesome!

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    Oh you. Thanks and love.

  • http://earthnative.livejournal.com/ Nemo

    I think that's where the technology falls down. or at least, any automaticness of it falls down. It's just a matter of letting people know there are two YOUs on twitter. The cultural understanding is there for “this is me on facebook, this is me on myspace, here is my LJ, here is my twitter, etc…” I don't think it's much of an extension to double up some of those entries. “this is me on twitter if you care about my work and linksharing. This is me on twitter at a more personal level”. Perhaps that's how it should be too. You control the level of separation between entities (well, influence, perhaps). I use twitter at a conversational/personal level – so I'm happy with just the one there.

    And it need not be symmetrical either. To go back to my wiki example – both have a 'contact nemo' page, but the one on my formal wiki has a few limited contacts. It's a subset of the one on my personal wiki[16] which is a pretty complete 'how to cyberstalk me' howto guide.

    [16] my personal wiki is online[17] – it's not private. I have a third wiki on the desktop at home for actual private note taking. Nobody else gets to see that.
    [17] it's contents are google unfriendly however.

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    Thanks to you I actually did make potato chips for lunch!

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    Unfortunately people seem to have forgotten that, and expect you to project a certain identity everywhere on the Internet as though it was a monolith. Hence teachers being fired because there's a photo of them on MySpace holding an alcoholic drink. People nowadays can't get the distinction that we are all made up of different aspects of personalities, even though that's true for *everybody*. Our work self isn't always our school self etc. And it's not being unauthentic – it's just that certain environments bring out certain parts of you or enable certain types of operating, and some work better in some places than others.

    And while making the this-post-inspired chips this arvo, I thought about how the use of terms like “friends” on Facebook have really served to blur that distinction even more. Friends, in their pure form, aren't always plentiful; they usually come after a period of getting to know each other well. Probably about 90% of people we added as “friends” on Facebook and Twitter are mostly associates or acquaintances – but when there's a misunderstanding over how we define “friends” vs “connections” you get the unequal friendships and broken expectations, which led to your last post. I've had some connections break down because they expected me to be able to keep up with their personal life on Twitter or Facebook – yet I don't always hold such connections in as high regard as some personal friendships. But then the fact that trying to remove such a connection from your online sites for whatever reason is “unfriending” brings up such contentious emotions. Too personal!

  • http://ittybiz.com Naomi Dunford

    I agree with The Dude on the “I absolutely think you should be able to say what you think and feel at all times” front.

    Where I think it becomes troublesome is when we think being able to say what we think and feel immunizes us against the fallout from what we say.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    An absolutely excellent point. My (hopefully) final post on the subject talked about it: http://www.beawesomeonline.com/my-new-social-rules

    Enjoy SXSW!

  • http://kirstyhall.co.uk/blog/ Kirsty Hall

    With reference to having separate online identities, I think of all my identities as a kind of online performance but then most of life is a performance of sorts. They are like sub-categories of me – they're absolutely all authentic (I'm not a good enough liar to maintain fictions!) but they're not whole.

    So for example, the person I am on my blog doesn't talk about sex, while the person I am on my favourite forum makes dirty jokes all the time because that's what we do there. Both those people are still me – in fact, they're both more me than the me that visits my parents. Because that last one is an extremely edited version of me – so edited, in fact, that I hardly recognise her. I guess my point is that it's not confined to the online world and very few of us ever has a single uncurated self. You do have to both be a supremely confident person AND have a lot of real world power to never have to alter your behaviour around others.

    These are complex issues and we all need to remember that interacting online is still very new and we're all still working it out. So we're going to mess up sometimes. That doesn't make us bad people, it just makes us humans trying to work out something weird. And as I like to say, “we're all assholes”.

  • http://twitter.com/susanjohnstone Susan Johnstone

    Catherine, I have a TOTALLY different take on what just happened here for you. And I want to say – massive congratulations!!! Yeah, you heard me right.

    When you said you were doing Live Your Truth coaching I thought “AHA!” And I would say you can thank your coach for saying “do it” because you just had a huge breakthrough.

    Any journey toward more authenticity requires the reclaiming of “shadow parts” of ourselves. These are any parts of us that were not OK with our caregivers when we were little. We depended on these people for suvival and so if something doesn't go over well or get us looked after, we stuff it and say “I'd better never be that again!”

    And if your personality is mainly nice and positive and upbeat, then I guarantee you that your shadow parts are the complete opposite. Shadow is everything we would say we're NOT.

    The thing of it is this: we can never stuff these parts completely. They always find a way out. And when they emerge, they're about the emotional age they were when they were buried. It's like a puppy being locked in a closet for years and never getting to socialize with dogs or people. It won't have much finesse in that area when it gets out and it will also be pretty pissed off.

    And let me be clear here – we DO actually want to let every one of them OUT! They're buried in there with all kinds of energy and talent that we really need and they're always an anti-dote for the places where we've strayed too far into “nice” or “positive”.

    But they tend to come out with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer. And that's what I see going on here. I think, in your quest for authenticity, you just had a breakthrough – and you got back a whole lot of energy in the process – energy that didn't have much finesse to it's expression! = >

    The fact that you did it publicly kind of sucks on one level, but on another level it's brilliant, because now you have direct evidence that you can fully express this part of you and not die from it. And that's really all you need in order not to stuff it back down again.

    So now you can go about the much more gentle process of slowly integrating this part of you back into the core of “who you are” in the world. Personally, I think we're going to LOVE the Catherine that can do both “nice” and “bitch” in perfect harmony!
    (and you already know that I think your're awesome) = >

  • http://www.dodgymoviesreviewed.com/ Gareth

    You like dodgy movies and reference Terry Pratchett (even if it may have been inadvertant. I hope it wasn't but …) No wonder I like your blog so much.

  • http://blog.themerchgirl.net Tiara the Merch Girl

    Catherine's or mine?

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    I think in this specific case he means mine. The Pratchett was deliberate.

  • http://www.beawesomeonline.com/my-new-social-rules My new social media rules, and a revised heresy

    [...] Comments Catherine Caine on Aftermath of heresy, part 1: Questions about social mediaCatherine Caine on Aftermath of heresy, part 1: Questions about social mediaMaureen Carruthers on [...]

  • http://www.dodgymoviesreviewed.com/ Gareth

    Ooh. Next you're going to start saying _ing

  • http://www.dodgymoviesreviewed.com/ Gareth

    Well, both actually. Tiara's got a great looking site, even if it is a little pink for my taste.

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    Most of the time I'm comfortable with all the different Catherines, and changing personas to fit the audience and needs and mood. But sometimes I yearn for completeness. Even though I know that my asshole will have to be part of that. :)

  • http://www.BeAwesomeOnline.com Catherine Caine

    Wow. That's the most useful and interesting way I've heard of to refer to that part of myself. I feel much better and more prepared!

    Thanks, Susan. Thanks very very much.

  • http://www.beawesomeonline.com/the-lie-of-social-media The lie of social media – website heresy

    [...] more, including a saner and more balanced version of this post written two days later, please read the questions about social media, and my new social media rules and a more thoughtful analysis of a problem in social media. There [...]

blog comments powered by Disqus