Facebook Gifts rolled out after a two-month beta last week, seamlessly melding social with shopping. Not to be outdone, Amazon recently released its Friends and Family Gifting option with the same kind of social gifting visibility.
For Facebook, another puzzle piece of its business model falls into place. For users, gift giving becomes by default a public rather than private activity: People can now fluidly and visibly give their friends holiday presents ranging from iTunes cards to Chandon champagne.
For our culture, however, an era of subtlety and “secret” Santa gives way to the era of reality TV. In many ways social gifting shrouds purchasing in a cloak of generosity, since the social streaming context removes the gaucheness of sharing these gifts. Yet these new social features also signal a culture where broadcasting our behaviors – whether gifting or other digitally shared activities – becomes the norm rather than the exception.
Digital social visibility doesn’t just turn our private lives inside out, though: It changes the choices we make, both online and offline.
Lauren Rhue is a doctoral candidate and Arun Sundararajan (@digitalarun) is a professor at NYU Stern School of Business, where they conduct research about how digital technologies transform business and society.
How so? Our research and observations here are based on analyzing visibility behaviors across a range of social platforms over the last three years. Our data includes over 10,000 users who shared more than a million purchases on Blippy across two years, as well as a recent sample of over 1,000 Pinterest users with more than 200,000 connections and close to a million re-pins.
I Anticipate, Therefore I Change
Social influence always seemed to flow from the person who makes the choice, to the people who observe it. But digital visibility reverses the direction and creates a new form of anticipatory influence: What we do is now influenced by the peers who observe us.
We anticipate how people might perceive us or react, and those anticipatory effects change our choices.
Facebook Gifts, for example, might make us think twice about and possibly revise our shopping lists. Because our gifts aren’t just between us and our loved ones anymore: They become part of our social Timelines, our online personas. They’re the future digital ghosts of our Christmas pasts.
Social psychologists have long documented how introducing passive audience observers into situations affects athletic performance, productivity, decision times, memory recall, and even the sunny-ness of our smiles. Interestingly, modifying what one does in response to an audience isn’t simply a socially learned human trait: Similar behavior has also been recognized in non-human species ranging from Budgerigars birds to peacocks to Siamese fighting fish.
So these audience effects are primal; they’re deeply ingrained in who we are. The underlying behavior we’re witnessing now isn’t new. Rather, social technologies are creating a broader and more visible digital public persona by letting us choose our audiences; expanding the audience beyond the individual or an intimate few; making the audience persistent; and transcending the constraints of space and time.
Consider maverick economist Thorsten Veblen‘s theory of conspicuous consumption, which formalized the idea that we make some of our purchases – particularly luxury goods – to advertise economic power and gain social status. Velben wrote his masterpiece “The Theory of the Leisure Class” over a century ago, when we could not transport our real-world social networks across all of our purchasing, gifting, and other consuming sites and moments.
But we no longer need physical and temporal co-location to realize the benefits of being conspicuous. We can now name-drop our Prada bag purchase or dinner at Masa instantly via a data trail or an Instagram picture … or through a Facebook gift in our stream.
Our audience might not be online when we do this, but they’ll probably see it tomorrow, next week, or maybe even next year.
Are You There, Audience? It’s Me, Social
Of course, the audience only matters if it’s actually there. But we don’t really know how many people see what we post on Facebook, which friends are online when, or what fraction of daily incoming tweets our followers actually notice.
This audience uncertainty is due to the absence of any real surroundings, environmental factors, and tactile cues for situating our digital visibility. These are the kinds of familiar cues that, according to sociologist Erving Goffman, shape our presentation in face-to-face settings.
One way of dealing with this audience uncertainty is to picture the group toward which we aim our shares, from whom we seek to maximize approval (or minimize disapproval): our imagined audience. When you buy your favorite employee a cool Facebook gift this holiday, it’s not just the gift recipient audience you’re playing to – you’re also orienting your largesse to other colleagues and maybe your boss too.
Digital social visibility doesn’t just turn our private lives inside out: It changes the choices we make.
The trouble is, you might get the audience wrong. Your audience might instead end up being your spouse or your employee’s significant other, who could misinterpret the intent of your gift. The fissure between imagined and realized audiences can lead to conflict or the feeling that our privacy has been compromised — even though our intent was social.
This is an example of context collapse: facing multiple and unknown contexts for each of our online shares. It’s the result of having a variety of relationships (including those whittled down to just “Facebook friendships”) with competing social norms on the same platform, along with the online data trails that persist long after we leave them.
Digital social visibility is therefore a double-edged sword: As we transcend the boundaries of physical space and time, we also give up the familiar anchors and cues provided in our face-to-face interactions.
How then do people deal with context collapse? By focusing on the small fraction of our network that does provide visible acknowledgement or cues in the form of likes, re-pins, and votes.
Context collapse is the result of having a variety of relationships with competing social norms on the same platform
The problem is that this approach, however, is that it also changes the products we buy. Our research reveals that people buy more in the categories of products for which they get more feedback.
We’re just beginning to understand the phenomenon of image management as commerce and networks merge. The implications are many: for advertising (how should businesses surface choices for gifting?), for measuring influence (Klout doesn’t even begin to capture tacit persuasiveness and cues), for privacy (losing contextual integrity of our shares); and more.
But for us as individuals, the implications go beyond just buying and gifting. Luxury purchases are only one aspect of conspicuous consumption; individual taste-based goods and services are another. You’ll soon – if you’re not already – spend more time hanging out at hip restaurants or rock concerts, monster car rallies or museums, benefit dinners or book readings. Not just because you want to … but because you’ll detract from your digital visible image if you don’t.
Digital Social Visibility: How Facebook Gifts Change Our Choices
This article
Digital Social Visibility: How Facebook Gifts Change Our Choices
can be opened in url
http://variationsnews.blogspot.com/2012/12/digital-social-visibility-how-facebook.html
Digital Social Visibility: How Facebook Gifts Change Our Choices
