Thesis Title: Subtitle

Seeing Patterns: Assessing the Authenticity of Facebook Self-presentation

Interestingly, when participants where asked if they could get an accurate idea of who someone was – if it was possible to locate an authentic or persistent self – from a Facebook profile, and their activity on Facebook, they all answered in the affirmative. For example, Andrea believed that while it might not be immediately apparent who someone was, she explained, “over the course of a year or so, you start to see (patterns)”.

Conversely, when participants were asked if someone else could get an accurate picture of them from their profile and activity, their answers were much more qualified. Andrea believes that her profile gives you an accurate picture of her “maybe not in terms of shyness or things like that”, but concerning what her interests and likes are. Andrea’s understanding that others’ view of her self on Facebook is qualified and limited is in keeping with Goffman (1959) who argues that the multiplicity of the self is such that it cannot be understood as a unified entity, but rather the self is only apparent when it is situationally invoked. However, participants’ responses which indicate that they believe that one can see patterns in others’ behaviours over time is much more consistent with the unitary view of the self discussed earlier in this chapter. This disjuncture is partially due to the internal-external dialectic, which I argue characterises most individuals’ experience of their self. Thus participants have a strong sense of their internal world as being private, separate and unknowable. The self is not unknowable because it is not unified, but rather because there is an aspect of it that is only internally experienced. Similarly, Bird believed that her profile gave others an accurate, albeit limited view of her self. She was quick to draw a distinction between the parts of her self that are visible on Facebook.

as a 'public' person, yes, they would know my kind of humour, my interests, things that annoy me. They probably wouldn't know what i'm scared of, how i see my future, what i think about my ex ... 2 sides of the same coin though, it's not like i have a split personality or anything.

So like Bird and Andrea, Brendon also believed that only the parts of himself that he chooses are visible to others:

People always try to project an image, but you can get to know more about them anyways…most people want others to see them in a particular way, and post things that will fit that image so if I want to picture myself as a big strong masculine man I won't post a picture when I am making faces into the camera with my friends…So no photos of me with a mohawk at a punk concert for my teachers or my students.

However, he acknowledges, like the people he observes, he also gives off implicit information in his posts, “Why would I be different from anybody else?” The self presented on Facebook, while it may be accurate in some respects is still a situational manifestation

– albeit one that is perceived as less complete by participants. As many participants
believed they could assess other people’s claims to authenticity via Facebook, I asked them how this could be achieved, given that their own self-presentation was often edited and partial. Participants use the structure of Facebook, with its continuous demands of self-presentation, as a way to judge other users’ self-presentation for authenticity.

Sean Sheep, for example, who is not really a sheep, never has a bad word to say about anyone. Someone I know personally, on FB is always leaping in and explaining things to people when really she doesn't know what she's talking about, some people always leave nice, kind supportive loving caring messages - in between the posts about shoes - so yes - you can tell…So their profile might show you one side of their personality, but not others, it's not even about personality, just about what you do, what you're interested in.

Participants, it seems, give more weight to the aspects of the self that ‘slip through the cracks’. They give more weight to the impressions that are given off, not given. While Sally may find it difficult to think of an example where people she knew behaved differently online, other participants such as Kathryn state that over time disjuncture between what people claim to be and what they do, emerge and that these disjuncture are an important way of asserting someone’s authenticity or whether they are projecting an ‘image’.

Participants understood this disjuncture as an expression of the ‘unconscious’ self. In other words despite one’s best efforts to present a particular identity on Facebook missteps occur. Kathryn explained that whatever picture one constructs from what happens on Facebook, even though it may be accurate it is still necessarily partial.

I notice a lot of people claiming to be something - like an environmentalist - when really all they are interested in is weight lifting - or fashion - you know after a time you build up an image from their posts.

This was similar to Marie’s experience. While Facebook helped her get to know some of her friends better, the perceived inauthenticity of self-presentation online was still a constraining factor.

Based on what they posted? Pretty much, depending. Some of them yes, definitely, because they’re very outgoing and very sharing. With others I would say I’ve got to know them better through chat. From what they post it’s similar to my appearance

on Facebook. Nobody can really judge someone on that base because basically you can post whatever you like. It’s the web.

So while Marie acknowledged that self-presentation on Facebook was generally accurate, the fact that these interactions took place online was seen as limiting to authenticity. This is similar to Carol, who likewise acknowledged that getting to know someone through what they do on Facebook was still limiting.

So, within certain limits, I think you can get a fairly accurate idea of someone especially if they post often and you've been friends for a long time (and even more so if you know them in real life as well), but I wouldn't say that you can always get a 100% accurate picture…I think Facebook content is not that different from what you'd talk about with your friends in real life... if I have a friend who's very passionate about politics, chances are she'll post about politics on Facebook as well and not about sandwiches.

Part of authenticity then lies in Facebook’s ability to link online self-presentation to an offline person against which one is able to falsify identity claims. This is similar to Zoe’s understanding of self-presentation online. Zoe emphasised that what is visible on Facebook is what might be visible to a casual friend or acquaintance, however this does not constitute intimate self-knowledge, which still needs to be obtained and disclosed in other ways.

I think it's pretty accurate really. They can see the band I've got up there and stuff like that. But yeah, it would be a very kind of acquaintance kind of perspective though, not like a really close friend kind of perspective, I reckon…Oh yeah. I think - yeah, I think so actually. You've got to be a bit perceptive. There was one before they [the friend] just posted about shit all the time. Yeah, well, they don't really have anything interesting to talk about normally. But having said that, I do know everyone who's on my Facebook page pretty well. The exception would be some of those more industry kind of contacts where what they're putting out on Facebook would be a very self-conscious view of themselves, I believe.

The self presented on Facebook in Zoe’s account is partial and distant but not inauthentic. Like Carol, Zoe’s perception of her friends on Facebook was verifiable due to her links to

them offline as well. This persistent link to an offline environment enables participants to argue that they are able to ascertain someone’s authenticity over time. So, while participants acknowledged that the self-presented on Facebook might be as ephemeral as the rest of the web this emphasis remained. The hesitancy to fully believe other people’s self-presentation on Facebook seems to be tied to the lack of corporeality. This reflects previous concerns associated with other earlier internet technologies as highlighted by Slater (1998) who argued that virtual identities trigger concerns about authenticity because they are not linked to a corporeal form. As Camilla has grown up with disembodied online communication in which identities can be fluid and multiple, it is understandable that this scepticism is also present in her assessment of self-presentation on Facebook.

Of course anybody can claim to be somebody they're not when they set up an online profile... and of course, most people are rather selective about what they post online (nowadays even more so than back when I first joined, although that might just be an age thing as well)...

This quote re-emphasises Facebook’s embodied qualities. Camilla is reticent about her self-disclosure on Facebook, not because she wishes to construct an identity that is separate to her embodied self, but because it is constrained by the connections she has offline that are also present on Facebook. Like Brendon, Camilla’s capacity for ‘authentic’ self-representation is somewhat limited by her friendship circle, as some of her ‘friends’ on Facebook are more professional than personal.

Participants believed that while self-presentation on Facebook was partial, and this was cause for some wariness, they are still able to locate an authentic self amongst this partial representation. I argue that this is because Facebook profiles are not like the disembodied avatars of identity that commonly populate the internet. Instead they are linked to a falsifiable body that can be located in space and observed over time.