Difference between revisions of "Parasocial Relationship"
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
== History == | == History == | ||
| − | The formation of parasocial relationships can be dated back to the existence of humanity, as individuals formed bonds with popular figures both real and imaginary, such as politicians, gods, and spirits. Entertainment also provided a source of parasocial relationships as audiences bonded with their favorite characters in plays, films, and television. | + | The formation of parasocial relationships can be dated back to the existence of humanity, as individuals formed bonds with popular figures both real and imaginary, such as politicians, gods, and spirits.<ref name="Horton and Wohl Parasocial Relationships">[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00332747.1956.11023049 Mass Communication and Para-Social Interaction |
| + | Observations on Intimacy at a Distance].</ref> Entertainment also provided a source of parasocial relationships as audiences bonded with their favorite characters in plays, films, and television. | ||
| − | Despite its longevity, the term parasocial relationship was only coined by sociologists in 1956. They noted that audiences would act as though they were involved in a social relationship with their idols, despite never having met them. The sociologists initially speculated that this was due to a lack of social interaction, but this was later refuted. Today, the standard view on parasocial relationship formation is that they are closely related to friendship formation. | + | Despite its longevity, the term parasocial relationship was only coined by sociologists in 1956.<ref name="Horton and Wohl Parasocial Relationships" /> They noted that audiences would act as though they were involved in a social relationship with their idols, despite never having met them. The sociologists initially speculated that this was due to a lack of social interaction, but this was later refuted.<ref name="Horton and Wohl Parasocial Relationships"> Today, the standard view on parasocial relationship formation is that they are closely related to friendship formation. |
== Ethics == | == Ethics == | ||
Revision as of 20:20, 15 March 2019
Parasocial relationships are "one-sided relationship that can occur between a media user and the media being consumed.”[1] Parasocial relationships typically occur between a celebrity and their audience – for example, an influencer and her followers. Through a combination of physical performance (talking informally, addressing the viewers in a conversational tone) and digital performance (posting photos that encourage audience engagement, commenting on posts, etc.) the audience are led to believe that the presenter knows them personally, creating an illusion of intimacy.
Contents
How do parasocial relationships form?
The process to forming a parasocial relationship is very similar to that of a real friendship.[2] At the start of new friendships, frequent and regular communication “promote the reduction of uncertainty,” which in turn promote frequent and regular communication. Next, this “decreased uncertainty… promotes liking, or interpersonal attraction.” Finally, the positive correlation between interpersonal attraction and intimacy causes the friends to get closer.
This cycle is easily translatable to media, as more exposure to personalities reduces our uncertainty about them, increasing their appeal. As we grow to like these celebrities, we perceive ourselves to be in an intimate relationship, despite having never interacted with them.
In the information age, parasocial relationships are propagated by the changing nature of friend-like interactions themselves – rather than engaging with friends solely through face-to-face interactions, friends also perform themselves online, interact digitally with the online-counterparts of their friends by liking and commenting on each other’s’ posts, responding to messages and posting videos.[2] Many friends even limit their interactions to exclusively digital ones. Coupled with the fact that social media performances can broadcasted at any hour of the day on personal pages, audiences are more-frequently and more-authentically interacting with their personalities, increasing the prevalence of parasocial relationships. On the personality's end, performing friend-like interactions through posts, pictures, likes, and messages is far less labor-intensive than actual relationship cultivation, and they can use bots, social media assistants, and other services to perform engagement with their audiences to propogate the parasocial relationship.
History
The formation of parasocial relationships can be dated back to the existence of humanity, as individuals formed bonds with popular figures both real and imaginary, such as politicians, gods, and spirits.[3] Entertainment also provided a source of parasocial relationships as audiences bonded with their favorite characters in plays, films, and television.
Despite its longevity, the term parasocial relationship was only coined by sociologists in 1956.[3] They noted that audiences would act as though they were involved in a social relationship with their idols, despite never having met them. The sociologists initially speculated that this was due to a lack of social interaction, but this was later refuted.Cite error: Closing </ref> missing for <ref> tag view of performance, truth is a relationship between an actor and the audience; in Hamlet, though everyone knows that there are no such things as ghosts, audiences and actors both suspend their belief, acting and reacting as if the ghost of Hamlet's father were real in order to enhance their enjoyment of the entertainment. The suspension of disbelief is dependent on the audience's willingness to believe the actor, as well as the actor's ability to convey the emotional truth required in the situation. If a performance is good, audiences and actors are moved to emotional connection. If a performance is bad, the connection doesn't exist or is poorly forged.
When applied parasocial relationships, celebrities and personalities do not have to be literally true, however, they must be skilled at encouraging audiences to suspend their disbelief and instead believe that their interactions are genuine. For example, a YouTuber might be paid $70,000 to perform a negative review of a product. The success of this performed negative review depends on the YouTuber's ability to convey the emotional truth of disliking this product - and that nobody disclose that he was paid to do so. In this case, while MannyMUA was able to create a semi-authentic video performing his hatred of makeup product Lashify, news leaked that he had been paid handsomely by a competing company (Lilly Lashes) to do so, thus shattering viewer's ability to believe in his hatred of the product.[4]
The difference between a social-media performance and a theatrical performance, however, is that there are real consequences to social-media performances that go beyond a poorly forged emotional connection. MannyMUA received extreme backlash when news of Lilly Lashes' "sponsorship" leaked, and this in combination with other scandals ultimately led him to lose half a million subscribers.[5]
From this examination of parasocial relationships from a performance-ethics standpoint, we concluded that a "good" performance depended on (1) the influencer's ability to persuade their audience to suspend disbelief and (2) that no conflicting outside information emerge otherwise. Upon the emergence of conflicting outside information, the influencer's authenticity and credibility is shattered, thus resulting in alienation and loss of audiences. From this, we can further extrapolate that "good" influencers are able to put appropriate boundaries around areas of their life where emergent conflicting information may threaten to undermine their authenticity. In the next section, we examine some "good" and "bad" social media performers based on these criteria.
"Good" Influencers
These influencers tend to be intentional in the types of content they create. They are aware of their parasocial relationships with their audiences and ensure that no conflicting outside information can be used to sabotage their credibility.
Oliver Thorn / PhilosopyTube
Oliver "Ollie" Thorn is a British Actor and YouTuber of the channel PhilosophyTube, which explores everyday phenomena and social issues through a philosophical lens. Viewers cultivated a parasocial relationship with Thorn as an internet-friendly, humorous, and socially aware philosophy professor. Their parasocial relationship deepened when Thorn opened up in his video titled "Suic!de and Ment@l He@lth,"[6] in which Thorn explored the philosophy of mental illness and patient rights while revealing that he, too, struggled frequently with the will to live.
Following this video, Thorn's YouTube viewership and Patreon donations increased substantially.[7] Thorn later analyzed the parasocial relationship between him and his fans in a second video, concluding that YouTube is a performance. Thus, Thorn convinced his audience to suspend their disbelief that they were merely staring at a computer screen, and to instead believe that Thorn was a cosmonaut having a life-threatening suicidal breakdown in space or a YouTuber being interrogated by Scotland Yard officers for the crime of "deceiving" his audiences. The authenticity of these situations cannot be threatened by outside information because they were highly exaggerated to begin with - everyone knows that Thorn is neither cosmonaut nor criminal. Audiences instead connect with the emotional truths in those situations - feeling hopeless and overcome with depression or feeling conflicted and unsure of what truth means when one is a public persona - all while learning a bit of philosophy.
Natalie Wynn / Contrapoints
Natalie Wynn is a self-titled "ex-philosopher" and trans YouTuber whose channel similarly examines social issues through a philosophical lens. Viewers cultivated a parasocial relationship with Natalie through her penchant to perform as highly exaggerated and drag-queen-esque personas, as well as her highly-public gender transition. Similar to Thorn, Wynn uses the exaggerated approach, birthing characters with colorful hair, long nails, and outrageous attitudes to ensure that her authenticity cannot be questioned in midst of all of the exaggeration.
Marlena Stell
Marlena Stell is a makeup influencer and founder of Makeup Geek, an independent brand Stell created after experiencing frustration working with big-name makeup companies. As an influencer, Marlena cultivates a parasocial relationship with her audience by presenting herself as a relatable, confident woman trying to navigate the complexities of makeup, fashion, and life.
Stell is intentional about the parasocial relationship she has with her audience, aiming to promote authenticity and inspire all women.[8] She increased her authenticity by creating a video titled "My truth regarding the beauty community," detailing all of the dishonest, manipulative, and greedy tactics that influencers do behind their fans' backs with a logical, mature approach. Though Stell was attacked by fellow influencers, she stood behind her arguments, thereby performing consistency and integrity in her beliefs. Following this video, Stell gained about 25 thousand subscribers, indicating that fans resonated with her message and positively responded to their enhanced parasocial relationship.[9]
"Bad" Influencers
These influencers tend to not be as aware about the parasocial relationship they have with their audiences. They thus say, do, or create content that spurs controversy and undermines their authenticity.
Olivia Jade Gianulli
Olivia Jade Gianulli[10] is a 19-year-old influencer and daughter of famed fashion designer Mossimo Gianulli and Lori Loughlin. She recently came into the national spotlight after it was revealed that her parents had paid over half a million dollars in order to ensure her acceptance into the University of Southern California as a crew team recruit - despite never having done the sport. To do this, they bribed athletic coaches, standardized testing proctors, and even went as far as submitting pictures of Gianulli on a rowing machine to prove her competence in the sport.
Prior to the scandal, young, mostly-female viewers had cultivated a parasocial relationship with her due to a combination of her relatable, down-to-earth personality and her luxurious lifestyle, which made audiences feel like they could be her best friend despite their differences. Comments on Gianulli's Instagram[11] showcase this attitude, with young women commenting "Beautiful!" and "You are amazing and gorgeous!" while others asked her where to get her dress and other clothing items she wore. Likewise, her attitude towards college was relatable to their attitudes: she wasn't sure whether it would be a good move, but ultimately, "mostly my parents wanted me to go [to college] because both of them didn’t go... I’m so happy they made me go."[10]
However, Gianulli's parasocial personality as a relatable rich friend fell apart in light of the college-cheating scandal. Fans were slapped in the face with just how much privilege she held, and how her family was effectively able to purchase her way into USC. The fact that Gianulli was spotted on a USC Trustee's yacht as the scandal was exposed furthered outrage. Additionally, fans were disappointed that she had actively participated in the scandal by having someone fill out her application for her and posing for the crew photos.
As a result of this backlash Gianulli has disabled comments on her YouTube channel. She has also lost many valuable brand deals and is possibly facing expulsion from USC.[12]
Logan Paul
Logan Paul is a 22-year-old American YouTuber and vlogger known for his comedic antics and pranks. As a personality, he performs as the male-counterpart to Gianulli; if she's relatable to young women, then he's relatable to young men. Though his antics have always been brash and abrasive, they resonated with his audiences, who found them humorous. He thus cultivates a parasocial relationship by appealing to his demographic.
In January of 2018, Paul uploaded a video titled "We found a dead body in the Japanese Suicide Forest…", in which he filmed a dead body, "holds back a laugh and says, 'this was all going to be a joke; why did it become so real?'" This video negatively affected his parasocial relationship with his audience, who felt that despite Paul's brash antics, laughing at a dead body proved to be too much. Paul lost approximately $5 million in revenue following the controversy and has since apologized many times and changed the nature of his content to be less abrasive.
