Content uploaded by Brooke Erin Duffy
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Brooke Erin Duffy on Apr 02, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Brooke Erin Duffy
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Brooke Erin Duffy on Apr 13, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
Social Media Influencers
BROOKE ERIN DUFFY
Cornell University, USA
Social media inuencers are a subset of digital content creators dened by their sig-
nicant online following, distinctive brand persona, and patterned relationships with
commercial sponsors. To earn income, they hype branded goods and services to their
communities of followers; such promotional communication takes the form of informa-
tion, advice, and inspiration. Because inuencers’ brand endorsements are integrated
into their existing arsenals of visual, textual, and/or narrative content, their persuasive
communication is widely understood as more “authentic” or “organic” than traditional
paid advertising. Against this backdrop, it is perhaps not surprising that inuencer mar-
keting has witnessed an astonishing uptick in recent years.
Despite the overall growth of inuencers, it isportant to acknowledge that their com-
munities and practices vary widely across platforms and sectors; some, moreover, con-
test the term “inuencer” given its unabashed marketing focus (i.e., the inuence they
purportedly wield is over consumer decisions) (for a discussion of the terminology see
Abidin, 2016). Further, while inuencers are called on to project their branded per-
sonae across the wider social media ecology, most establish themselves on a particular
social networking site—such as Instagram, YouTube, Twitch, or Weibo. evisuallyori-
ented platform Instagram lends itself particularly well to inuencer marketing; by one
projection, companies were expected to invest more than US$1 billion in Instagram
inuencers in 2018 (Mediakix, 2017).
esubgenresandnichesinwhichinuencers have found entrepreneurial suc-
cess are similarly kaleidoscopic. Forbes’ 2017 ranking of the “Top Inuencers,” for
instance, catalogued leader-tastemakers across such areas as fashion, beauty, tness,
parenting, travel, pets, entertainment, tech +business, home, food, kids, and gaming
(Forbes, 2017). With few exceptions, these categories adhere to normative gender
scripts: while female content creators dominate fashion, beauty, and parenting, the
genres of comedy, technology, and gaming are populated by male creators. is
marked division attests to the extent to which stereotypical gender roles inherited from
traditional media—such as women’s magazines and comedic entertainment—become
translated into new cultural contexts (Bishop, 2017).
While social media inuencers are undoubtedly a product of the digital zeitgeist,
their practices harken back to one of the earliest forms of marketing: word of mouth
promotion. By the early 20th century, community-based marketing practices had taken
on a recognizable form, with retailers seeking to harness the presumed trustworthiness
of ordinary citizen-consumers—most especially women (Serazio & Duy, 2018). More
contemporary promotional practices, including multilevel marketing and o-line
brand advocacy, oen deploy a predominantly female sales force to meld sociality
eInternationalEncyclopediaofGender,Media,andCommunication.KarenRoss(Editor-in-Chief),
Ingrid Bachmann, Valentina Cardo, Sujata Moorti, and Marco Scarcelli (Associate Editors).
©2020JohnWiley&Sons,Inc.Published2020byJohnWiley&Sons,Inc.
DOI: 10.1002/9781119429128.iegmc219
2SOCIAL MEDIA INFL UENCERS
with consumerism. Campbell’s (2011) notion of the “labor of devotion” provides a
useful framework for understanding the gendered nature of these persuasive tactics:
brand executives operate under the assumption that “men loyally consume their
favorite brands, whereas women actively promote their favorite brands to other
women” (Campbell, 2011, p. 494; emphasis added). Industry discourses about the
value of online product recommendations for female shoppers also reify beliefs about
the gendering of consumerism while providing a foundation for understanding the
staggering ascent of inuencer marketing.
Inuencers are also considered more sincere or trustworthy sources of information
and advice; thus, their communicative practices tap into the wider cultural appeal of
authenticity. Indeed, today’s inuencers are oen cast as individuals “just like us”; as
such, they temper their promotional messages with expressions of realness and ordi-
nariness (Duy, 2017). Despite—or perhaps because of—this emphasis on relatability,
the inuencer economy also draws on the conventions of traditional celebrity (Hearn
& Schoenho, 2016). It is in this vein that scholars like Sen(2013), Marwick (2015),
and Abidin (2016), and others, suggest that contemporary inuencer strategies can be
understood through the framework of microcelebrity, or “the concerted and strategic
cultivation of an audience through social media with a view to attaining celebrity sta-
tus” (Khamis, Ang, & Welling, 2017, p. 196). Both careful impression-management and
deliberate acts of self-branding are central practices among inuencers.
Presumably, the comingling of authenticity and brand promotion raises critical ques-
tions about the ethics of inuencer marketing. To reconcile these seemingly conicting
imperatives, inuencers supply a common refrain: they only promote products or ser-
vices that they really love; such aective statements serve as a buer against critiques of
crass commercialism. Yet it is precisely such imprecision that makes the inuencer mar-
keting industry dicult to patrol—especially given regulatory guidelines across many
West e r n nati o n s mand a t ing th a t i nuencers must disclose product sponsorships.
In recent years, social media inuencing has undergone a process of industrialization,
as evidenced by the emergence of social media talent agencies along with management
companies oering to broker deals between brands and inuencers. Aliate adver-
tisers, in particular, are billed as resources to help content creators “monetize” their
promotional eorts. rough apps like LIKEtoKNOW.it, social media users express
interest in products worn or showcased by their favorite inuencer; revenue earnings
are based on the percentage of these recommendations that are converted to sales.
Inuencers operate in a currency of exchange exclusive to the so-called attention
economy: social media metrics. To monetize their following, content creators must
demonstrate their ability to wield sway with veriable evidence: YouTube subscribers,
Instagram/Twitter followers, Facebook Likes, and Weibo comments—along with
more elusive symbols of “engagement” or “impact.” Marketers have also developed
a new industry vernacular to describe those social media personalities with smaller,
but ostensibly more engaged, audiences: “micro-inuencers,” “mid-tier inuencers,”
“mega-inuencers,” and “macro-inuencers.”
In an age when entrepreneurship is a much-hyped career goal, it is perhaps not
surprising that “YouTuber” and social media star rank among young people’s top
career choices (Weiss, 2017). Our cultural celebration of careers born of digital media,
SOCIAL MEDIA INFL UENCERS 3
however, glosses over a less auspicious reality about social media inuencers. For one,
this career requires considerable labor behind the screens, as individuals are expected
to dedicate time and energy to creating, editing, and promoting their content. Young
women, who have long been expected to provide “soskills” in both personal and
professional pursuits, face these demands accurately.
Moreover, despite considerable attention lavished on inuencers who have achieved
staggering fame success, social media sites are also brimming with aspiring inuencers.
Instead of free trips, those lacking the requisite digital sway are expected to pay their
own way to events, an investment that they hope will “pay o”throughsocialand
economic capital. Instead of free swag, lower and middle tier bloggers are compelled
to invest their own capital in the latest fashions and accessories. eir expressions of
brand devotion are undercompensated, leaving participants to shill brand merchandise
in exchange for free products or the mere promise of exposure (Duy, 2017 ) .
Not only do few content creators make a living as a full-time inuencer, but those
who do tend to conform to existing cultural codes. Indeed, marketers’ denition of
social media inuence is a narrow one that unfolds within what Banet-Weiser describes
as “preexisting gendered and racial scripts and their attendant grammars of exclusion”
(Banet-Weiser, 2012, p. 89). einuencer economy, in other words, remains marked
by the same imbalances that have long dened the media and culture industries.
SEE ALSO: Celebrity Bloggers and Vloggers; Vloggers
References
Abidin, C. (2016). Visibility labour: Engaging with Inuencers’ fashion brands and #OOTD
advertorial campaigns on Instagram. Media International Australia, 161(1), 86–100.
Banet-Weiser, S. (2012). AuthenticTM: epoliticsofambivalenceinabrandculture.NewYork:
NYU Press.
Bishop, S. (2017, October 4). Beauty for girls, pranks for boys: It’s the same old gender stereotypes
for YouTube stars. e Conversation. Retrieved from https://theconversation.com/beauty-for-
girls-pranks-for-boys-its-the-same-old-gender-stereotypes-for-youtube-stars-83927
Campbell, J. E. (2011). It takes an iVillage: Gender, labor, and community in the age of
television–internet convergence. International Journal of Communication, 5(19), 492–510.
Duy, B. E. (2017). (Not) getting paid to do what you love: Gender, social media, and aspirational
work. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Forbes.(2017).Topinuencers of 2017. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/top-
inuencers/#64b6d74e72dd
Hearn, A., & Schoenho,S.(2016).Fromcelebritytoinuencer: Tracing the diusion of celebrity
value across the data stream. In P. David Marshall & S. Redmond (Eds.), Acompanionto
celebrity (pp. 194–212). Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons.
Khamis, S., Ang, L., & Welling, R. (2017). Self-branding, “micro-celebrity” and the rise of social
media inuencers. Celebrity Studies, 8(2), 191–208.
Marwick, A. E. (2015). Instafame: Luxury seles in the attention economy. Public Culture, 27,
137–160.
Mediakix. (2017, March 29). Instagram inuencer marketing is a 1.7 billion dollar indus-
try. Retrieved from http://mediakix.com/2017/03/instagram-inuencer-marketing-industry-
size-how-big/#gs.2lhpN6E
4SOCIAL MEDIA INFL UENCERS
Sen, T. M. (2013). Microcelebrity and the branded self. In J. Hartley, J. Burgess, & B. Bruns
(Eds.), Acompaniontonewmediadynamics(pp. 346–354). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell.
Serazio, M., & Duy, B. E. (2018). Social media marketing. In J. Burgess, A. Marwick, & T. Poell
(Eds.), eSagehandbookofsocialmedia(pp. 481–496). ousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Weiss , G . ( 2 0 17). emostdesiredcareeramongyoungpeopletodayis“YouTuber”
(study). Tubelter. Retrieved from http://www.tubelter.com/2017/05/24/most-desired-
career-young-people-youtube
Further Reading
Ashton, D., & Patel, K. (2018). Vlogging careers: Everyday expertise, collaboration and authen-
ticity. In S. Taylor & S. Luckman (Eds.), enewnormalofworkinglives(pp. 147–169). Cham,
Switzerland: Palgrave Macmillan.
Hearn, A. (2008). “Meat, mask, burden”: Probing the contours of the branded “self.” Journal of
Consumer Culture, 8(1), 197–217.
Luvaas, B. (2017). What does a fashion inuencer look like? Portraits of the Instafamous. Fashion,
Style, & Popular Culture, 4(3), 341–364.
McQuarrie, E. F., Miller, J., & Phillips, B. J. (2012). emegaphoneeect: Taste and audience in
fashion blogging. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 136–158.
Pham, M. H. T. (2015). Asians wear clothes on the internet: Race, gender, and the work of personal
style blogging. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Rocamora, A. (2018). elabouroffashionblogging.InL.Armstrong&F.McDowell(Eds.),
Fashioning professionals: Identity and representation at work in the creative industries.London,
UK: Bloomsbury.
Brooke Erin Duyis an assistant professor in the Department of Communication,
Cornell University, New York, USA. Her research interests span social media and soci-
ety, gender and feminist media studies, and the impact of new technologies on creative
work and labor. She is the author of (Not) Getting Paid to Do What You Love: Gen-
der, Social Media, and Aspirational Work (Yale University Press, 2017) and Remake,
Remodel: Women’s Magazines in the Digital Age (University of Illinois Press, 2013). In
addition, her work has appeared in New Media & Society, the International Journal of
Communication, Information, Communication & Society, and Social Media +Society,
among others.