bethanypalmerblog-blog

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

Through the creation of an artificial self, how big a following can I get in nine months?

           For my special project, I have chosen to focus on the topic of fame and micro-celebrity, my overarching question is: through the creation of an artificial self, how big a following can I get in nine months? To begin this project, I looked into the meaning of what a celebrity is. In Chris Rojek’s book, Fame Attack, he reflects back to the 1920’s where people were famous for established careers. These careers were credible, for example, being a politician or a writer (Rojek, 7). Over time, the established careers developed from politicians and writers to jobs in entertainment and art, for example, actors and singers are now among the famous.

           Entertainment and art have also progressed since the 1920’s and have entered new platforms, a predominant platform being technology and social media. The entertainment and art I am referring to can be seen on social media today, for example, on YouTube and Instagram. Posting pictures and videos online was how content creators began, they posted content of themselves for Internet users to see. The successful amongst these content creators are now referred to as micro-celebrities. A micro-celebrity according to Andrew Keen, a Silicon Valley technician, is, ‘In our so-called attention economy…these services [social media] also provide us with platforms to be visible and enable us to build what Fordham University professor Alice Marwick calls our “micro-celebrity” in the social media age’ (115). A micro-celebrity is someone who has utilised social media to become visible as Keen describes. This visibility builds a following online and if the following is significant, you could be classified as a micro-celebrity. Following the title, a micro-celebrity can be paid by social media websites such as YouTube or Instagram and are highly regarded in the online world.

           Growing up as the Internet was born and developing itself, I have come to know a lot about social media. I have always had an interest in social media as I use it every day to communicate with the world via my smartphone. I wanted to experiment with how famous I could get online so I decided to create and perform an artificial self online to see how many followers I could get in nine months. To define an artificial self for the purposes of this project it is a self that is created based on aspects of my real self. I took the better parts of my physical aspects and character traits, for example, my body and my confidence and put them online. Turkle discusses presenting a character online in her book Alone Together, ‘…not to be fooled by anyone who tells you that his Facebook page is the ‘real me’. It’s like being a character in a play. You make a character’ (183). Turkle’s explanation is a clear reflection of what I embodied online, a character that I created based on the best parts of real me and this was my artificial self.

           Rojek said, ‘…the internet offers unprecedented new pathways to acquire fame’ (33). Because social media is accessible and there are many micro-celebrities, I presumed acquiring a large following would be easy. I was convinced that if I dedicated enough time to my social media accounts that my following would grow rapidly, but that was not the case.

           Over the last nine months, I created an artificial self to perform on YouTube and Instagram and the following I obtained overall was two hundred and ninety-one. I had forty-six subscribers on YouTube and two hundred and forty-five on Instagram as of 28/04/2017. The following I got was not as big as I thought it would be. My exploration of social media has taught me more about micro-celebrity and social media than my last nine years using social media.

           I have written four essays as the main body of my project, these essays are as follows:

1.     How did I create my artificial self and how did micro-celebrities influence it?

2.     How have micro-celebrities utilised social media to create a god-like status?

3.     The Results.

4.     Do the negative impacts of having a big following outweigh the positive impacts?

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

How did I create my artificial self and how did micro-celebrities influence it?

           Creating an artificial self was paramount to this project in order to gain an audience. An artificial self is a separate identity that is a filtered down version of the real self that is used to perform online (Marwick, 17). Chris Rojek describes a celebrity’s performance as, ‘A public face [that] is constructed to achieve instantaneous, affirmative social responses’ (Rojek, 15). Rojek’s idea of celebrity was my goal and to achieve this goal, I took influences from famous female micro-celebrities such as Zoella and Tanya Burr. I chose to base my artificial self on them because they are now successful business women with their own brands and a large online following which was what I wanted to achieve. I researched successful micro-celebrities on social media, took inspiration from their content that also reflected aspects of my real self to keep a level of authenticity. This allowed me to draw on aspects of my real interests whilst performing my artificial self to draw in an audience. From performing my gender, remaining authentic and relatable, and experimenting with risk, I will discuss my findings over the last nine months.

           First of all, I created my artificial self by performing my gender as a female which my research suggested would serve me well in the way of getting noticed. I took inspiration from other female micro-celebrities on YouTube who I had watched over the last eight years and I recreated popular videos made by females on my own channel. For example, in the videos below you will see a video of Tanya Burr’s and my own ‘Autumn Make-Up Look’ videos, seen below in figures 1 and 2. I performed my gender role as a female because it obviously worked when gaining a following for Tanya Burr, who has over 3.5 million followers and more than 500,000 views on this make-up tutorial. I also have an interest in make-up which aided me in creating videos on a variety of beauty topics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PIzUUA0YIOY – Figure 1 is Tanya Burr’s My Autumn Makeup Look |Tanya Burr video that I took inspiration from.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtFpM8zECP8 – Figure 2 is my Autumn Make-Up Look! Video.

Many of the girls whom I watch on YouTube have made at least one video regarding make-up or beauty. Looking good is an important trait that is taught to girls from a young age, ‘…little girls learn to value "appearance," that is, managing themselves as ornamental objects. Both classes of children learn that the recognition and use of sex categorization in interaction are not optional, but mandatory’ (West, 141). According to West, girls are valued for their looks, it is what defines the female from the male gender and when it comes to interactions these values are mandatory. Maintaining a good appearance is a key value that is inherent with girls from a young age, making girls want to look their best. Hence girls strive to better their appearance and make-up makes a good appearance more tangible, making beauty tutorials helpful as they are instructive and easily accessible online. This then creates a market online that will advise girls on beauty. It could be assumed this market is the reason why beauty gurus have large followings because girls value their appearance. I invested into this market as I am a female who can apply make-up which gave me a reason to be watched. Beauty tutorials, therefore, would give me a following which they did somewhat as my ‘Autumn Make-Up Look’ video is one of the most viewed on my channel. In this way, the creation of my artificial self was influenced by female micro-celebrities. Beauty is what I am good at which I knew would work in my favour as beauty is valued highly on social media by women and the market was created by the micro-celebrities I was influenced by. Due to this I was able to bring real passion to my content, bringing an authentic part of my real self to my artificial self.

Basing the characteristics of my artificial self on my real self was important to create a plausible performance. This is how I came up with the idea of the ‘DMC Sessions’ on my YouTube channel. I wanted to offer honesty on my channel so I discussed issues that I thought my demographic would relate to, for example, beauty standards and my future post university. I was influenced by other micro-celebrities who have proven that honesty works well with their audiences, ‘I’m really honest about the things I talk about because people like honesty because it feels like they have a more personal connection.’ – (Howell, ‘Becoming YouTube’). An honest conversation with my audience allows them to know me in a personal way on my own terms, creating an honest view of my artificial self, to an extent, for my fans to consume.

Alice Marwick comments in her book Status Update that, ‘…what is truthful and authentic is what is good for business’ (198). Being truthful and authentic is what people relate to, being online allows the person creating the content to screen how much is revealed (Marwick, 121). This technique provides an impression of ambiguity that makes an audience want to stay for more. The obscurity displayed creates a loyal following as the micro-celebrity has intrusted their audience with an aspect of their private life and the audience will stay to witness what happens next. In one of my ‘DMC Sessions’ videos entitled, ‘Am I pretty enough?’ I chose to discuss my opinions on female beauty standards. As aforementioned girls are taught to value appearance and talking about my frustrations with this value is what girls especially can relate to. Establishing my opinions online allowed my audience to relate to what I had to say which was good for my business, being my channel, because people came back to my series to see more of my opinions. It is said that TV is a monologue and YouTube is a conversation (‘Becoming YouTube’). This gives YouTube videos a more personal interaction with an audience, therefore, having personal topics discussed in my videos was practical and expanded my following. Being authentic online made my performance relatable which had done well in the way of getting noticed. There are risks when putting elements of your real self online but an audience enjoy and admire honesty and will stay to see what risk is taken next.

During the process of developing my artificial self I experimented with new content and pushed the boundaries of my gender role and being authentic. I took risks with my artificial self and I included comedy in my online performance. I pushed against the boundaries of my gender, stepped away from make-up and I made videos that took simple topics and made them comedic with the use sketches. The first two videos that were comedic got better views and more feedback over social media and in person. I decided to try comedy as I wanted to experiment with my artificial self, for arguments sake, to see if my following grew or depleted. Comedy had an element of risk as my audience had become used to my artificial self as performing a female gender role and comedy was a way to challenge that.

Being funny made me stand out more than I did previously as I separated myself from the female majority on YouTube who perform their female gender. In Fame Attack by Chris Rojek, he talks about the idea of the fool and how the fool gains a higher status when he performs. Rojek says ‘By virtue of departing from the rules of normal group life, appearing in a bedraggled state and speaking in an unselfconscious way, the fool occupies a space outside the law. An interesting inversion in the status of the fool occurs at this time’ (168). I pushed against the boundaries of my gender role and I chose to not be influenced by female micro-celebrities when I experimented with comedy or being the fool. This is evident in moments where, for example, I did not value my appearance as a woman. I made a mockery of appearance in my video ‘How to NOT put make-up on’ (figure 3) as I made my artificial self look bedraggled and ridiculous which my audience enjoyed. I spoke in an unselfconscious way by swearing and speaking about my opinions in a cruder way than I had previously done. I have departed from the rules of normal group life by leaving the beauty genre on YouTube and I became more noticeable. I got more comments, more likes and more views and it is now one of my most popular videos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7tybO1_RL8&t=3s – Figure 3 is my How to NOT put make-up on video.

In the process of creating a comedic artificial self, however, I stayed authentic to my real self as all of my opinions were true, just heightened from a performance point of view to attract an audience. I was also truthful during the non-sketch sections of my comedic videos as that is how I act in the real some of the time. I also researched the content of male micro-celebrities and I chose to be influenced by them more so than female micro-celebrities. I took inspiration from the structures of videos from micro-celebrities such as British YouTubers Dan Howell and Charlie McDonnell (figures 4 and 5). Despite the fact that comedy goes against my original research and plan of how I would attain a large following, utilising comedy for my artificial self has proven successful in getting a following on social media. Performing my female gender role has also worked for my channel as I have good viewings and gained subscribers on beauty videos too, but my experimentation with comedy was worth the risk. Finding new micro-celebrities to influence me did aid the creation of my artificial self.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uz-jMB6yKkQ – Figure 4 is a video by Daniel Howell entitled Audience Participation Fear. I was influenced by the structure of my comedic videos from video like his.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnEKRi56204 – Figure 5 is my Procrastination Station video that I structured with the influence of videos similar to figure 4.

The research carried out on micro-celebrities influenced me to create enjoyable content and performances whilst remaining authentic in a performative portrayal. The creation of my artificial self, therefore, did give my artificial self views and an audience. I began by being influenced by successful female micro-celebrities and I conformed to my female gender to create my artificial self. I then explored what it meant to be authentic further but engaging the audience with a filtered version of my real self with my artificial self. This lead me to take a bigger risk and trial comedy, abandoning my gender role to explore something new and possibly becoming more honest than I was before.

In this essay I only mentioned YouTube and not my other social media websites as I feel that the exploration and diversity of my artificial self was more applicable to YouTube rather than, for example, Instagram. This is because I had more opportunity to fully practise comedy in longer videos on YouTube than I did in shorter videos on Instagram. Due to the format of Instagram I don’t think comedy will have worked as well as it did on my YouTube channel as Instagram is a photo album and YouTube, as I said previously, is more like a conversation with videos.

This essay is intended to add to the conversation of obtaining a large following through an artificial self. I think the investigation of my artificial self will add to the conversation that conforming to certain ideals of a group like the female gender does work but it is imperative to explore new ways of performance. It is important to be influenced by those who have different ideas of what is good and in the process find something more interesting for the content and for the audience.

 Bibliography

·        Audience Participation Fear. Dir. Daniel Howell. Perf. Daniel Howell. 2017, YouTube. Video.

·        Becoming YouTube. Dir Benjamin Cook. Perf. Benjamin Cook, Alex Day, Charlie McDonnell, Chris Kendall, Hazel Hayes, Dan Howell, Phil Lester, Carrie Hope Fletcher. YouTube, 2012. Documentary.

·        Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman,“Doing Gender” Gender and Society, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Jun., 1987), pp. 125-151

·        How to NOT put make-up on. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2017, YouTube. Video.

·        Marwick, Alice E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity & Branding in the Social Media Age. London: Yale University Press, 2013. Print.

·        Part 2: Am I Pretty Enough? Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2017, YouTube Video.

·        Procrastination Station. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2017, YouTube. Video.

·        Rojek, Chris. Fame Attack: The Inflation of Celebrity and its Consequences. London: Bloomsbury, 2012. Print.

·        Autumn Make-Up Look! Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2016, YouTube. Video.

·        My Autumn Makeup Tutoiral | Tanya Burr. Dir. Tanya Burr. Perf. Tanya Burr. 2016, YouTube

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

How have micro-celebrities utilised social media to create a god-like status?

           As technology and social media have developed and become easily accessible, those who use the Internet have utilised it to make a name for themselves online. Those who were successful in doing so are now called micro-celebrities. Micro-celebrity is a sub-culture of celebrity, Graeme Turner defines micro-celebrity as, ‘…viewing friends or followers as a fan base; acknowledging popularity as a goal; managing the fan base by using a variety of affiliative techniques and constructing an image of self that can be quickly consumed by others’ (qtd. in Turner, 72). Due to devoted audiences, micro-celebrities have become as well-known as film and music celebrities with large online followings, for example, micro-celebrity Jenna Marbles has 17 million subscribers on YouTube. Audiences see micro-celebrities as famous and treat them as such. Chris Rojek has made the claim that, ‘The most prestigious celebrities have replaced the gods of ancient society as the immortals’ (3). Micro-celebrities have started to be among the prestigious celebrities as audience numbers grow, giving them a god-like status like celebrities have. Micro-celebrities have achieved status by broadcasting their ordinariness, being a consumable brand and acquiring a loyal following online and this process is what I shall explore.

           By broadcasting their ordinariness, micro-celebrities have ‘democratised fame’, (Turner, 89) and become ‘DIY celebrities’ (Turner, 71). They have built their brand from sharing their lives on social media and their relatability to normal people has captivated their audiences. Micro-celebrities are relatable because they film what happens in their lives, these videos are called vlogs. In vlogs micro-celebrities take a camera around with them all day and film what they have done that day, for example, I filmed a day out in London which is considered a vlog (figure 1). Vlogs are snippets of everyday life, an invasion into what micro-celebrities do. Micro-celebrities lives are similar if not the same to the lives of non-famous people, making micro-celebrities relatable to an audience.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UV94jVBMdG4 Figure 1 is my vlog called A Day in London

Micro-celebrities use social media platforms like YouTube to broadcast their lives online, Turner observes that they, ‘…use their consumer behaviour as a means of constructing their everydayness – their similarity to ‘us’’ (Turner, 44). Micro-celebrities are adopting consumer behaviour by making themselves products for the people to consume. The normality of micro-celebrities lives creates a connection between them and their audience, they have something in common. This creates a ‘feeling of common identity’ as the audience identifies with the micro-celebrity they are watching and invests into their brand (‘Century of the Self’). For example, in my vlog, there are shots of me walking down streets in London and commuting with a coffee, both of which are ordinary moments in the lives of ordinary people (Palmer). Audience and micro-celebrity seem to emulate the same status, this is where the feeling of common identity comes from, but it is an illusion. Vlogs are edited to make every day of their lives look like a good day, it is relatable because it is desirable for an audience member. To have a good day seems achievable for audiences because the vlogs are so familiar to the life of an audience member. But as Turner depicts, their similarity to us is constructed, it is real but edited showing the highlights of the micro-celebrity’s day. In my vlog, I chose to film on a day where I was going to London and meeting family, I filmed a happy, excited atmosphere but that does not happen every day.  Micro-celebrities use social media to display a channelled, positive version of their lives and audiences can connect with that. This invites the audience to stay and watch because they can engage with the micro-celebrity in a more personal way. Whereas with a film star, audiences cannot relate in the same way because their everyday is a different kind of life to that of an audience member’s. The relatability of a micro-celebrity, therefore, gives them a connection with audiences that will build their following and moreover their god-like status. This in turn gives them the status of celebrities and a following that gives micro-celebrities a god-like status just through being ordinary and connecting with their audience.

Due to the relatability of the micro-celebrity, it becomes clear that anyone can have the status that they have, making the lives of micro-celebrities desirable. The luxurious and glamourous life of a celebrity is attractive due to elements like wealth and fame. The same applies for micro-celebrities who are paid for making YouTube Videos and by sponsored Instagram pictures. Micro-celebrities walk the red carpet and are photographed the way famous film stars or musicians are, thus they exude the same status that a famous actress would (Marwick, 123). Micro-celebrity status is growing and with that, the desire to have what they have and be successful grows.

Micro-celebrities and celebrities are commodified in the way of desire, audiences want their fame and want to have their success. Turner remarks that, ‘Stories routinely present the celebrity as a model of consumption practise and aspiration for the reader’ (43). Audiences watch or follow micro-celebrities and aspire to their fortune and achievements, their relatability draws in a following and retains it. Once the commodification of the micro-celebrity is established, micro-celebrities then produce physical products to sell to their audiences in the way of merchandise or beauty lines or books and so on. It is said in episode one of The Century of The Self that Edward Bernays used psychoanalysis to attach feelings to products so that consumers could ‘express [their] inner sense of self to others’ (‘Happiness Machines’). It is possible then that micro-celebrities achieve the same thing when releasing products for their audiences to consume. It could be said that these products are bought because audiences ascribe emotions or qualities to the micro-celebrities products, for example, the successful attributes of the micro-celebrity. As Rojek says, ‘…celebrity sells…’ and the success attached to a product could make an audience member buy the product (24). If an audience member owns a successful micro-celebrity’s product, the buyer will feel successful or be inspired to be successful and achieve similar goals, like writing a book or releasing a clothing line or attempting to become a micro-celebrity themselves. By ascribing emotions onto a product, audience members will return to buy more products produced by that micro-celebrity. This further increases the following of a micro-celebrity and further gives them a god-like status. The success of micro-celebrity is desirable to an audience as it seems anyone can achieve what they have achieved. Fans buy into the micro-celebrities commodification and carry out a dedicated role similar to a working role. The religious connotations mirror the dedicated following of a micro-celebrity in the millions of followers and that is what I will discuss next.

Micro-celebrity audiences aid the success of micro-celebrities by committing themselves to their brand, for example, subscribing or following them or investing in their personal brand. Audience members or fans carry out ‘…fan labour…’ (Marwick, 95). This is when a fan is actively passionate or obsessed with a famous person and they are active by sharing, watching, liking or buying and so on, into a celebrity’s brand. Fan labour is evident in celebrities but also in micro-celebrities in that it is easier for fans to share the content of micro-celebrities as their content is online, easily accessible and free. An example of fan labour occurs in micro-celebrities like, Zoella, a British vlogger who has 11.7 million followers. She has released three books over three years and her first novel was the fastest-selling debut novel ever according to The Telegraph and The Independent with over 78,000 books sold in the first week.

Rojek comments that the type of fan labour that Zoella’s fans carried out could reflect religious tendencies, ‘…the labour of following a celebrity provides a discipline and purpose to individuals that echoes religious meanings’ (179). Fans of micro-celebrities could be seen as a social media or a 21st century reflection of religious groups. Fans are given discipline and purpose by their micro-celebrity god to buy their merchandise. This is because they assign successful attributes to their products and the fans are devoted to her success. The consumed products, therefore, advertise a micro-celebrity to the rest of the world, hence the fan labour that occurs. However, it was Edward Bernays who thought that consumerism is an illusion of control (‘The Century of The Self’). Where religion has the power to influence and educate religious followers, so does micro-celebrity but the power they possess is in how they make an audience consume. If consumerism is an illusion of control, then it is clear that fans have been persuaded to consume products to the point that they look to micro-celebrities as figures with a god-like status. The control is in consumerism because the current young generation have been brought up to desire their commodities as Adam Curtis explores in episode three of The Century of the Self. Curtis explores that consumers expressed themselves through products and that products sell values and give consumers an identity. If consumerism were to be taken away, there would be no self-expression through products and therefore, identity would be lost in the area of consumerism. It could be assumed that this is how micro-celebrities wield power over their audience because they provide videos and products that distribute identities. The god-like status of micro-celebrities is evident in the loyal audiences that they have acquired. Social media and technology have given micro-celebrities the platform needed to become the gods of the 21st century.

Social media exists because of technology. Technology has given micro-celebrities the platform to become as famous as celebrities. Without technology, would micro-celebrities exist? Could it be possible that it is not micro-celebrities that have the god-like status, but technology? Over time, technology has grown and developed, for example, now it seems that everybody has a smart phone. In 2014, an article from The Independent said that there are around 7.19 billion active mobile devices. The Economist said that by 2029, eighty percent of the adult population will have a smart phone. Smart phones and mobile devices are the main carriers of social media, this is because social media has all been converted or made to be an application that is most efficiently used on mobile.

Over time, the development of technology has made the population more dependent on their phones to be able to connect with people on mobile, ‘Connectivity becomes a craving: when we receive a text or an email, our nervous system responds by giving us a shot of dopamine. We are stimulated by connectivity itself. We learn to require it, even as it depletes us’ (Turkle, 227). Dependence on technology rather than people is not healthy, people are depending on their phones to give them happiness and to enable them to feel connected instead of allowing others to provide it. As Turkle said in her Ted Talk Connected, but alone? if there is a constant connection to the world through a mobile device or phone, people will never learn how to be alone happily. Turkle is making the point that by being constantly connected, technology is not only ruling lives but making us more alone.

However, the argument could be made that without people using social media, would technology have been brought to life the way it has? Turkle also said that we turn to people to feel less anxious and more alive, dependence on others is not necessarily positive but having people around you, online or in person is a good thing (‘Connected, but alone?’). Micro-celebrities are said to exude an ‘…illusion on friendship…’ (Marwick, 117). Even if it is just an illusion, fans feel a connection to micro-celebrities as the online world prompts a connection. Micro-celebrities can talk to the fans online through tweets and comments, providing a connection which maintains a god-like status. Marwick goes on to say that, ‘The Web 2.0 is responsible for the behaviours we see, not the technology’ (192), so it is plausible that those in charge are the users of technology and furthermore, mobile applications. Micro-celebrities have utilised the development of technology and social media to gain a following and fame. The utilisation, therefore, puts the micro-celebrity in charge of the technology as they have manipulated it for their own gain to give them a god-like status. Thus, making the micro-celebrity a god and the technology the platform to obtaining a god-like status.

Micro-celebrities have achieved a god-like status because they are relatable and their lifestyles are desirable. Their audiences trust them because they are ordinary people who managed to become successful and their audiences praise them for that success. A micro-celebrity’s authenticity creates a trusting relationship between micro-celebrity and fan, fans then become active through consumerism, promoting the micro-celebrity in the process. The activity of the fan could be said to mirror the traits of religious groups and their devotion to their god. These stages of fan worship are made utilisable through social media because social media is easily accessible as it is free and downloadable on mobile devices.

Micro-celebrities could then go on to use their fame to promote charities and do humanitarian work which could further their god-like status. I have decided to not explore this topic as I wanted to focus on the utilisation of social media to achieve a god-like status. I have chosen to focus less on my practical research as I did not become a micro-celebrity myself, therefore, case studies illustrated my points better. The implications of my work aim to add to the conversation that micro-celebrities are becoming frequent. Through using social media, micro-celebrities are expanding the idea of what celebrity means. Furthermore, I hope to add to the conversation of my overarching question of how the creation of an artificial self can give the individual the following to become famous.

Bibliography

·        A Day in London. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. YouTube, 2016. Video.

·        Rojek, Chris. Fame Attack: The Inflation of Celebrity and its Consequences. London: Bloomsbury, 2012. Print.

·        Marwick, Alice E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity & Branding in the Social Media Age. London: Yale University Press, 2013. Print.

·        The Century of The Self. Dir. Adam Curtis. Perf. (/Narrator) Adam Curtis. BBC/RDF Media, 2002. Documentary.

·        Turner, Graeme. Understanding Celebrity. London: Sage Publications, 2012. Print.

·        Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together. New York: Basic Books, 2011. Print

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

The Results

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jh2Zs785Vgw 

           Over the last nine months, I have been continually active on two social media accounts, YouTube and Instagram. I have uploaded a variety of videos on YouTube from make-up and hair tutorials, to music covers and to comedy sketches. I have maintained an Instagram that has been dedicated to posting pictures and videos to do with fitness, make-up, promoting my YouTube channel and motivational quotes. My YouTube channel has been a place for my artificial self to be experimental and explore different avenues of performance. My artificial self on Instagram, however, has been more of a regimented and focussed journey where my artificial self has aimed for perfection and a flawless image.

The creation of my artificial self has generated a following on each account over the nine months, yet the following obtained was not as large as I initially thought it would grow to. Keen said that, ‘”Eyeballs”, as everyone described audience, were the holy grail; the more eyeballs, everyone assumed, the more revenue’ (127). Keen’s idea that the more viewers equals more income, or views in my situation, is accurate and that is how I measured my success. My question as to how many followers could be acquired through the creation of an artificial self over nine months has been answered. The answer to my project question is not enough to give me the title micro-celebrity. The question as to why my artificial self’s following is not big will be explored in this essay through how my following on YouTube and Instagram have developed through what I posted. I will also explore how comments from followers can indicate the future of my social media accounts.

           The two social media platforms I utilised, being YouTube and Instagram, grew in subscribers and followers over nine months. However, they did not grow at the velocity or stability that I anticipated they would. I uploaded my first video on the 09/08/2016 and since then I have strived to upload at least one video a week. Similarly with my Instagram, my first uploaded picture was on the 28/07/2016 and I have uploaded at least five pictures a week. Over the course of the last year, I have aimed to be consistent with my social media accounts and to be as involved with them as possible.

Figure 1 shows how many YouTube subscribers I have currently and that have stayed subscribed to my channel over the last nine months. According to Marwick, popularity can be seen in the number of followers and likes so I will start with my following on YouTube (188).

I have gained twenty-three subscribers in the last nine months and I lost three subscribers in the months of October, December and February. I do not know why I lost and gained subscribers as YouTube does not provide any information as to what videos may have caused the loss or gain. Furthermore, there is the question of who my audience is. According to YouTube’s analytics my audience consists of seventy eight percent female and twenty two percent male. These demographics make sense in the way that the majority of my YouTube videos began with making content about beauty. I can speculate that this is why my male following is much lesser than my female following as I focussed on predominantly female interests.

Similarly in my essay ‘How did I create my artificial self and how did micro-celebrities influence it?’ I discussed how I portrayed my female gender role as my research supposed that this would develop my following (Hughes). At the end of March, however, with the addition of a comedic video entitled, ‘How to NOT put make-up on’, my subscriber count went up by four followers (Palmer). West suggests that, ‘Women can be seen as unfeminine, but that does not make them "unfemale”’ (134). My artificial self was unfeminine in the sense that my script used crude language and made a mockery of the application of make-up. Parting from my gender for comedic videos worked well in my favour as my audience increased by four more subscribers. For the majority of the year, performing my gender proved successful as my following grew and stayed predominantly steady. Additionally, my audience remained heavily female so my artificial self did not deter any female subscribers as shown in figure 2. Thus, comedy encouraged more audience members to subscribe to my channel and watch more of my content which expanded my following in the last stages of my project.

Figure 3 indicates how many followers my artificial self has on Instagram as of the 28/04/2017, unfortunately Instagram do not provide analytics on follower development. From the 28/07/2016 to the 28/04/2017, my Instagram account has gone from zero to two hundred and forty-five. I do not have the knowledge of the demographics of my Instagram following but I do know how the likes on my content have developed over the last nine months. As aforementioned, Marwick states that popularity is based on followers and likes (188) and compared to my YouTube channel, my Instagram account did far better in the case of likes and followers.

From figure 4 below, it can be seen that the likes of my Instagram uploads have increased over the last nine months. My Instagram account did better than that of my YouTube channel and this could be because Instagram uses hashtags. Using hashtags on a picture is a promotion of an account in itself because hashtags allow the user to find pictures of things they like which attracted my following. In total, my page has had 5,174 likes, averaged thirty-nine likes a picture and my most liked picture reached one hundred and twenty-nine likes (figure 5). I decided that my artificial self on Instagram would continue to develop my gender role, meaning I chose to value my appearance as West suggests, on Instagram. My Instagram promoted fitness, food, selfies and motivational quotes, but predominantly pictures of my body. For example, I posted a lot of fitness pictures of my body’s progression through exercise and those pictures attracted attention. By posting pictures along the former guidelines I strived to display a girl with a near perfect and positive outlook on life.

Turkle comments in her book Alone Together, ‘…online, you’re slim, rich and buffed up and you feel you have more opportunities than in the real world.’ (12). Turkle’s analysis of an online persona is accurate in explaining how others are perceived online. By posting pictures of my body at its fittest I was able to exude a persona that was flawless. This allowed my artificial self to gain a following that would not be as easily obtainable in the real world. Turkle’s idea reflects similar ideas to what Candace West discusses about the female gender being taught to value beauty (141). I portrayed a slim and buffed up appearance that I was able to achieve by editing myself to look good. I was in control of how I was perceived by my followers so I ensured that my appearance was good in every upload. In this way, conforming to Turkle and West’s ideas of a good appearance worked in that my following always went up when I uploaded pictures of my body. Due to this, my likes were consistent averaging thirty-nine likes a post and the pictures of my body often reached seventy to eighty likes.

My likes have escalated from December to April in particular and I can speculate that this is because of the regular uploading of pictures of my body progressing through fitness. In the book Understanding Celebrity, Turner says that, ‘Celebrity is the spectacle of a particular kind of social objectification, and that’s all.’ (139). There is an ongoing idea that celebrities are commodities to be consumed by the public (Turner, 39) and this can be reflected in how girls are valued for their appearance (West, 141). Celebrities are objectified because they are easily accessible to the public, this could be due to their high status and the spectacle that comes from this high status. Their high status, therefore, enables the public to see more of them because celebrities are glorified as a spectacle to be consumed. As Rojek states in Fame Attack, ‘From a mean standpoint, celebrities are viewed as the property of the polis. Everyone as a right to a piece of action’ (175). Turner and Rojek both make the point that a celebrity becomes a commodity because their elevated status allows it. The public have ownership over celebrities because the public enable the spectacle by devoting themselves to following celebrities. In this sense, I made my artificial self a commodity for consumption for my followers. I made my body consumable and I achieved a status by having followers, therefore, I conveyed the kind of status a celebrity would have on a smaller scale. I made myself an object to be owned by the people who chose to follow me and I can assume that this is how my account got likes.

Regardless of how big a following I acquired over the last nine months, I did not achieve the big following that I thought I would. Forty six subscribers on YouTube and two hundred and forty-five followers on Instagram is not a big following. However, my artificial self did receive encouraging comments. For example, I received a comment from a follower who said, ‘Beth you are becoming quite famous on Instagram…’ (Figure 6).

           I am aware that this girl’s comment does not quantify how famous my artificial self became on Instagram, however, this girl is part of my following. Her comment about my Instagram has proven to me that my following may not be large but that my followers are starting to notice that my artificial self is becoming popular. Marwick said that becoming a micro-celebrity, ‘…requires imagining oneself through the lives of others, creating a “dual gaze” of internalised surveillance’ (191). I agree with Marwick’s ideas on acknowledging a followings perception of who you portray online. Hence I posted pictures of me at my best and appearing confident which would in turn give me a high status. Confidence gave my artificial self status to attract a following that I hoped would then turn into a micro-celebrity status in the future. I also tried to post what my audience seemed to like best, for example, I knew pictures of my body would get more likes and my following would increase. So I saw my artificial self through a dual gaze, a girl who posts the highlights of her life and herself onto Instagram. If I performed a life that my audience wanted to see, then likeminded others would join and expand my following which is what has happened on a small scale.

           The expansion of my following may have been small but regardless my artificial self had been noticed. I was approached by two different clothing companies (figure 7) that were small but that could lead on to a bigger following in the future and increase my status to micro-celebrity. Chris Rojek said that ‘…you recognise yourself belonging to a prestigious fraternity which in turn, signifies common pedigree’ (95). Being approached by companies justified being a part of a prestigious fraternity or at least it could be the beginning of such in the future. A lot of micro-celebrities are sponsored by companies to advertise products, which is how micro-celebrities make money. It is now a possibility that I could be paid as well, validating my status as a possible micro-celebrity. This could then include me in the fraternity and signify me as pedigree in the variety of micro-celebrities.

           Over the course of this project, I did not gather the big following I had anticipated over the nine month period of my project. I do not have enough followers on either YouTube or Instagram to acquire the title of micro-celebrity. I will never know exactly why users of Instagram and YouTube did not follow me, but I have learnt who my audience are and what they like, to an extent. I was limited in my findings as Instagram do not supply analytics for Instagram accounts so I sourced my own online. The analytics I used, however, did not tell me about my audience in the detail that YouTube analytics did. Because of this, I did have to speculate more with my Instagram following than with my YouTube subscribers.

           It is my intention that this essay adds to the conversation of my overall question of how many followers I can get in nine months through the creation of an artificial self. I also hope that this essay will enquire about how to attain the status of a micro-celebrity and how to get a following online. All online followings start from somewhere and this is the stage that my online following has been able to reach over the last nine months.  

Bibliography

·        Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman,“Doing Gender” Gender and Society, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Jun., 1987), pp. 125-151

·        Keen, Andrew. The Internet is Not the Answer. New York: Grove Press, 2015. Print.

·        How to NOT put make-up on. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. YouTube, 2017. Video.

·        Hughes, Bethany. How did I create my artificial self and how did micro-celebrities influence it? London: n.p. 2017.

·        Marwick, Alice E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity & Branding in the Social Media Age. London: Yale University Press, 2013. Print.

·        Rojek, Chris. Fame Attack: The Inflation of Celebrity and its Consequences. London: Bloomsbury, 2012. Print.

·        Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together. New York: Basic Books, 2011. Print.

·        Turner, Graeme. Understanding Celebrity. London: Sage Publications, 2012. Print.

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

Do the negative impacts of having a big following outweigh the positive impacts?

           In my previous essays, I have explored how I created an artificial self, how micro-celebrities have acquired a god-like status and the results of my project. After the micro-celebrity is born, I would now like to question how fame impacts the individual and society. To answer this question I am going to reflect on my own findings and the already famous micro-celebrities as I do not carry the title, micro-celebrity. From the research I have undertaken, I think the negative impacts outweigh the positive impacts. I will explore the negative impacts of having a big following has on the ego of those with a great following, the unpredictability of fame and how social media is ruining our economy.

           A negative impact of having a big following is narcissism and how one’s ego is impacted by fame. There are the few among the famous who are very egotistic and conceited and have let their fame corrupt their outlook on where they stand in society. Examples of the egotistical celebrity can be seen in many celebrities and this has been further encouraged by the development of technology. The current young generation have been brought up in the century of the selfie, there is an obsession with the self rather than the group as Curtis explores in The Century of The Self. We are a consumerist, self-obsessed generation and this is influenced further by celebrities such as, Kylie Jenner. Kylie Jenner is a nineteen year old reality star from the television programme, Keeping Up with the Kardashians. I am aware that Kylie Jenner is not a celebrity for her online status, but she does have a following on Instagram of 92.6 million. As her following is so large, she is a micro-celebrity as she is famous online as well as on television. Jenner’s Instagram account is full of pictures of herself or ‘selfies’, she poses for the camera in expensive scenarios, for example, in designer clothes or on private jets.

Jenner is the perfect example of how Marwick describes fame, ‘…the difficulties of adjusting to new found fame and how frequent positive feedback can lead to self-absorption, narcissism and grandiosity’ (162). Jenner made a name for herself through a reality television show that promoted base values of self-absorption, vanity and wealth. She is self-important and with her big following on Instagram, she promotes the values Marwick describes to her following, including my artificial self. I researched the biggest Instagram accounts, most of which were the accounts of celebrities. My research suggested that posting pictures of my body and my face would give me a following like it had done for celebrities like Jenner. My artificial self was narcissistic as I posted pictures predominantly of myself, similar to that of Jenner. My following is not as great as hers but we are both promoting the value of self-obsession and pride. Rojek confirms the negative truth, ‘At its worst, celebrity culture infests ordinary people with false values, base aspirations and abusive character traits’ (40). Jenner promotes the false values and base aspirations that Rojek said infests her followers and my artificial self does the same on a lesser scale. Furthermore, Jenner encourages abusive character traits as she upholds a perfect body image that is unobtainable naturally because she has had plastic surgery. This then causes her female following to feel negative about their bodies and to look to surgery as a way to fix themselves. The negative and pretentious persona of a celebrity like Jenner or my artificial self at times stimulates a vain image of themselves. This a negative impact because it is irresponsible with a following of her volume to further influence a generation who will become further obsessed with themselves.

Being famous is an unpredictable business as there is always a risk that the individual will become irrelevant. The sad truth is that the audience of a famous person is in control of their fame as the wants and needs of the audience are important in keeping fame alive. An example a micro-celebrity who lost their fame is Charlie McDonnell, a micro-celebrity who was one of the first famous micro-celebrities on YouTube. McDonnell still maintains a following of 2.3 million on YouTube but he has been over taken by YouTubers such as Zoella who has 11.7 million subscribers. McDonnell’s video entitled I’m Scared was uploaded to his channel in which he expressed his fear in making new content and his fear of being judged or having an uncaring audience. After uploading this video he started to post less videos and so his status decreased on YouTube.

Rojek’s analysis of the fool in his book Fame Attack brings to mind the random and sudden irrelevance that McDonnell has faced. ‘The purpose of the fool was to constantly remind the powerful that fame is arbitrary and influence capricious…he offers the important lesson that social order is fragile. Power can be removed at once. The man of fame and decorum can be plunged into moronic abyss in a trice.’ (Rojek, 169). The fool had the power to overthrow the powerful at random, Rojek’s quote parallels celebrities being forgotten. YouTube has over a billion users and Instagram has 300 million daily active users, with this volume of users it is possible that a micro-celebrity could lose their power quickly. Micro-celebrities can earn up to six figures currently and many users want their power and wealth, creating the intense competition that makes fame arbitrary and influence capricious.

Charlie McDonnell has now been beaten out by other male vloggers like Caspar Lee with 7 million subscribers because Caspar Lee uploads content regularly. Being consistent with content is important, ‘…if that sounds tedious or repetitive, just close this book now and go do your best to enjoy the life you’ve got because you’re not cut out for this’ (qtd in Marwick, 173). Uploading content on a regular basis keeps an audience’s attention, being active on social media and interacting with an audience keeps them interested and keen to interact. Being consistent is something I have experienced as if I post late or not at all, my following decreases rapidly. If the social media account becomes dormant then the audience has no reason to bother. Marwick’s quote approaches this problem in a harsh but direct way, you need to give your time to securing a big following and if you do not do that then you are going to be forgotten. Unpredictability is a negative impact of a big following because of the instability and uncertainty of how long you will last. This could lead to unemployment which is concerning as if being a micro-celebrity is someone’s income then that is gone which is a hugely negative impact.

The economic impacts of having a big following on social media are also extremely negative. People can lose their jobs and it takes time and dedication to build your brand on social media. An example of this negative impact is discussed in Andrew Keen’s book The Internet is Not the Answer, ‘Instagram really did just have thirteen full-time employees when Facebook paid a billion dollars for the start-up. Meanwhile in Rochester, Kodak was closing 13 factories and 130 photo labs and laying off 47,000 workers’ (112). The workers at Instagram are very minimal in number, a billion shared between thirteen is extreme but are there really only thirteen workers? Keen goes onto make the point that the users become the workers, ‘You see, the labour we invest in adding intelligence to Google, or content to Facebook, or photos to Snapchat, we are paid zero. Nothing at all, except the right to use the software for free’ (114). Unemployment is a huge concern when it comes to social media apps as you do not need a big workforce to create and maintain social media as it is all online and no physical products are required. In episode three of The Century of the Self, Adam Curtis explains the extremes of unemployment in the 1980’s and how products were made to enable people to express themselves. Products were physically produced in factories and provided jobs because people started to consume an identity through products. A similar idea goes on in social media but the consuming of an identity is no longer accompanied by a physical product. There is a lack of mass production due to commodities moving online or on one device, for example, cameras and pictures. Instead of the factory workers, therefore, you have the users who make content for the apps free of charge. Meanwhile, the app developers are using users for their own gain because the users are making the applications bigger by consuming them. This then prompts companies to pay for advertising space on social media applications which then gives applications like Instagram and YouTube more money to be spread across a small workforce. This generates the extremely wealthy and extremely poor, having a big following encourages this because micro-celebrities encourage their fans to follow them online. Micro-celebrities contribute a lot to the hierarchy of social media workers. This creates a vicious cycle as more people sign up to social media as they want to see more of micro-celebrities. This is a hugely negative impact because it leaves people jobless and most of the population are contributing to the elitist society that values the few rich over the whole.

On the other hand, having a big following does have positive impacts. Positive impacts could be success, fame and wealth and how easy it is to get a large following. For example, Zoella is a famous YouTuber with 11.7 million subscribers and 10.9 million followers on Instagram. Zoella has her own beauty range, Zoella Beauty and was able to buy a house with her earnings from YouTube.

Turner comments in his book Understanding Celebrity, ‘The great value of celebrity is that it enables the ‘ordinary’ person to make the transition to being a ‘media’ person: that this is seen as an achievement only reinforces the hierarchical structure which separates media people from ordinary people.’ (89). Turner refers to the ‘transition’ of being normal, to being a micro-celebrity as being a positive transition, which it is. Becoming a micro-celebrity is easy in a sense but to gather a following takes time and dedication, so it is an achievement. It is easy to pick up a camera and film a video or upload a picture in minutes and to do so frequently could lead to a big following. If successful, being a micro-celebrity is a fun job that embraces fame and wealth, without having to leave the house. YouTube statistics say that, ‘The number of channels earning six figures each year on YouTube has increased by 50% y/y’ and Instagram claim that, ‘Instagram influencers are charging up to $100,000 for a sponsored post’. From these statements it is clear that more people are taking up micro-celebrity as a job which is giving more people a good income which is a positive impact.

By becoming another micro-celebrity, however, users are still adding to the ethical problems I have explained and especially to the problem of employment. Keen has made the assumption that, ‘…these companies will replace the government. That they will become Big Brother’ (180). Curtis expressed a similar concern in The Century of the Self in that businesses would take over the government in the future. The frightening truth is that social media applications and businesses are earning a lot of money at such a velocity that a takeover could be possible in the future. For social media to take over could mean leadership from a narcissistic group of privileged people who created the most self-obsessed social media applications. The question of whether this is positive or negative is clearly negative because a government filled with selfish leaders will only bring more negativity to our world.

From the research I have done, the negative impacts outweigh the positive impacts because having a big following is damaging our sense of self and ego, is arbitrary and unpredictable and is threatening our economy. The positive impacts of fame are unlimited and I do not dispute that success, fame and wealth are worthwhile but I do not believe that they are worthwhile for the whole of our society.

For the discussions in this essay I unfortunately could not discuss many of my personal experiences with my practical research of my artificial self online. This is because I did not achieve a big following but I hope that using other celebrities as case studies did highlight my points and the gross inadequacy of fame. It was my intention that this essay would add to the discussion of how micro-celebrity is impacting culture and how the use of social media needs to be observed with a strict eye. I wanted to illustrate this point because micro-celebrities and social media are important factors in the 21st century. I think it is important to encourage conversation about whether investing a life into the online world of the self and fame is worth the price of stepping on your fellow man.

Bibliography

·        Keen, Andrew. The Internet is Not the Answer. New York: Grove Press, 2015. Print.

·        The Century of The Self. Dir. Adam Curtis. Perf. (/Narrator) Adam Curtis. BBC/RDF Media, 2002. Documentary.

·        Marwick, Alice E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity & Branding in the Social Media Age. London: Yale University Press, 2013. Print.

·        N.a. ‘Statistics.’ YouTube. YouTube. N.d. Web. 19 April 2017. <www.youtube.com/yt/press/en-GB/statistics.html>

·        N.a. ‘Instagram by the numbers: Stats, Demographics and Fun Facts’ Omnicare. Salaman Aslam. Updated: 29 April 2017. Web. 19 April 2017. <www.omnicoreagency.com/instagram-statistics/>

·        Rojek, Chris. Fame Attack: The Inflation of Celebrity and its Consequences. London: Bloomsbury, 2012. Print.

·        Turner, Graeme. Understanding Celebrity. London: Sage Publications, 2012. Print.

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

The Final Blog Post

           To conclude, through the creation of an artificial self, I was able to get two hundred and ninety-one followers and not achieve a micro-celebrity status. Over nine months I have created an artificial self, explored a god-like status in micro-celebrities, examined the results of my practical research and challenged the concept of having a big following. I can now conclude that trying to acquire a big following on social media is more difficult than it seems and it is not worthwhile.

           Throughout my project, there were points where I was unable to give examples of my practical research as I did not become a micro-celebrity. However, I do think using micro-celebrities as case studies illustrated those points more clearly than my research would have. I think it was important to make those points and to analyse social media and micro-celebrity in order to expose their superficial and elitist qualities. As Rojek says, ‘Stardom is strongly associated with narcissism’ and his idea resonates with micro-celebrity and celebrity culture as a whole (35).

           It is my hope that my work informs further research into micro-celebrity, how the self is performed online and how the online world is a growing influence on the real world. Now that I have concluded my project and finished my research, I have genuine concern for how social media will change our world. I do not deny that social media is an incredible development and that the work micro-celebrities do is of value and that it has created a new world of work and creativity. However, I think it is wise to expand the online world with caution as it has the power to influence a generation. As Turkle said, ‘We talk about “spending” hours on email, but we, too, are being spent’ and I think this idea of being spent is something to be wary of as social media progresses (280).  

[bethanypalmerblog-blog]

Bibliography.

Works Consulted

·         A Day in London. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. YouTube, 2016. Video.

·         Audience Participation Fear. Dir. Daniel Howell. Perf. Daniel Howell. 2017, YouTube. Video.

·         Autumn Make-Up Look! Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2016, YouTube. Video.

·         Becoming YouTube. Dir Benjamin Cook. Perf. Benjamin Cook, Alex Day, Charlie McDonnell, Chris Kendall, Hazel Hayes, Dan Howell, Phil Lester, Carrie Hope Fletcher. YouTube, 2012. Documentary.

·         Candace West and Don H. Zimmerman,“Doing Gender” Gender and Society, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Jun., 1987), pp. 125-151

·         Connected, but alone? Dir. Sherry Turkle. Perf. Sherry Turkle. February 2012. Ted, 2012. Web.

·         How to NOT put make-up on. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2017, YouTube. Video.

·         Hughes, Bethany. How did I create my artificial self and how did micro-celebrities influence it? London: n.p. 2017.

·         Keen, Andrew. The Internet is Not the Answer. New York: Grove Press, 2015. Print.

·         Marwick, Alice E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity & Branding in the Social Media Age. London: Yale University Press, 2013. Print.

·         My Autumn Makeup Tutoiral | Tanya Burr. Dir. Tanya Burr. Perf. Tanya Burr. 2016, YouTube.

·         N.a. ‘Statistics.’ YouTube. YouTube. N.d. Web. 19 April 2017. <www.youtube.com/yt/press/en-GB/statistics.html>

·         N.a. ‘Instagram by the numbers: Stats, Demographics and Fun Facts’ Omnicare. Salaman Aslam. Updated: 29 April 2017. Web. 19 April 2017. <www.omnicoreagency.com/instagram-statistics/>

·         N.a. ‘Instagram Help Centre.’ Instagram. N.p. N.d. Web 25 April 2017. <www.help.instagram.com/351460621611097

·         Part 2: Am I Pretty Enough? Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2017, YouTube Video.

·         Procrastination Station. Dir. Bethany Hughes. Perf. Bethany Palmer. 2017, YouTube. Video.

·         Rojek, Chris. Fame Attack: The Inflation of Celebrity and its Consequences. London: Bloomsbury, 2012. Print.

·         The Century of The Self. Dir. Adam Curtis. Perf. (/Narrator) Adam Curtis. BBC/RDF Media, 2002. Documentary.

·         The Creators. Dir. Nanette Burstein. Perf. Zoella, Tomska, Niky and Sammy. YouTube, 2015. Documentary.

·         Turkle, Sherry. Alone Together. New York: Basic Books, 2011. Print.

·         Turner, Graeme. Understanding Celebrity. London: Sage Publications, 2012. Print.

Works Cited

·         Bailly, Lionel. “Unspeakable need, unquenchable desire: need, speech, and desire” and “That obscure object of desire: l’objet petit a” in Lacan: Beginner’s Guide.

·         Gehl, Robert. YouTube as archive: Who will curate this digital Wunderkammer? International Journal of Cultural Studies. Sage Publications. 1January, 2009. <journals.sagepub.com.ezproxy01.rhul.ac.uk/doi/pdf/10.1177/1367877908098854>

·         Heuvelman, Ard, Moor, Peter J. and Verleur, Ria. Computers in Human Behaviour. N.p. 9 June 2010. www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0747563210001627

·         Holmes, SU. Framing Celebrity. London: Routledge, 2006. Print.