Self-commodification and self-branding..
Users also spoke of competences of use, and especially in relation to practices of self- branding. Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook have been analysed in terms of user practices of self-branding and the commodification of the self (Bauman, 2007; Hearn, 2008; Marwick, 2013), while pre-internet dating advertisements have also been analysed in terms of Giddens’ (1991) concerns regarding self-commodification and the interpolation of market dynamics in practices of self-construction (Coupland, 1996). Similarly participants in this study had a commodified understanding of the self. They acknowledged the need to engage in self-branding activities to market themselves as desirable commodities in a crowded relationship marketplace – a process of self-stylisa- tion for self-transformation (Foucault, 1988).
For example, Tim, a 24-year-old heterosexual, discussed the ways in which the crea- tion of a Tinder profile required – in his estimation – various techniques and compe- tences that would make the profile stand out and exhibit the user as desirable. Tim boasted of helping a friend to redesign his Tinder profile because it was not receiving any interest from prospective partners:
He’s in my student housing and he’s like ‘Man, I don’t I don’t have much success on Tinder.’ So I ask ‘Can I look at your profile and can I change it for you?’ So I get him a different picture and I make his profile his ‘buyer’ – he didn’t have a buyer. I made his profile a buyer, and said ‘You can always go back’ and it blew up! It was almost like in the movies.
Tim’s use of the term ‘buyer’ denotes a sales technique designed to encourage other Tinder users to ‘buy’ the profile. This is an explicit recognition of self-branding tech- niques and supports Bauman’s (2007: 6) arguments on the commodification of identity.
Similarly, Josh, a 28-year-old heterosexual, discussed his amusement or disdain on encountering other people’s profiles that he felt were lacking in the competences required for the successful presentation of self on Tinder:
Whenever I use it I just have so much fun laughing at how some people think some things are a good idea … things like … can I just say it bluntly? I don’t mean to be rude but if you’re fat you have head shots where you sought of turn so you get like a jawline. If you’re fit but ugly
Hobbs et al. 281
you have like wide shots, or at the beach with sunglasses and a hat pulled down. If you’re fat and ugly you hide in a group shot.
Alice also discussed the issue of selecting a suitable profile photo: ‘you try and pick the best photos of you … we’ve all got this idea of ourselves and it is marketing’.
Amy felt the need to engage in the self-branding technique of ‘edited authenticity’ (Marwick, 2013) when creating her Tinder profile so as to not exclude herself from potential partners:
One strategy for me was probably like making a conscious decision not to have any extra information. From a strategic sort of point of view the more I say about myself on the profile the more likely I am to alienate certain people who I might actually click with but who are saying ‘She likes this band? Well I hate that band so she can fuck off.’ And then I guess a couple of my photos I wanted them to have friends in them so you could see that I had friends and I wasn’t you know a loner, and also didn’t wanna have any selfies because I wanted them to reflect that I hopefully wasn’t, you know, super vain or caught up in appearances too much.
Similarly, Alexander observed that his profile was ‘brief, so I wouldn’t say it’s, you know, a complete picture of who I am as a person, but that’s fine too, it doesn’t have to be … that’s why you’re supposed to meet up and have a conversation I guess.’
Conclusion
The exploratory findings offered by this study suggest that users of dating apps view them as welcome intermediaries in the search for companionship, love, sex and intimacy. Unlike the argument advanced by Bauman, dating apps and internet dating more broadly are not ‘liquefying’ ideals like romantic love, monogamy or a commitment to longer- term relationship. Indeed, the data suggest that a majority of individuals continue to value and seek these social phenomena, and are merely using the technology as a means to pursue meaningful partner
ships. This study’s participants felt they have more roman- tic and relationship possibilities than previous generations, and that the technologies give them greater agency with regard to pursuing and meeting potential lovers and compan- ions. The concept of ‘networked individualism’ (Rainie and Wellman, 2012) is readily applicable to studies of app-enabled dating/hook-up practices as individuals become responsible for, and exercise control over, their life-chances within a broadened social network environment. For those living in urban areas, their smartphones are allowing them access to an extensive network of romantic possibilities. Only with time will we see whether this seductive network of romantic possibility has a gradual cultural influence on people’s desire to commit to long-term monogamous relationships – an area for future longitudinal research.
What is clear is that not everyone is deriving the same experiences from the technology. As noted above, a small number of survey participants felt like they were missing out on intimate experiences as it was ‘only the attractive people’ who were able to harness the full spectrum of possibilities offered by the network. Likewise, some participants indicated that they felt that the interactions afforded by the technology were somewhat superficial in that they were based mostly on profile photos, which could not provide a fair account of a
282 Journal of Sociology 53(2)
person’s personality. Others were concerned that dating apps reduced people to commodities in a marketplace of romantic options and that exchanges were too strategic. And yet these same concerns can clearly be applied to ‘real-world’ sites of seduction and courtship, as many strangers begin a conversation based solely on physical attraction and subsequently engage in the strategic ‘presentation of self’ to convey a desirable impression (Ansari, 2015; Goffman, 1959).
Despite concerns about strategic and inauthentic behaviour, the majority of this study’s participants believed that the technology merely enhanced their desires and abilities to find a date or suitable life partner. Indeed, dating apps provide a ‘network of intimacy’ that dramatically enhances the user’s social capital and further enhances what Giddens called ‘plastic sexuality’. These networks of romantic possibility enhance a person’s capacity to find a partner with whom to build a mutually fulfill- ing relationship and continue the trend towards the ‘pure relationship’ (Giddens, 1991). Networked intimacy is, then, about flirting, courtship and the ongoing search for love and fulfilment via dating apps and smartphones. It brings new freedoms, opportunities and pleasures, as well as old and new anxieties about risk, self-image and love.
Self-commodification and self-branding.
.awasam-promo3 {
background-color: #F5F9FF;
color: #000000;
text-align: center;
padding: 20px;
border-radius: 10px;
}
.button {
background-color: #4CAF50;
border: none;
color: white;
padding: 10px 20px;
text-align: center;
text-decoration: none;
display: inline-block;
font-size: 16px;
margin: 4px 2px;
cursor: pointer;
border-radius: 5px;
}
.button-whatsapp {
background-color: #41D07D;
border: none;
color: white;
padding: 10px 20px;
text-align: center;
text-decoration: none;
display: inline-block;
font-size: 16px;
margin: 4px 2px;
cursor: pointer;
border-radius: 5px;
}
.awasam-alert {
color: red;
}
Needs help with similar assignment?
We are available 24×7 to deliver the best services and assignment ready within 6-8 hours? Order a custom-written, plagiarism-free paper
Get Answer Over WhatsApp
Order Paper Now