
Confessions of an Instagram Influencer - kevinbluer
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-11-30/confessions-of-an-instagram-influencer
======
cyberferret
My wife and I were just talking about this today, coincidentally.

She follows a few people around the world who are artists or collectors on IG.
She pointed out to me that when she started following some of them more than a
year ago, they had a few hundred followers, and were posting general stuff,
but which all felt heartfelt and 'in the moment'. I think 'genuine' was the
word my wife used. Kids doing silly things. Artwork in various stages of
completion, etc.

But now, she has noticed a couple of them have rocketed to over hundreds of
thousands of followers, and their posts have changed to become quite soulless
and fake. Obviously they have been engaged by a marketing or promotional
company that sanitises and sets up their posts for them.

All of a sudden, an artist who was formerly struggling to raise a family and
make meaningful work is announcing (and posting photos) that they are in
[insert brand name here] health spa having a weekend pampering. Continuous
shots of not the art or kids, but of bath products, massage companies, drink
companies etc. all heavily hashtagged. Following up a few days later are
pictures of the kids, but this time around a brand new laptop with the
manufacturers name and laptop model hashtagged to the hilt.

As @sAbakumoff pointed out here - this is "Black Mirror" Season 3 Episode 1
come to life. I have nothing against someone doing promotional work to earn
money to live, but I do have a problem with people portraying a totally fake
and unrealistic life as a reality.

We are just seeing magazines starting to push back against "Generation
Photoshop" and go back to 'real' shots of people again (Pirelli 2017 calendar
a case in point), but are we now going to replace Photoshop with 'posed
reality'? I know a lot of us do that to a certain extent on social media
anyway, but not for discounts or monetary compensation, usually.

~~~
personlurking
For anyone not familiar with French philosopher Jean Baudrillard, I recommend
reading up on his ideas around 'posed reality', as it were.

____

"Simulacra are copies that depict things that either had no original to begin
with, or that no longer have an original.

Baudrillard believed that society has become so saturated with these simulacra
and our lives so saturated with the constructs of society that all meaning was
being rendered meaningless by being infinitely mutable."

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simulacra_and_Simulation)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Baudrillard)

~~~
icebraining
_" All that once was directly lived has become mere representation."_

 _" Where the real world changes into simple images, the simple images become
real beings and effective motivations of hypnotic behavior."_

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Society_of_the_Spectacle](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Society_of_the_Spectacle)

~~~
chillwaves
Can watch a rework here (I liked it).

[https://vimeo.com/60328678](https://vimeo.com/60328678)

~~~
AndrewKemendo
Thanks for that. Very much a rabbit hole for Situationism which I had only
ever barely interacted with when I was more active in Anarchist philosophy.

------
razakel
I'm with Bill Hicks when it comes to advertising and marketing.

I adblock. I pirate. I don't use Facebook or other social networking sites.

I don't want advertising in my life. It's propaganda. It shits in your head.

If there's anybody reading this who works in those industries: you thought
Generation X was cynical?

~~~
mozumder
Bill Hicks never figured out the meaning of life.

The entire purpose of life is to market.

You get up in the morning and brush your teeth so that you're more marketable
than the slob that doesn't.

Everything you do can be traced back to marketing. The more people understand
that, the better off they will be at handling life.

~~~
celticninja
I brush my teeth so that they last longer and I can chew food longer and thus
stay alive longer, marketing only comes into it for people in marketing.

~~~
Angostura
Which toothpaste do you use? And how did you come to choose that brand?

~~~
realusername
I check the Fluor ppm and pick the most inexpensive one with the highest ppm
personally

~~~
nol13
Wow your pineal gland must be bout closed shut.

------
johndoe4589
Was just thinking about this recently as I started following a few people.

We are increasingly living in a world of fiction. Previously it was mainly fed
through television. You'd grow up on television series, and as a young
man/woman you'd try to be cool like them, dress like them, talk like them. You
build your world view around "influential" portrayals.

Nowadays, we haven't freed ourself from media controlled television at all.
It's actually worse, because now advertising is blurring the lines even more
between real people and fiction. We eat and breathe fiction, then we live our
own life trying to resemble it.

Nothing is new there. But what's new for me is I started to recognize that
_fiction_ in and of itself is probably as detrimental to our society as fear
is. It's well known that fear drives self centered way of life and when we are
in survival mode, we just don't make good choices and we lack compassion.

Lately I'm thinking that fiction, on a collective scale, is just as bad as
fear. It keeps us unconscious. Just like fear it dissociates us from what we
are, and from one another. It's really detrimental to us as individuals, and
as a society. Unlike fear, it isn't immediately felt in the stomach.. so there
is no sense of urgency.. And yet it is there... one just looks at the world to
see the massive disconnect in our life on a day to day basis. I guess fear and
fiction are best friends. Fear drives us to dissociate, and fiction provides
the perfect happy place to dissociate.

John Berger, Ways of Seeing

"But where is this other way of life?"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jTUebm73IY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5jTUebm73IY)

~~~
qznc
I don't think that we are _increasingly_ living in a world of fiction. We
always have. It is human. Kids believe in Santa Claus, adults believe Saddam
has weapons of mass destruction. Some believe in Mohammed, Jesus, Jahwe, or
Dharma. Some believe they will become rich in Silicon Valley, others on
Wallstreet. Some believe in articles from mainstream media, some don't. Many
people have dreams for their future, which is just fiction they are telling
themselves.

You consider these thoughts dark or cynical. Why? Humans have built an amazing
civilization with a global economy and messaging travel across the globe in
milliseconds. We did all this as fallible meat bags believing in dreams and
telling each other mostly false stories. That is a great story as well. ;)

~~~
johndoe4589
By the way I just realized... kids do not believe in Santa Claus. WE make them
believe in it. Big difference. And in fact in some parenting circles, it is
suggested that you should never tell such stories to your children.

This is another big debate altogether and I genuinely have no interest in
debating that. Just threw it out there because it sounds like you lump
together things that are very different from one another.

[https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/logical-
take/201512/in-...](https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/logical-
take/201512/in-defense-parents-who-don-t-lie-about-santa)

------
keyle
I find my feed, even though filled with different people is really really
repetitive. You've got the ones about their image, sometime sneaking in some
never-heard of brand of protein you wouldn't give your dead dog, you've got
the arty ones posting their latest work, you've got the "I'm only doing shots
of my girlfriend from behind", the cute dogs with the outfits, and so on.

I swear if I could compare it to my timeline from a month, or 3 months ago,
it'd be the same.

Turns out, even though a picture is worth a thousand words, we keep writing
the same sh#$% over and over!

------
panorama
We live in a society where, because ad dollars drive so much of online
commerce, attention _is_ currency. And right now influencer marketing is
outperforming many other channels, so naturally a lot of money is headed this
direction, allowing many 'ordinary' people to monetize.

I don't think this is a problem - I believe in the power of the internet
democratizing revenue opportunities and disrupting outdated media channels.

(Bias disclaimer: I run a startup that helps brands find Instagram influencers
to work with - won't plug it here but it's in my profile).

~~~
mtrn
In one way, this is sponsorship taken to a micro level. And sponsorship is
fine - and usually open, for the benefit of both parties.

But if I open a random influencer agency website, I can read something like
this: "Influencers drive trust". The message here seems to be: Yes, trust is
super valuable - and now the price is finally dropping! But is it really?

~~~
panorama
It's a weird middle-ground. I myself constantly ask people for their
recommendations on books and such. I trust them and act upon their
suggestions. The only difference is that influencers are paid to suggest, and
sometimes this leads to low-quality products being touted by low-quality
influencers appearing in your feed. Definitely bad.

DHH suggested a book in an interview with Tim Ferriss[0]. I read what DHH says
often and trust his taste - is this bad? I don't think so. Obviously DHH
wasn't paid to talk about this book, but it wouldn't matter either way to me;
a lot of his influence comes from the fact that I know he wouldn't willingly
shill for something he doesn't believe in.

[0] [http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/10/27/david-heinemeier-
hans...](http://fourhourworkweek.com/2016/10/27/david-heinemeier-hansson/)

~~~
shostack
It doesn't just sometimes lead to lower quality recommendations. It ALWAYS
does due to the nature of how it works.

When someone is financially incentivized to push something, but discloses
that, you have to take it with a grain of salt. When they don't disclose it,
you can't trust a word out of their mouth. Full stop.

------
tempestn
> “You sell part of your soul. Because no matter what beautiful moment you
> enjoy in your life, you’re going to want to take a photo and share it.
> Distinguishing between when is it my life and when am I creating content is
> a really big burden.”

I didn't realize just how realistic that Black Mirror episode was.

------
auganov
Such a weird article. It's written as if he already had a large following and
got on to monetize it. But it looks like a fresh account and in the end, he
failed to gain any real momentum. Which goes to show that establishing genuine
rapport still matters. Why would you even go from posting cat pictures to
vaguely fashion/glamor content? Bloomberg should do what these scouts do -
find a person that already has traction and pay them to journal their
monetization process.

------
Illniyar
So he hired a bot for a month to do 30,000 likes. Anyone wonder how many of
his own likes are from bots?

All this social media advertisement seems like one big fraud to me - from
profile farms to click frauds, has any of the people buying the ads actually
attempted to verify the actual increase in sales? Or maybe it just looks good
in powerpoints when showing to the clients where the money is spent.

~~~
SuperPaintMan
There's a good chance if you do not recognize the user liking your post, it's
a bot hoping to get a followback.

Yeah it's fraud up and down the feed, and it looks great in spreadsheets. IG
provides metrics on profile views and website clicks, that's one way to
measure engagement as bots will usually skip that.

------
askdjso
I know a local "artist" that lives off Instagram and not her "art".

She publishes all her "songs" on Youtube for free, and lives off sponsored
content on Instagram and media appearances.

Is she lazy and getting "free-money"? no.

Is she talented? also no.

~~~
Freak_NL
She's just gaming a system that rewards her output. Whether the advertisers
are getting a good return on investment is debatable, but apparently they are
convinced that advertising on her channel is worth it.

The only drawback is that she might be investing a good part of her career in
something that may prove prone to inflation and whim.

------
sAbakumoff
Black Mirror, s03e01 in reality.

~~~
platz
I only skimmed it, but I'm feeling this is exploring the world of fashion
models more than Instagram per se, or at least being in that world incents a
certain behavior. It's fine to wonder if tech if serving us correctly, but
also it's good to know that some people have very different lives from us, and
thats ok too.

~~~
cyberferret
Thing is, its not just happening in the 'fashion model' world. The focus seems
to be coming down to 'regular' people. Artists, street musicians, developers,
moms and dads, single parents, cat lovers, bike enthusiasts, amateur chefs...
you name it.

If you have a sizeable following, you have the option to sell your soul to one
or many companies who will then organise your social media flow for you,
suggesting what to post, when to post, and what to hashtag. All for a fee or
discounts on their products.

At least when you see a racing driver's suit plastered with sponsor logos, you
_know_ they've paid him/her or the team for the privilege of doing so.
Nowadays it is not so obvious, but rather the inference is that it is all
natural and common and 'real'.

------
jokoon
The more I read about that, the more I want to start an instagram of a
stereotypical loser.

~~~
razakel
>The more I read about that, the more I want to start an instagram of a
stereotypical loser.

It wouldn't be popular. People crave escapism.

The very fact that you're satirising exactly that is what defeats the purpose.

~~~
TeMPOraL
You'd be surprised. Everything can be sold. Companies have figured out how to
monetize anticonsumerism long time ago.

Related: Black Mirror, S01E02 - Fifteen Million Merits.

------
johndoez
Influencer marketing will boom with the launch of social commerce. But
startups need to be careful about advertising regulation. If someone has paid
for a promotion, then it will have to be tagged as such, like Sponsored Ad.

~~~
Guyag
I don't think tagging with something like #ad or #sponsored does nearly
enough, especially if hidden amongst a bunch of other tags. (edit: And #sp -
are you kidding me?) Traditional ads are obvious through specific placement on
the page (sidebars) and/or a prominent "Advertisement" or "Sponsored" label
and/or moreover simply having the general look and feel of a 'traditional'
advert.

When your favourite media personality is gushing about some product it's
really easy to forget it's an advert and they're being paid for it. I know
that's what makes it great for marketing purposes, but it feels seriously
dishonest and (to me) represents a decline in our standards.

~~~
Freak_NL
These type of advertisements are already garnering interest from national
regulators. One reason is that a lot of these influencers have a lot of
children and teens amongst their followers (think beauty vloggers on YouTube).
Most countries have laws regulating advertising aimed at minors. By using
popular social media channels brands can circumvent this limitation by simply
buying advertising space from local influencers with predominantly teen or
pre-teen follower demographics.

------
nojvek
This is the sole reason why I liked snapchat. But now snapchat is getting so
popular, the ads are being forced in my face. I'm gonna a probably jump ship
to something less invasive.

------
alkonaut
More than two hashtags on a photo is an instant unfollow. Obvious paid shot?
Same.

Idk who enjoys following what's essentially just an ad? You can get glossy ad
pics in a magazine?

------
yk
> (#ad #sp #liveauthentic)

In some literary critique sense, it does not so much seem hollow as it seems
like authentic expression of our time. The fact that people authentically
believe in success in social media does not invalidate their dreams.

------
thinkloop
I would have liked to see him continue the test without the photography,
keeping just the bots and offshore friend farming - I have a feeling that's
most of it.

TL;DR:

How to get Instagram followers:

\- photo quality is very important, pay for a professional

\- submit 3 posts a day, try to make them interesting, but that's only medium
important

\- pay for bot to like and comment on posts with similar hash tags, so their
owners can see your profile and hopefully follow

\- use offshore friend farm to boost numbers. They don't outright say it, but
the last service had to be that. One day his followers surged for a couple of
hours then stopped.

~~~
mrtksn
I wonder what will happen when AI is good enough to imitate real internet
users and ad agencies just spin up some servers in some datacenter that
handles millions of bots that are indistinguishable from real people and
follow the formula of the influencers.

~~~
Paul_S
Bots creating content for bots to click on. Perfect. Seal it in a bunker and
launch into space (together with the marketeers).

------
chris_wot
Fuck this for a joke. Thank goodness I'm not on any of these services, or even
using them!

It's bad enough I use Facebook, but the Instagrams of our time are just
ridiculous.

