Over the past two decades, the profusion of influencers on social media has been nothing short of overwhelming. With unrelenting consistency, influencers have poured out of social media sites like Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, LinkedIn and the controversial TikTok. From fashion to health, from management lessons to relationship advice, from spirituality to how to converse with your cat, there seems to be nothing which is off-limits for influencers. As per an article in the Harvard Business Review, by the end of 2023, the influencer industry is going to be worth $ 23 billion, with 300 million people claiming to be content creators. The arrival of influencers has immutably rearranged the socio-cultural conversation.

Though seen as a recent phenomenon, the art of influencing has been around for centuries. In Aristotle’s Ars Rhetorica, which dates back to the 4th century BCE, we find mention of the art of influencing through three methods, namely Ethos, Pathos and Logos. In simple terms, they mean the ability to influence other’s opinions through authoritative, emotional and cognitive triggers. This conceptual framework is still relevant today, as people continue to be influenced by expert opinion, emotion-laden appeals and cleverly crafted arguments. Our ways of thinking, behaving and accepting are somehow the after-effects of influence.

Advertisement

Originating from the Latin word ‘influere’ which meant ‘flowing’, the initial meaning of influence had divine connotations earlier. It signified the transmission of a liquefied ethereal power which impacted human destiny. Though retaining its essential meaning, influence has slowly evolved to become a contranym, having both positive and negative connotations. The Janus-faced reputation of the word may be partly attributed to its familiar association, explicit or implicit, with manipulation. Way back in the 1950s, we had Vance Packard, in his book, The Hidden Persuaders, sharing with us how consumers are persuaded (read manipulated) to make irrational buying decisions based on their psychological weaknesses. What made things worse was that even when they realised that they were being coerced into a decision, consumers didn’t press the pause button.

As Packard comments tellingly “When irrational acts are committed knowingly, they become a sort of delicious luxury.” With the increasing awareness about its adverse effects, the climate of influence became cloudy. Till a decade and a half ago, the onus of influencing rested on a particular cohort, namely thought leaders, marketers, politicians and lawyers. With the creeping suspicion regarding their veracity, the opinions of such ‘qualified’ experts, became questionable. Consequently, there was a need for more voices to be heard. The arrival of social media fulfilled the need. Wresting the rights of specific professions and institutions, regular individuals started sharing their views on public platforms, claiming authenticity from their real life experiences. These growing numbers rapidly took charge of moulding public opinion. Motivated by the enthusiastic response of the younger set, namely the millennials and Gen Z, these influencers authorised themselves to promote, criticise and sermonize on a plethora of issues.

The after-effects of this democratisation have been mixed. Given its easy eligibility, the influencer marketplace has become a space where authenticity and flaky appearances, friendship and animosity, information and disinformation, excellence and mediocrity happily co-exist. This paradoxical outcome can be attributed to the social behaviour of affirmative reassurance. Believing that the influencer is ‘one of us’ gets us to fall into a trap. We start correlating the authenticity of the individual with the number of likes and followers he or she gathers, on his Facebook or Instagram page. As the eminent social psychologist Robert Cialdini mentions-‘… when we begin responding to social proof in such a mindless and reflexive fashion we can be fooled by partial or fake evidence’. It is therefore not unusual to find social media junkies glued to Instagram reels where self-appointed life coaches speak on inner reflection, gratitude and mindfulness – their colour-ordinated ensembles attracting more attention than their vapid homilies. There are similar scenarios in the management world, where corporate gurus expound management theories, aided by plucky acronyms and dodgy certification courses.

There is also the world of marketers who cleverly use fabricated figures to monetise the relationship between influencers and their followers. Perhaps the most dangerous category of influencers is social commentators who build public opinion through a false narrative of authenticity. The after-effects of these opinion makers who present a warped view of reality can be debilitating. A recent Netflix drama – Adolescence, portrays the shocking effects which social media influencers have on teenage boys, driving them to acts of violence based on their sense of distorted reality. The influencer industry currently thrives on chaos. It is time to establish a framework that ensures transparency of information and intent. Like every industry which evolves over time, there is a need for a triage between the platform providers, the government and the community to come together and formulate certain dos and don’ts.

To do so, we should begin by asking an existential question – what should be the role of the influencer? Is it shaping society, providing entertainment, promoting brands or just reporting information, whose only claim to authenticity could sometimes be a personal, prejudiced view? In the process of formulating an answer, we should ensure that the influencer community’s accountability to society is not overlooked. Our objective should be to collectively build an equitable system where freedom of expression does not allow for misdirection, and where fabricated insights does not masquerade as authenticity.

(The writer is former CEO of HCL Care and an author.)