The Accidental Endorsement

If you’re reading this, then you’re a digital citizen, too. Nice to meet you.

Social media is ubiquitous. It’s arguably harder to avoid social media and online communities than it is to grow a following online. Honestly, it goes to show that even when our society occupies the same space– the same online space– it doesn’t necessarily mean we’re talking to or listening to each other. 

But it’s impossible to ignore how the spheres of reality and social media have overlapped in the past decade or two. I want to use Sarah Warren-Riley’s chapter in Citizenship and Advocacy in the Technical Communication Classroom to discuss how online and social media texts have become “mundane texts that we engage with daily.” When we communicate in online spaces, our communications carry messages that we maybe never meant to send; or, as Warren-Riley argues, “… we often advocate positions whether we intend to or not,” (285). 

 

Share What You Mean; Mean What You Share

When I signed up for my Facebook, Twitter, Vine, and Tumblr accounts, I didn’t know I would later be studying those platforms in a professional writing program at a Master’s level. I was fourteen!

Many of the social media accounts that have stuck with me into adulthood– professionalhood, if you will– are relics of a past Gabriela who was so ignorant of her own ignorance that I sometimes wake up anxious now, in my late twenties, wondering OMG… wtf?!

Because we don’t think of our social media posts as texts that matter. I mean, maybe in retrospect, but social media has become such an everyday, mechanical motion of our lives that we forget the value of the content we’re publishing. We retweet NASA when they post about Native American Heritage Month and celebrate @AstroDuke, or Nicole Mann: the first Native American woman in space. Or, like a few off of my Facebook friends list who identify as “LGBTQIA+ allies,” some users reshare posts about how it’s great that transgender people are participating in professional sports ‘but they should have their own team because it’s not fair to let them compete otherwise’ (a perspective I denounce). I refuse to link-embed the vitriol, but it’s there, and it gets a heck-of-a-lot more aggressive than just suggestions of segregation.

In chapter 14 titled, “Social Media and Advocacy in the Technical and Professional Communication Classroom,” Warren-Riley reminds us that “memes, viral videos, and popular Twitter feeds” are only a few of the online social media texts through which we might interpret advocacy (294). On the one hand, some users don’t take tweets and Facebook posts too seriously– social media is a separate plane than “real life” beyond the screen. But for others (like myself), it’s hard to separate “sharing,” “reposting,” “retweeting,” or generally (re)publishing content to your individual page from a personal endorsement.

I’m really curious as to why somebody would publish something to their own social media profile if they do not endorse its message. But that’s not really my point, either. Whether or not you mean to advocate for a belief or message, when you share or post content online, it is subjectively up to each and every user to decide if it’s indicative of your beliefs– political or otherwise. As technical communicators and as teachers of technical communication, we need to consider how “the uncritical liking and sharing of posts that are enacted in social media spaces often advocate” whether or not it is our intention to endorse such advocacy in our liking and sharing (285). 

 

Social Media Best Practices

Below are several considerations to take before posting to any of your public accounts. Taking these considerations further, one might consider separating their professional identity from their personal identity entirely. It’s not unheard of to foster multiple social media accounts for different purposes, however, the following considerations are still worth passing onto our students whether through lecture or in organic conversation:

(1) Be aware of the larger conversation taking place around your post topic.

Many social media posts offer the opportunity to “dig deeper” and uncover other users’ responses and reactions with a *click*. 

On Twitter, it’s always worth opening the entirety of a single tweet separate from its individual presence on your timeline. In doing so, you can view and scroll through comments other users have left in response to the tweet in question.

Similarly, a useful feature of this platform is the “Quote Tweet” option. Below any tweet is a numerical representation of its “Retweets,” its “Quote Tweets,” and its “Likes.” By clicking on “Quote Tweets,” any user can navigate to an area of the platform where they can see other users “quoting” the original tweet in question, but also adding their own context to it for their followers. 

Both of these options enabled by the social media platform allow us to become acquainted with the many different perspectives that the extensively diverse population of the Internet affords. Considering that any mundane retweet or “like” can be construed as an endorsement of the message being advocated for by the post, do you think it’s worth taking into account these perspectives? 

(2) Consider your purpose in sharing. 

Warren-Riley describes our interactions with everyday posts and reposts as “uncritical” (285). 

So, what’s the point? If we’re posting arbitrarily; if we’re thinking about these posts’ messages uncritically; if we aren’t taking what we post or repost, like or share online seriously, then what’s the point? 

The fact is, as Warren-Riley points out, social media texts often advocate for causes that we may not realize they are advocating for when we initially reshare them. For example, I have an aunt whose husband is a law enforcement officer and she changed her profile picture to the notable “blue lives matter” flag that gained traction as a response to the Black Lives Matter movement. When I saw the update in my newsfeed, I saw that the comment section of the update was full– 67 comments full! Being nosy, I jumped into the thread immediately…

… And read through a pleasantly wholesome exchange wherein my aunt’s neighbor, a single Black mom with two teenaged children, explained why the symbol my aunt “endorsed” by sharing it to her profile, was an inflammatory symbol that throws aggression at an already-marginalized group of users (Black Americans).

My aunt recognized that she could support her law enforcement-employed husband without publicly endorsing a message that was meant to stifle the progress of a movement as important as BLM. She changed her picture and deleted the symbol from her profile.

Her purpose in sharing was good-intentioned. But did it trump the progress of an entire civil, human rights movement? That was the way my aunt perceived this question: what was the power of this simple social media post?

Oftentimes, we’re not trying to tout a certain message when we reshare content from others– we just agree with the shallow idea that the post represents. But again, what we share usually belongs to a larger conversation. Where do we stand, in that conversation, and what is our purpose for speaking up and joining in on the discourse?

(3) You control who sees your posts. Who are you allowing to be your audience?

I recently examined my following/followers list on Instagram and Twitter. Facebook feels like a bigger beast to tackle: even though I signed up for these accounts within years of each other, I’ve amassed over 1,000 Facebook friends compared to my several-hundreds of Insta and Twitter followers. 

There’s a reason for that! I was a ‘96 baby, so when I hit the realm of high school social media-use, it was the thing to amass a huge Facebook friend following. You didn’t have to know the people you were friends with; but as long as you knew of one another, your social status benefitted from acknowledging that online.

And even though I don’t closely know many of the people I am “friends” with online, it doesn’t stop me from scrutinizing those relationships now. In fact, as Warren-Riley points out, it’s kind of my job as a student and working expert of technical communication to “disrupt systems of inequalities,” (291). It’s not my fault if the most accessible ways to disrupt systems if inequality are offered in online spaces.

So that’s what I do: if somebody I am “friends with” chooses to share, and therefore arguably “endorses” a message on their public social media profile, and I happen to find it unethical or un-humanitarian, I’ll engage in the appropriate genre conventions to express my confusion. Comments, anger-reacts, and other such conventions help us demonstrate endorsement, too.

It’s important to surround yourself with followers and friends whose “sharing” ideologies won’t disrupt your professional plan. Many career paths now take into consideration social media use, and the way we interact with other online community members is often scrutinized as part of our ability to work alongside others.

So, in terms of control: you have control over very little. You cannot control the way others perceive you. You cannot perceive the way others perceive your online presence. But what can you control?

Your audience is usually in your control. Use your following and friends-lists wisely, but never underestimate their ability to affect your online social identity.