Virtual Stars and the Impact of Audience Behavior on Their Fate

As social networks become more popular and widespread, the stars of these networks also gain fame, but this fame sometimes brings troubles. Recently, news emerged about an Iranian woman named Nasim Najafi Aghdam, who was very famous on YouTube and attacked the YouTube building out of anger at the policies of this social network, injuring three people before committing suicide. In this week's program, we have addressed the question of who the stars of social networks are and how audience behavior affects the lives and personalities of these virtual stars. Along with two experts: Hossein Ghazian, a sociologist residing in the U.S., and Amir Rashidi, a researcher on security and internet access at the Human Rights Campaign in Iran, also based in the U.S. Mr. Ghazian, I want to start the discussion with you. Who are the stars of social networks in general, and what factors influence the stardom of various personalities? I think it’s worth distinguishing between two groups of these stars because their nature and form of presence in social networks are different. The first group consists of those who were stars in the real world or offline and are now utilizing social media. The second group includes those who have become stars in this online world and virtual space, using the features of social media to achieve this. The first group was already famous before entering social media, and these platforms serve as a means to connect with their audience and increase their fame and popularity, with less commercial use being common among them. In contrast, the second group has built their stardom through social networks and often uses them for commercial purposes as well. The first group typically has a presence in universal networks, meaning they are known and connected with a vast number of people across various social networks, as they generally communicate with their audience through mass media. Those who usually interact with them are their fans and supporters. However, the second group, which has created their stardom through networks, only interacts with a segment of the audience present on that network, making their work local and situational, attracting both supporters and opponents, and often engaging in controversy for commercial purposes. Therefore, it is essential to differentiate between these two groups, as both their entry into social networks and their methods of becoming stars and utilizing them are different. Consequently, the factors that make them stars also vary. The first group primarily relies on their personal or personality traits, such as their artistic talent, voice, or performances they have done, being prominent figures in literature, sports, or other fields. The second group highlights one of their traits through social media, often straying from conventional norms, which creates controversy and attracts both support and opposition, leading to their stardom. Mr. Ghazian, I believe our discussion now focuses more on that second group you mentioned, those who were not stars outside the virtual world but became stars within it. What are the advantages and disadvantages of their stardom on social networks? Some of this can be considered an advantage, as social networks have broken the monopoly on content production and distribution. Previously, before the advent of social media, content production and distribution were primarily in the hands of mass media, which had specific gatekeeping and criteria for producing and disseminating content. If we consider all forms of artistic production as a medium, they controlled the cultural and artistic content. Now, with the presence of social media and the creation of virtual space on the internet, this monopoly has been broken. Therefore, if you wanted to enter the music world, you not only had to produce but also needed a distributor willing to produce a gramophone record for you, then a cassette, and later a CD, which required a significant amount of financial resources. Now, due to social media, the amount of investment needed for distributing cultural and artistic products has significantly decreased, allowing more people to participate. Hence, this monopoly has been broken, which is why you can see numerous stars in areas like music and performance, differing from the previous era before social media when the number of people was limited and stars were well-defined. These stars are in many places you may not even see, due to the networked nature of social media. You are dealing with a group of people who may have hundreds of thousands of followers, and since you are not in that network, you do not recognize them. Therefore, I believe this is a positive aspect that potentially allows the monopoly on content production and distribution to be broken, and it has also enabled the visibility of things outside the rigid norms of mass media, which primarily reflect and reproduce the prevailing values in a society. This is another positive aspect. However, there are also those who go so far beyond these norms that they appear very abnormal and unusual to us. For this reason, people approach them with various labels, harass them, and confront them, which sometimes they themselves seek such confrontations because it is a potential opportunity for their stardom. Mr. Ghazian: 'There are also those who go so far beyond these norms that they appear very abnormal and unusual to us. For this reason, people approach them with various labels, harass them, and confront them, which sometimes they themselves seek such confrontations because it is a potential opportunity for their stardom.' Mr. Ghazian, we will certainly return to the discussion of harassment and violence that exists. But I would like to ask Mr. Rashidi now. We have often heard, Mr. Rashidi, that social networks are not real. That is, people are not what they portray. How true is this statement and why is it so? You see, I am one of those who believe we do not have a virtual world. Everything we see there is real. In a way, it is a mirror reflecting a reality we face in society. However, [the virtual world] intensifies this and makes the issues we see there more pronounced. Additionally, since there is no physical presence there, it allows you to create another image of yourself that does not align with your real image. However, one concern in these environments is that your perspective becomes limited, in a way that you may not realize this limitation. If you pay attention to the behavior of celebrities on social networks, they usually count their likes, look at their comments, respond carefully, and their world is summarized within that scope. I call it we have several circles in this virtual world, in these social networks: one is my circle and my friends, and another is the circle of my friends' friends, which usually limits perspectives to the extent of friends of friends in this space. We cannot see beyond that because finding the depth of relationships is not something you can grasp by scrolling through these pages on Facebook or any other social media. Therefore, it can create a false impression about the world you are living in, whether the feedback you receive is real or not. Regarding how much these feedbacks can affect you, I am talking about their reality or unreality. Thus, it can lead individuals to - I want to use this word very cautiously - suffer from 'delusion' about their status in this virtual space, because it is very difficult to see beyond your friend's friend and observe their reactions to the content you post in that space. When you step back a bit, you can see what people are talking about, what their concerns are, and what kind of relationship they establish with you. Mr. Ghazian, Mr. Rashidi mentioned the delusion that arises for some social media stars. How much do you agree with this issue, and what impact do you think it can have? I completely agree. The main reason for this issue is the nature of the network itself. It is true that we talk about a network, and often we might have a mental image of a single network, but the reality of networks is that we live in a world of networks, meaning there are multiple networks that may sometimes connect with faint lines. But these lines are so faint that it seems these networks are like separate galaxies. If we are not aware of this characteristic from above and do not realize that this network we refer to as a network, for instance, under the name of the internet, has actually become networked due to the presence of social networks, and in each network, there are many people who may not know that there are many others in another network alongside them who may be completely unaware of their situation and their network. In this case, a cognitive error may occur for those who are in their network, leading them to believe they are the center of all networks or the network itself, and they may not realize that there is another network, and each of them has its own centers, and they are also part of this world, so they are not the center of the universe. They are merely the center of their own universe. This factor is the delusion. That is, the delusion that because I am in a place where, for example, I have five hundred thousand followers, this is the center of the universe, and everyone seems to pay attention to this place. We realize this when people enter these worlds who have never known this person and are suddenly surprised that there is someone who sometimes does not have very different characteristics but has several hundred thousand followers and people follow them, and you may have never even heard this person's name before. People who look at the network this way may fall into this delusion, but those who are in that network are always prone to this cognitive error and may not realize that they are just one network among many networks. Especially since two factors strongly reinforce this, perhaps we can say three factors: one is the platforms that exist on the internet, and we do not realize that if we are on one platform, we may not be on another platform, which has its own world. For instance, someone on Instagram may not realize what is happening on Twitter or may not be there, or on Facebook, and so on. They may not be aware that this is just one of the available platforms and that within this platform, there are many networks. The second is the issue of language, and sometimes people do not pay attention to the fact that the center of their linguistic world is in one of the networks, and the other issue is, of course, location, which also sometimes affects this matter. If we do not pay attention to these aspects, many users and many content producers in these media may not consider this aspect. That is, they may not have that general perspective and may not have an overview of this world, what characteristics it has, and that the network is networked and fragmented, and they may completely fall into this cognitive error and consider themselves the center of the universe, and this is actually the delusion we refer to.