It is widely understood that social media is capable of connecting users in a way that traditional forms of media cannot. Unlike traditional forms of media, social media can be used as a mundane platform, whereby people post pictures and videos relating to their personal lives, or a commercial platform, whereby professionals and business people alike use the connectivity and instant-reach provided by social media to sell to impressionable consumers. Recently, social media has evolved to become a digital infrastructure capable of advertising and promoting plastic surgery procedures.  

As identified by Dorfman, Instagram in particular is a ‘natural suit’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 332) for ‘business marketing’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 333) surrounding plastic surgery. This is because Instagram is a photo and video sharing platform and  plastic surgery is a ‘visual surgical specialty’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 332). Through using Instagram, plastic surgeons are able to post photos and videos of procedures, before and after comparisons and also market their procedures to a desirable audience. 

However, whilst it appears that social media and plastic surgery is the perfect match, this relationship is bittersweet. 

It is advantageous for plastic surgeons to use social media as a marketing tool to gain new clientele. With more and more people interacting and using social media, plastic surgeons will continue to gain more interest and enquiries via these platforms. However, whilst social media is a great marketing tool, it is not the most professional nor educational tool consumers should use to inform themselves about plastic surgery procedures. Dorfman’s research indicated that a vast number of posts under the hashtag ‘plastic surgery’ were ‘self-promotion’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 334) rather than ‘education’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 334). With an increasing number of plastic surgery patients using social media as a ‘consultation’ service to inform themselves of plastic surgery procedures, self-promotional posts or posts from nonplastic surgeons may be detrimental to potential consumers. 

Additionally, through the continued use of social media by plastic surgeons for self-promotion, the procedures of plastic surgery have become a ‘trivialised aesthetic’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 335), rather than an understood medical procedure. This aesthetic coupled with a lack of ‘board-certified plastic surgeons’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 334) posting to popular social media hashtags used by consumers to inform themselves of procedures, produces a dangerous situation whereby consumers can be falsely enticed into a surgery that they know little about. With a lack of educational posts surrounding plastic surgery, consumers are unlikely to be properly exposed to the ‘risks and dangers’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 336) of plastic surgery.  

Ultimately, social media presents a valuable option for plastic surgeons to inform and gain new clientele. However, there are significant risks to using social media to inform and advertise plastic surgery. Whilst there is an abundance of self-promotional content regarding plastic surgery on social media platforms, there is a significant deficit of educational content regarding the risks and dangers of plastic surgery . Moreover, there is a lack of ‘board-certified plastic surgeons’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 334) using social media to inform these consumers, instead popular plastic surgery posts are often posed by nonplastic surgeons. To combat these issues, as argued by Dorfman, more ‘board-certified plastic surgeons’ (Dorfman et al. 2018, pg 334) should post to social media, adequately informing potential consumers of the benefits and risks of plastic surgery procedures.

References:

Social media is known to foster communication between people. Considered as a forum to post interesting photos of yourself/others or what you are doing/interested in, social media is not often associated with the world of politics and activism. However, with the increased use of social media and recent “advances” (Law et al 2018) in “digital communication platforms” (Law et al 2018), social media has transformed into a digital infrastructure aiding political engagement. Social media allows for the “distribution of ideas” (Law et al 2018) and “public deliberation” (Law et al 2018). Through this, social media inherently promotes the sharing of political ideas and political discussion

The unique feature of hashtags, or specifically hashtag publics further helps social media facilitate political engagement. Hashtags use specific words or abbreviations to connect or “affiliate” (Zappavigna) different posts together. Through different themes and keywords, ideas and discussions can instantly be connected. Additionally, whilst hashtags generate “ambient affiliation” (Zappavigna) between those who use them within a post, other users who merely wish to engage with the content of a specific hashtag public can search for that hashtag whereby all posts that have used it are coordinated. Hence, hashtags can help to coordinate political ideas, events and experiences and allow those interested in those ideas to engage with them. Ultimately, hashtags “aid the formation and coordination of ‘ad hoc issue publics’” (Bruns & Burgess; Rambukkana). Users of social media who wish to express a political opinion, idea or experience can use a specific hashtag whereby any experiences similar to can also be coordinated. 

Ultimately social media, whilst often considered a mundane digital infrastructure, has become a forum to promote and engage issues of politics and activism. Political engagement within “advanced democracies” (Vromen 2017, p.2) has “changed” (Vromen 2017, p.2) within the last few years. No longer do citizens solely align with “traditional, dutiful allegiances” (Vromen 2017, p.2) of politics, such as political parties and trade unions, to engage with political issues. More often, citizens are now engaging with politics in a more “individualised” (Vromen 2017, p.3) way, specifically using “everyday digitally based mechanisms” (Vromen 2017, p.3) to “engage in politics” (Vromen 2017, p.3) and “express points of view” (Vromen 2017, p.3). This is due to the connectivity and availability social media affords its users. 

Moreover, within the modern era, many people are digitally literate. They can understand how internet applications work, and can communicate effectively using different social media platforms. Hence, many generations today represent ‘digital citizens’. The concept of a digital citizen can be used to articulate how social media can be used to foster political engagement. A digital citizen is a person who has the “skills and knowledge” (Office of the eSaftey Commissioner, NSW Department of Education) to “effectively use digital technologies” (Office of the eSaftey Commissioner, NSW Department of Education). Moreover, a digital citizen uses these skills to “positively participate in society and communicate with others”  (Office of the eSaftey Commissioner, NSW Department of Education). Through using social media applications, people can effectively share their political opinions/ideas/experiences within one another. Additionally, social media can be used as a forum for political discussion, whereby different people can discuss different political events or efforts that require more attention from the public. 

Ultimately, the advances of social media coupled with its increased use and literacy means that everyday citizens can use social media to engage in politics, outside the constraints of traditional and formal political engagement. 

References:

Traditionally introduced by Jurgen Habermas, the ‘public sphere’ is a concept used to explain social relationships within the “structure” (Bruns et al. 2016, p. 99) of media. Subsequent to this notion has been a discussion of digital communities. A digital community is a “distinct, bounded group” (Keller 2019, p. 2) of “social relationships” (Keller 2019, p. 2) within an “online space” (Keller 2019, p. 2) that is “accessible” to everyone (Kruse 2018).

Tumblr functions as a blogging space. The anonymity of Tumblr profiles (McCracken 2020, p. 39), coupled with its features of hiding follower counts and “blue check marks” (McCracken 2020, p. 39) (indicating official accounts) means that Tumblr promotes an authentic and accessible social media experience for its users (McCracken 2020, p. 39).   

Tumblr is well-known to fan communities and fandoms. Tumblr makes interactions between fans easier through its use of hashtags (McCracken 2020, p. 41). Hashtags allow users to “search” (McCracken 2020, p. 41) and be “introduced” (McCracken 2020, p. 41) to others within the fandom thus promoting “social relationships”  (Keller 2019, p. 2). Moreover, Tumblr’s use of “GIF sets” (McCracken 2020, p. 43) allows fans to interact through visual means. Through these processes, Tumblr has created a specific means by which its users can connect and interact, creating social relationships and discussions.

Tumblr promotes a safe space for all its users (McCracken 2020, p. 40). Tumblr is utilised by the LGBTQ + community due to its anonymity and known accepting presence. Additionally, young feminists utilize Tumblr to communicate and interact away from judgement (Keller 2020, p. 1). This accessibility has also aided Tumblr in facilitating important and impactful events for different digital communities. Ultimately, Tumblr’s anonymity has “empowered” (McCracken 2020, p. 40) users who would be “otherwise marginalised” (McCracken 2020, p. 40) to use their voices and “find their community” (McCracken 2020, p. 40). Hence, Tumblr acts as a digital community through its ability to connect users to different communities to facilitate discussion and foster social relationships.

References:

Allison McCracken, Chapter 3 ‘Going Down the Rabbit Hole: An Interview with Amanda Brennan, Head of Content Insights and Social, Tumblr’ in a tumblr book: platform and cultures eds Allison McCracken, Alexander Cho, Louisa Stein, and Indira Neill Hoch (University of Michigan Press: 2020) https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11537055

Bruns, A & Highfield, T 2016 Is Habermas on Twitter? Social media and the public sphere. In A Bruns, G Enli, E Skogerbø, AO Larsson, & Christensen, C (Eds.) The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics. Routledge, New York, pp. 56-73