If you expand this idea on to the level of social networks and think about how it has to adapt to work then the outcome is what you see in most facebook feeds. Firstly the small talk is no longer an act between 2 people or a small group and secondly there is no longer the need for the call and response nature of conversation. The bond act is simply to know that people will see and likely read your updates and that they in turn know you are likely to see and read there’s. This can then, through comments, move back in to the realms of conversation and direct interaction.

The point is that to some one who wants to see the internet making people self obsessed the “new web small talk” looks a hell of a lot like self obsessed self promotion. Which is sad because it takes something that I think is vastly positive and casts it as the negative decay of our social society. In my view social groups are now much closer and tight nit then they have ever been before. I feel closer to my friends through the use of facebook and twitter and other social networking than I have at any point in my life. People that you may have other wise not seen a lot and lost that “touch base” bonding that small talk exits to do are kept in your social loop and the bond is at worst kept intact or at best grown.

So what we have is a basic social function that looks like but isn’t self obsessed self promotion in a medium where valid self promotion is huge factor in it’s self. It’s easy to see why people would get confused. Even more so when you factor in the other social norms that have been talked about already. There is a human need to shout in to the dark and the internet is a vast darkness in that respect. We have a new meta social group of strangers that we are connected to, we can throw videos up on to youtube and make blogs and get feedback and interaction from people we may never have otherwise known. People are interested in people because people are fascinating things.

What you get then in the next level above your direct social circle where strangers are interacting and where the lines between that is useful and good and what is bad and degrading start to blur a little. The internet is full of noise, full of people shouting and hoping to be heard, hoping that some one somewhere find what they have to say interesting. Be that in blogs, videos, art, music, writing it’s all in the hope that something we’ve put effort in to will strike a chord with some one somewhere and our efforts are validated and then enriched by interacting with that person. The problem is that people will look at all that noise through there own filtering of it. Which is to say they will dismiss a lot of it as empty and stupid because it isn’t of interest to them. They can then claim that all this empty rubbish is proof of people new self obsessed natures and re-enforce there view that the internet is making us all crazy.

Yet as rule 34 proves and celebrity gossip mags proves, what is seen as empty noise by some is interesting and valid content to others. Disturbing as those interests maybe. You can argue the validity of given subjects until the cows come home and even if it’s true that some matters and topics are more meaningful to be interested in it’s the interest it’s self that provides the validity of it in this context.

With out the internet I would not be as good an “artist” as I am today, which isn’t to say I’m any good at all (can’t leave out the self deprecation now can I?) but that is besides the point. By throwing my work be it writing (it’s a curse to like to write when you are as vastly dyslexic as I am) drawing or my music up on to the internet I get reactions and interactions that enrich me and make me better. From the simple positive feed back to meaningful criticism and advice to simply talking to people with the same interests as me, all these things improve me and my work. The conversion in this comment section is proof of that. We are all better off for reading it than we where because some one I don’t know posed an interesting question on a blog and asked us to respond. There is nothing empty about that and it is far from self obsession, it’s simply being human and seeking value and meaning and improvement of ours self’s through interaction with others. that said it is here that we find the cross over with simple and true self promotion.

Given how much noise there is on the internet you can not count on interested people just stumbling across your work. It may happen but you are more likely to get the worth wise responses you are looking for by finding ways to promote these things to the people who may be interested by them. This is not a purely selfish act as some people may want to paint it is, by finding some one interested in what you’ve done you both benefit. It’s that mutual benefit that is often over looked and forgotten. It does not matter if I think what you’ve done has value so long as some one somewhere does and you have every right to try and find those interested parties.

So that is pretty much everything but self promotion for professional gain covered, which I want to talk about in a second. I just wanted to take a moment to stop and say that none of what I’m trying to say means that there are no self obsessed self adsorbed people on the internet. There’s a hell of a lot of them, only I honestly don’t think there is any more than there would be with out the internet. It’s true they maybe more vocal and we may come in to contact with a lot more of them than we would other wise but that is also true of interesting people. Just because you are exposed to a grater number of people from a given percentage group does not mean that that percentage is on the increase. That misconception and the misreading of the placement of value in online interactions is what leads to this fear that we are becoming more and more self obsessed when in the main we are just expanding on the actions that make us human and enrich our life’s through feedback and interaction and the bonds of our social circles.

Now, on to self promotion as a professional matter. We’ll there is often a lot of cross over from this to the general promotion of our work. Since often the work we promote is the kind of work we’d like to be paid to do, since it’s our interest, our hobby. There is a point at which you cross a line and that is the point is when what you are promoting is your main source of income. Before you cross that line the blog or the band or the youtube videos or the webcomic are just a hobby, something fun you do that you want to shear with interested people in a mutual act of enrichment. You can start to push the promotion of that given interest in the hopes of taking it to a pro level but the fact remains that you could stop and walk away with out your life falling apart. Take the website I’ve put in place here, it’s just to a silly page holding some silly acoustic songs I’ve written that I’m turning in to an acoustic EP that I’ll give away free to any one who wants it. I promote it here in main because the first run of t-shirt designs I’m having printed get here on Friday and the website isn’t ready so I can’t promote something that will make me money. The point simply is that if some one goes to that myspace and listens and likes my songs then we both have got something we wanted, I get validation of my song writing and some one gets the joy of music they like.

When you do go pro that relationship changes a little in to the much stricter more recognised form of “you give me money I give you something of value in return”. You host here benefits from this blog by promoting it in the hopes some one who can provide work will see it. We benefit from great content and a fun discussion. How can there be anything wrong with that?

If being in bands and being around the local gig promotion scene (all round the county for a fun filled time) one of the thing I’ve come to understand is simple if shocking to some people with artistic temperaments. Talent on it’s own is worthless. The best bands the best musicians do not rise to the top simply for being good. It helps of course to be the best but a good band that knows how to promote and works the system and circuit hard will be the ones that can make a living from it, not the best band in the world who can’t be bothered with myspace or the like.

I’ve seen the radical changes in the music industry over the last 5 years and it’s the bands that have worked out how to adapt best to those changes that make it. They may not be best bands in terms of there music but they get there music to more people and engage with those people in a way that builds a connection that can then be turned in to profit so you can get away with touring and living the life. One of the big changes is oddly a very simple one, bands should no longer be trying to sell EPs. It’s pointless. No one cares who you are or that you’ve got an EP let alone give enough of a crap to buy it. The people who will buy it are your fans but if that is 3 girls and a man with a dog it’s all a bit pointless. Yet if you give out an EP for free, mostly as some form of digital download, you engage with people who are not your fans. If you see a band that you don’t know and you think “there quite good” and they then tell you you can have there EP for free you are likely going to go download it. In that way you grown your fan base and put the EP to work in a useful way. You may even offer an EP fans can buy that has extra tracks or some other added value counting on fans wanting to show there support for you to make money. It’s a double hitter you can both use the EP for promotion and bring fans in and as a way of bring money out of those new fans in a way that makes those fans feel value.

Anyway I feel I have gone a little of point there and I’ve just realised just how long I’ve been rambling on for. I know that my writing can not be the easiest thing to read so if you’ve made it this far I’m grateful. To labour the point even more I hope in some way my comment has enriched you even if it’s simply for the fact you disagree with me since you’ve have had to think about disagreeing with me. I’ve enjoyed thinking about and writing this. Given both those things how can any one look at what is happening here and presume it all as simple as us being self obsessed… life is so much more fun and complex than that.

I think it’s about staying with the core of what you wanted to do and thought was important, and not letting the marketing tail wag the dog. Even BBDO says, “The Work! The Work! The Work!”

If the source of your action is expressing or getting the word out on something genuinely sincere for yourself, then fine. Ex: I would be a fool not to promote the spy novel that took me 3 years of blood sweat and tears. to as many people as I can.

But if you become someone who will tweet/blog/FB/photo/vid/colonoscopy/promote just for the pathological OCD need to dry-hump an empty vessel with no content or value; or someone who will go to the Grand Opening of anything, including an envelope, then you’re screwed. ie, Exhibit A.: Don’t turn into Julia Allison.

Another great quote [paraphrasing] “For Christ’s sake, whatever you do, just DON’T BE EMPTY!” -Sanford Meisner on acting.

I think it’s easy to see other people doing it, and think that to succeed in NYC you’ve got to do exactly as much, if not more to have same.

-And there’s truth to some of that. You can get the word out about something good, valuable, substantial and aligned with your core purpose, and then that’s it.

Please don’t turn into the prototypical acting teacher who takes the entire class time to be a captive audience about them and their awesome, super-important internal ego-life and does no teaching; or the vapid hacks who are repeatedly hijacking the unrelated Meetup groups they moderate to spam advertise their empty, narcissistic-personality-disorder 3-hour 1-man-shows on off-off-off-off-off-Rahway.

Also, don’t be a perpetual Hollywood or Business whore.
There are people for whom nothing is EVER enough. -Ever. Despite truly Gargantuan success + riches, they promote themselves Every Second of Every Day to everyone, public bathrooms included. See: movie stars and Martha Stewart.
If you become someone who despite success, still busts out a ShamWOW! commercial faster than Usain Bolt to a passer-by, whilst in the middle of a candlelit dinner with your significant other, and has no discernable down-to-earth “You Time” or “Life” or “Friends in Meatspace” or “Humility”, then it’s probably time to hit yourself with a hammer.

Now to screw things up and contradict some of that, quote+rule+story:
*[paraphrasing again] “The most successful salespeople were ones who would go so far as to ask for the sale up to 7 times.” -’The Aladdin Factor’
*People have busy lives and short memories. They need persistent reminders for things outside their routine.
*There was this girl who got mad at me because I didn’t go to her play and see her. It was the first week we worked together at this job, she announced it 1x at the end of Meeting#1, and put up only 1 poster in the office. I forgot her announcement 2 minutes after she made it.

++Also: What advice you need depends how far you’re marginalized to one side or another. If you’re a crazy blowhard narcissist sea-monster, you probably need to turn it down.
If you’re naturally shy or low self-esteem, you may have some incorrect limiting beliefs and need encouragement.

Re Poppies: The Japanese also say ~”The nail that sticks its head up gets pounded down.” -I think both are overly humble bullshit; just don’t end up on “Hot Chicks with Douchebags”, or post your daily chores/errands/bowel-movements/nostril-hair-growth-charts on your Twitter stream.

I’m tired. Hope that helps.
Oh, also: http://radar.oreilly.com/2009/01/work-on-stuff-that-matters-fir.html

phampants: I agree that authenticity is the key. I hate getting spammed with promotional stuff that has obviously been thrown at all and sundry. It’s much more interesting and fulfilling to connect with people on an individual level.

Mohamad: The “hope for the nation”? Wow! Those are big shoes to fill.

Justin: Good call on the self-improvement factor. Complacency gets really boring really fast. And where do you slam? Let me know, I might pop in one day!

Mike: I simply adore the fact that you used Stephen Colbert as an example. I have a lot of respect for him and Jon Stewart, and the way they draw attention to issues that might otherwise fall by the wayside.

Lagrange: You’re right, I ought to have made the distinction between people who need to promote for their careers and people who do things like lifecasting. I’ve always felt that people should do something of societal worth in order to “earn” fame. But while attention-seeking for its own sake is annoying, I’m coming around to the fact that there are people whose very presence, warmth or sense of humour is enough to inspire, comfort or entertain others. And that’s pretty cool. Again, it’s about authenticity.

Also, If I can bust out a quote from the great Meryl Streep:

“I’m curious about other people. That’s the essence of my acting. I’m interested in what it would be like to be you.”

I think that curiosity about other people’s lives is a big part of what’s fueling this internet microfame phenomenon. The very fact that people’s daily travails are available for examination — and collaboration — is interesting to us. What a time we live in!

Nate: I absolutely love this sentence: “In the absence of defining ourselves through the means people have used for centuries–family, place of origin, politics, religion, even vocation–arbitrary interweb associations become the new social currency.”

Spot on.

Jeremy: Not enough. I can haz MOAR?

Mike again: I’ve heard worse!

Here is some attention. Hope it’s enough!

Love,
- Jeremy

As some have remarked above, I’m not sure that technology (the web in this case) can change human nature, but it does appear that social media developments of late have exacerbated certain tendencies. The ubiquity of the web and the east of participation combine several potent emotional fixes: instant gratification and irregular reinforcement. When I know I can post my every thought or link through my blog / facebook / IM status / twitter / youtube, why wouldn’t I? Why wait to have a meatspace interaction when I can have a virtual one instantly? Also, you never know when someone will reply to your facebook wall post, retweet you, comment on your blog, and so forth–and when it does happen, you get that special little rush of validation. (And as psychologists say, irregular reinforcement is the most addictive kind.)

Regarding microcelebrity, most of us may know enough simple math to avoid playing the lottery, but I think many of us are still hoping to hit the celebrity jackpot. Once again, asserting whether or not people have fundamentally changed is beyond me, but I think it’s pretty clear that the current media climate has made us more celebrity-obsessed. As recent as a few hundred years ago (before photography was widespread), many Americans would not have even known what the president looked like; today, we know more about him than we probably do about some of our own relatives. I don’t think, however, that the president, or @aplusk, or any other celebrity, has any more significant effect on our lives than such figures did in generations past–but their inescapable presence in our lives, from checkout line to web site, gives the illusion of meaning, and inspires us, consciously or not, to want to be like them. In the absence of defining ourselves through the means people have used for centuries–family, place of origin, politics, religion, even vocation–arbitrary interweb associations become the new social currency.

Nevertheless, if you follow me back, I’ll be tickled. Keep up the good work.

So you just found yourself a new blogreader – by delivering interesting content

Just one remark: In case you really want a helpful opinion from people reading your blog you shouln’d ask a question in a way that the people answering could give their answer with the explaination/justification that they like what you do, since they allready read your blog so they will probable like it. It’s similar to when a youtube user ask his subscribers “if they like that kind of video and if he/she should make more of that kind”. The ones who like it will say ‘yes’ and the ones who don’t will not say ‘no, I don’t like it’.

So anyway about the topic: You think talk about two different things here. First the dilemma of the “actor/writer/host/producer/performer” (to show off my copypaste-skills) how has to be known to make money, who might overdo it and get a bad image. And second the more general observation on what the internet is “doing with us”.
For the second part I’d be interested in how you feel about average users “promoting” themselfs, that is tweeting stuff of showing of on facebook. And do you thing there is a difference in how people would receive it in Australia and America? I’m from non-England-Europe btw.
To me, I thing facebook is more a bad thing in general. It’s time consuming and the “real people” are at least on my phone. On facebook ect. people are reduced to one or two lines and even if they are totally interesting personalities you don’t really get to ‘know’ them at all and so if you shift your social live more and more online… you end up ‘knowing’ nobody.

Concering the first part I can’t really see the world from the entertainers point of view so I can’t really say how much you should advertise the things you do. I’ll make a more general approach.
I live on the other part of the spectrum (theoretical physics) but I guess there are some common aspects concerning the point of beeing successful:
You have to be good at what you do, that is you have to have new ideas or produce something helpful or entertaining in your case. What you do has to be accecible to others, meaning there has to be a medium and the target audience shouldn’t be too small. And you have to get people excited about what you do so they keep track or even better: contribute themselfes.

The first part isn’t a problem in your case I guess. You rock, I’m sure
The last part is beeing inspirational and making me coming back. You’ll see in a couple of months if I’m still here
The second one requires that you tell the world you exist and now you don’t know how far to go before scare people off (so to speak) or turning good publicity into bad publicity by appeaing to be too full of your self.
My opinion is that if what you do is good, then that is the biggest part in the process of beeing known. Sure, you have get the word out so you get a job but once you know you got that one, you should remember that the plan was and is to be good at what you do (that is why you wanted to do what you do). The plan is not to get rich. That’s kinda the point. The funny thing is that if you stay good you make more money, but if you focus on making more money you might end up driving in the opposite direction. So I thing it’s intuitivly clear when you cross a line (do you agree with your mother, you haven’t really told?) and if you don’t know for sure you can easily let it go because this isn’t a necessary route at all.

On the other hand, people who have real talent, or can make you laugh, or have real insight and information to share (in a fair, balanced, non-insane way – not ‘Fair and Balanced’ like Fox News…)… those people I AM interested in hearing from.

[Pardon a digression for an example: A perfect example of this is Stephen Colbert. His character “Stephen” is an attention-seeking, crazy blowhard conservative. On the other hand, in the interviews where I have seen him be himself, Stephen seems rather thoughtful, not overbearing, low-key person (and politically very different from “Stephen”.) The character is a direct refutation of people who equate Fame and Value/Importance. (It’s funny that some people actually don’t understand this!) But he seems to fight very hard to *use* his character to draw attention to things he feels strongly about – like the US Olympic Speedskating team most recently, or the craziness of the politics of the day...

So he uses his humor to address some things he wants to put out there for discussion. I see that as valid on many levels – you can just enjoy his humorous wordplay, or you can delve deeper and see some political meaning in the things that he says.

One more brief example of something similar is/was Dave Chappelle. He did similar things with his show a few years ago, but I think he quit because his real message was getting lost in the ‘famestorm’ that was surrounding him at the time…]

So back to your original topic more directly, Hey, if you’re an actor/writer/host, how can you NOT self-promote? As long as you have people around you that will snap you back if you start getting a ‘big head’ about it, and you keep perspective in whatever way you feel is best for you, I think there’s nothing wrong with it. I don’t agree with what your mother said – Facebook could be a terrific venue for your expression (if it feels right to you). And isn’t the goal to share your stuff with more people? (Unfortunately, not everyone will like it or be kind, but some people are just dumb like that…)

Jeb did say some great stuff there. You seem to really enjoy what you are doing, you do it well, and people should see it! You make people laugh and think a little… seems like you’re Doing It Right.

(By the way, I’m not so sure the Internet is creating the “Look At Me” syndrome as much as reality TV and stuff like American Idol…)

Tall Poppy Syndrome – I have never heard of that, and it’s a very evocative image. Well, I suppose it all depends on the reason to be tall – your fans like you because of your work, and the way you carry yourself while you do it, not because you are ‘famous’.

Paris Hilton could represent your Evil Opposite – all fame, no ‘there’ there. People who want to be seen ‘being’, (like the person previously mentioned), well, I give that no value.

People who share stuff they value, or that they think others will value (and by the way, funny is VERY valuable!), I’m TOTALLY into that.

Well, I wrote a bunch. Slow day at work. I love to read about your life in the city (I grew up in Staten Island), so keep it coming!

Interesting post. Please give me a second to comment.

I think this is all about taking the middle road. While it’s kind of a terrible idea to be an arrogant prick, I think there’s a fine line that people ought to walk between that, and self-deprecation.

As an artist, there’s a certain self-importance there. Look at me. I am important. I have something important to say. I think without this, one probably does not become an artist at all, never mind succeed at becoming an artist.

However, I think the goal should always be to constantly improve. Don’t rest on your laurels. Acknowledge your accomplishments, but do not flaunt them. One should be wise enough to know that there’s always someone better than them out there. As part of the New York City poetry scene, this is made vividly clear to me every time I head out to slam at any of the various venues.

As for “Tall Poppy Syndrome” – in America, that’s what’s known as “being a hater.” Haha!

Also, don’t let your mother tell you what’s cool.

I live in a country where self-promotion is necessary for the future of the Nation. I mean, our pool of talents always promote themselves as a “hope for nation” especially the likes of Michelle Yeoh, Jimmy Choo and Lee Chong Wei. But i know where you’re coming from Ella and as a DJ, I remember going to Melbourne and seeing how only international DJs get more promotions than local Australian DJs, especially in Australian EDM sites like http://www.inthemix.com.au. I remember how Sneaky Sound System was heavily criticised by Oz for “showing off” due to their collaborations with Tiesto and Kanye West.

But self-promoting always work, and it has to work no matter what. Self-promoting can even happen through accident. All you need to do is to get through your criticisms and be what you are. That’s what self-promoting’s all about.