How Social Media Shape Identities and Discourses in Professional Digital Settings: Self-Communication or Self-Branding?

  • Sandra PetroniEmail author


This chapter draws attention to how users discursively present and promote themselves in a professional digital setting, namely LinkedIn, and how social media technology affects users’ agency and, as a consequence, their identity construction. Four categories of LinkedIn profiles, that is, journalists, photographers, web managers and project managers, are investigated in order to identify which verbal resources these professionals exploit to present themselves. Furthermore, after describing the digital technologies through which users carry out their Self-branding process, the author shows how these technical devices channel meaning potential. In fact, findings demonstrate that the effective and strategic rhetoric of LinkedIn profiles not only resides in the data uploaded by users but also in how the algorithms which fuel the platforms manipulate these data.


  1. Amoore, L. (2011). Data derivatives. Theory, Culture & Society, 28(6), 24–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Archambault, A., & Grudin, J. (2012). A longitudinal study of Facebook, LinkedIn, & Twitter use. CHI, 2012, 2741–2750.Google Scholar
  3. Baron, N. S. (2008). Always on: Language in an online and mobile world. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Basthomi, Y. (2012). Curriculum vitae: A discourse of celebration with narcissistic allusions. TEFLIN Journal, 23(1), 1–24.Google Scholar
  5. Beer, D. (2009). Power through the algorithm? Participatory web cultures and the technological unconscious. New Media & Society, 11(6), 985–1002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhatia, V. (1993). Analysing genre: Language use in professional settings. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
  7. Bhatia, V. (1996). Methodological issues in genre analysis. Journal of Language and Communication Studies, 16, 39–60.Google Scholar
  8. Biber, D. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Biber, D., & Conrad, S. (2009). Register, genre, and style. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bijker, W., Hughes, T., & Pinch, T. (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge MA/London: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. Bijker, W., & Law, J. (1992). General introduction. In W. Bijker & J. Law (Eds.), Shaping technology/building society: Studies in sociotechnical change (pp. 1–16). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bolter, J. D., & Grusin, R. (1999). Remediation: Understanding new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  13. boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon information. Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. boyd, D. M. (2011). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics, and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (pp. 39–58). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Brouer, R. L., Stefanone, M. A., Badawy, R. L., & Egnoto, M. J. (2015). Losing control of company information in the recruitment process: The impact of LinkedIn on organizational attraction. In Proceedings from the 4th Hawaii International Conference on System Science (pp. 1879–1888). Hawaii, HI: IEEE.Google Scholar
  16. Brown, R. P., & Zeigler-Hill, V. (2004). Narcissism and the nonequivalence of self-esteem measures: A matter of dominance? Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 585–592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Buffardi, L. E., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking web sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1303–1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Campbell, W. K., Bonacci, A. M., & Shelton, J. (2004). Psychological entitlement: Interpersonal consequences and validation of a selfreport measure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 83, 29–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Campbell, W. K., Rudich, E., & Sedikides, C. (2002). Narcissism, selfesteem, and the positivity of self-views: Two portraits of self-love. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 358–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cheney-Lippold, J. (2011). A new algorithmic identity: Soft biopolitics and the modulation of control. Theory Culture & Society, 28(6), 164–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Chouliaraki, L., & Morsing, M. (2009). Media, organizations and identity. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  22. Cook, G. (2012). Persuasion in English. In D. Allington & B. Mayor (Eds.), Communicating in English: Text, talk, technology (pp. 225–266). London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Darics, E., & Koller, V. (2017). Language in business, language at work. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  24. DeKay, S. H. (2006). Expressing emotion in electronic job cover letters. Business Communication Quarterly, 69, 435–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Díez Prados, M., & Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A. B. (2015). Persuasion at work: Digital media for self-promotion. Paper presented at ADDA (Approches to Digital Discourse Analysis), 1st International Conference, 18–20 November 2015, Valencia.Google Scholar
  26. Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Development in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2), 415–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ellison, N. B., Steinfeld, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘friends’: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Emmons, R. A. (1984). Factor analysis and construct validity of the narcissistic Personality inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48, 291–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Enelow, W., & Kursmark, L. (2012). Expert resumes for managers and executives (3rd ed.). St. Paul, MN: JIST Works.Google Scholar
  31. Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change. Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  32. Fairclough, N. (1995). Critical discourse analysis. London: Longman.Google Scholar
  33. Featherstone, M. (2007). Consumer culture and postmodernism (2nd ed.). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  34. Fiske, S. T., & Tylor, S. E. (2013). Social cognition from brain to culture. London: Sage publications.Google Scholar
  35. Fogg, B. J. (2003). Persuasive technology. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
  36. Fogg, B. J. (2009). A behaviour model for persuasive design. Persuasive 2009. Proceeding of the 4th International Conference on Persuasive Technology April 2009, Claremont, CA, USA. Retrieved from
  37. Furka, I. (2008). The curriculum vitae and the motivational letter: A rhetorical and cultural analysis. WoPaLP, 2, 18–37.Google Scholar
  38. Gabriel, M. T., Critelli, J. W., & Ee, J. S. (1994). Narcissistic illusions in self-evaluations of intelligence and attractiveness. Journal of Personality, 62, 143–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Gardner, W. L., & Martinko, M. J. (1988). Impression management: An observational study linking audience characteristics with verbal presentations. Academy of Management Journal, 31, 42–65.Google Scholar
  40. Gibson, J. J. (1977). The theory of affordances. In R. Shaw & J. Bransford (Eds.), Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology (pp. 67–82). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  41. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of the self in everyday life. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
  42. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behaviour. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  43. Guillory, J., & Hancock, J. (2012). The effect of LinkedIn on deception in resumes. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15(3), 135–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 276–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Hearn, A. (2010). Structuring feeling: Web 2.0, online ranking and rating, and the digital ‘reputation’ economy. Ephemera, 10(3/4), 421–438.Google Scholar
  46. Herring, S., & Kapidzic, S. (2015). Teens, gender, and self-presentation in social media. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of social and behavioral sciences (2nd ed., pp. 146–152). Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Herring, S. C. (2013). Discourse in Web 2.0: Familiar, reconfigured, and emergent. In D. Tannen & A. M. Trester (Eds.), Discourse 2.0: Language and new media (pp. 1–25). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Hoffmann, C. R. (2012). Cohesive profiling: Meaning and interaction in personal weblogs. Amsterdam: John Benjamins publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Isaksson, M., & Jørgensen, P. E. F. (2010). Communicating corporate ethos on the web: The self-presentation of PR agencies. Journal of Business Communication, 47(2), 119–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Jenkins, R. (2010). The 21st century interaction order. In M. Hviid Jacobsen (Ed.), The contemporary Goffman (pp. 257–274). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Jenkins, R. (2014). Social identity. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1994). Accuracy and bias in self-perception: Individual differences in self-enhancement and the role of narcissism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 206–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Johnson, N. L. (2016). Improving the accounting student resume language: Accounting faculty best practice tools. The Accounting Educators’ Journal, 26, 18–33.Google Scholar
  55. Joos, G. J. (2008). Social media: New frontiers in hiring and recruiting. Employment Relations Today, 35(1), 51–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Kampf, C., Broillet, A., & Emad, S. (2014). What and how do we learn from LinkedIn forums? An exploratory investigation. Retrieved from
  57. Kaputa, C. (2005). UR a brand! How smart people brand themselves for business success. Mountain View, CA: Davies-Black Publishing.Google Scholar
  58. Kelly, B., & Delasalle, J. (2012). Can LinkedIn and enhance access to open repositories? In OR2012: The 7th International Conference on Open Repositories. Bath: University of Bath.Google Scholar
  59. Krämer, C. N., & Winter, S. (2008). Impression management 2.0: The relationship of self-esteem, extraversion, self-efficacy, and self-presentation within social networking sites. Journal of Media Psychology, 20, 106–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Labrecque, L. I., Markos, E., & Milne, G. R. (2011). Online personal branding: Processes, challenges, and implications. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 25, 37–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Lair, D. J., Sullivan, K., & Cheney, G. (2005). Marketization and the recasting of the professional self: The rhetoric and ethics of personal branding. Management Communication Quarterly, 18, 307–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Leary, M. R., & Kowalski, R. M. (1990). Impression management: A literature review and two-component model. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 34–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lee, I. (2005). The evolution of e-recruiting: A content analysis of fortune 100 career web sites. Journal of Electronic Commerce in Organizations, 3(3), 57–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Mager, A. (2012). Algorithmic ideology: How capitalist society shapes search engines. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 769–787.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Manovich, L. (2001). The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  66. Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Marwick, A. E. (2013). Status update: Celebrity, publicity, and branding in the social media age. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  68. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media. The extension of man. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  69. Mehdizadeh, S. (2010). Self-presentation 2.0: Narcissism and self-esteem on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(4), 357–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Milioni, D. L. (2015). Opening the ‘black box’ of user agency: A critical cultural studies approach to Web 2.0. Retrieved from‘Black_Box’_of_User_Agency_A_Critical_Cultural_Studies_Approach_to_Web_20
  71. Miller, J. D., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Comparing clinical and social-personality conceptualizations of narcissism. Journal of Personality, 76, 449–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Nishar, D. (2014). The next three billion [INFOGRAPHIC]. Retrieved from LinkedIn Corporation:
  73. Orduna-Malea, E., Font, C. I., & Ontalba-Ruipérez, J. A. (2017). From universty to private company: A measureable route of LinkedIn users. In M. Cabrera & N. Lloret (Eds.), Digital tools for academic brending and self-promotion (pp. 127–150). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Page, R. (2012). The linguistics of self branding and micro-celebrity in Twitter: The role of hashtags. Discourse & Communication, 6(2), 181–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Papacharissi, Z. (Ed.). (2011). A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  76. Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, machiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 556–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Peters, T. (1997). The brand called you. Retrieved from
  78. Petroni, S. (2011). Language in the multimodal web domain. Rome/Ottawa: Aracne/Legas.Google Scholar
  79. Petroni, S. (2016). Digitality and persuasive technologies: New social actions and practices in digital settings. In S. Gardner & S. Alsop (Eds.), Systemic functional linguistics in the digital age (pp. 29–44). United Kingdom: Equinox Publishing.Google Scholar
  80. Pinch, J., & Bijker, W. (1997). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W. Bijker, T. Hughes, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 17–50). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  81. Rainie, L., & Wellman, B. (2012). Networked: The new social operating system. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  82. Rein, I. J., Kotler, P., & Shields, B. (2006). The elusive sports fan, reinventing sports in a crowded marketplace. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  83. Rodden, J. (2006). Reputation and its vicissitudes. Society, 43(3), 75–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Rosenberg, M. (1986). Conceiving the self. Malabar, FL: Robert E. Krieger Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  85. Schawbel, D. (2013). Reasons why your online presence will replace your resume in 10 years. Forbes. Retrieved from
  86. Sinclair, J. (1991). Corpus, concordance, collocation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Singh, P. R. (2011). Consumer culture and postmodernism. Postmodern Openings, Year 2, 5(5), 55–88.Google Scholar
  88. Sordello, S. (2014). LinkedIn’s Q1 2014 earnings. Retrieved from LinkedIn Corporation:
  89. Stutzman, F., & Hartzog, W. (2012). Boundary regulation in social media. In Proceedings from the ACM 2012 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 769–778).Google Scholar
  90. Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research setting. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  91. Thurlow, C., & Mroczek, K. (Eds.). (2011). Digital discourse: Language in the new media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  92. Tognini-Bonelli, E. (2001). Corpus linguistics at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Tomlinson, E. (2016). First encounters in professional cyberspace: Writer’s exploration of LinkedIn. In P. Thomas & P. Takayoshi (Eds.), Literacy in practice: Writing in private, public, and working lives (pp. 163–176). London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  94. van Dijck, J. (2009). Users like you? Theorizing agency in user-generated content. Media, Culture & Society, 31(1), 41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. van Dijck, J. (2013). ‘You have one identity’: Performing the self on Facebook and LinkedIn. Media, Culture & Society, 35(2), 199–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. van Dijck, J., & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding social media logic. Media and Communication, 1(1), 2–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Vazire, S., & Gosling, S. D. (2004). E-perceptions: Personality impressions based on personal websites. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 123–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Ward, C., & Yates, D. (2013). Personal branding and e-professionalism. Journal of Service Science, 6(1), 101–104.Google Scholar
  99. Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  100. Wernick, A. (1991). Promotional culture: Advertising, ideology and symbolic expression. London and Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Zappavigna, M. (2012). Discourse of Twitter and social media: How we use language to create affiliation on the web. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  102. Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 1816–1836.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of HumanitiesUniversity of Rome “Tor Vergata”RomeItaly

Personalised recommendations