Self-branding’s legitimacy rests on cultural taken-for-grantedness, not evidence.

Evidence

Bombastic blogger Stowe Boyd also had no problem criticizing the self-branding idea, which he compared to Freudian psychology and multitasking, two widely accepted ideas that in his opinion were invalid: The self-branding thing, the thing that you’re treating yourself like you are a product, is a relatively new meaning that’s only been around about 15 years. But, it’s so embedded now into the American psyche. I mean, it’s like Freudian psychology in the ’50s. It’s like you couldn’t argue against it even though there was absolutely no evidence to suggest that it was true, that Freudian psychology had any therapeutic benefits. Self-branding is like that now. It’s commonplace, you can’t convince people that it’s an un-useful metaphor because everyone takes it for granted. — Alice E. Marwick, Status Update, 423

Categorization

• XREF: Boyd’s analogy resonates with the sociology of convention — how unquestioned ideas persist without empirical support; also echoes Berger and Luckmann on the social construction of reality. — connects to: The desire to be a self and a brand is historically learned, not innate — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory: A Marxist…, 106
• DEEPTHINKING: The analogy between self-branding and Freudian therapy as evidence-free but culturally hegemonic ideas is a genuinely dense observation worth sitting with.

Broader Connections

• The desire to be a self and a brand is historically learned, not innate #corroborates (0.85) — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory, 106