First off, thanks for pointing out that authenticity has, in part at least, to do with how in touch someone is with who they are and – if they’re selling/marketing something – how confident they are about their product or service. Yes, indeed. As someone I knew a while ago used to say, “certainty sells.” (And that’s not a bad thing at all.)

I also appreciate your point about trying things on to see if they fit. Actually, I can absolutely say “yes!” to that point, because I seem to have gone down several different paths, thinking that they were the right ones, but then realizing that they weren’t really what was calling to me.

Thanks, Jennifer!

I usually know within the first paragraph or two if the writer is in touch with who they are and feel confident about what they’re offering. I get a gut sense of it. It’s not a superpower or anything, I can just feel the “yes” or “no” in my abdomen.

The “yes” opens me up and makes me feel curious. The “no” shuts me down and I click away to something else. I’ve known people in life who are an absolute “yes”, but their website is a huge “no.”

Not that there’s something wrong with inauthenticity – sometimes we have to try things on to decide if they fit. For myself, though, I’m most comfortable working with folks who like who they are and are unapologetic about being that person – warts and all. And I like working with people who’ve gone through the process to get to that place.

So I check in with my gut.

I think the first comment on the article sums up a lot of my thoughts and feelings.

Hate and nastiness are, unfortunately, part of human experience. AND, so are generosity, empathy, and kindness.

While it’s true I’ve seen flame wars erupt in various online venues, I’ve also seen the equivalent erupt in face-to-face encounters.

And I’ve seen plenty of real support show up online as well. Not just empathetic support, but actual financial support as well, offered in a spirit of generosity to and by people who will probably never meet face-to-face.

I think it comes down to what each of us individually feels most comfortable with. You know?

Thanks for your thoughts! It’s definitely an intriguing conversation.

http://calacanis.com/2009/01/29/we-live-in-public-and-the-end-of-empathy/

I teach a class on politics in the workplace, and manipulation is one of the things that always comes up, especially when I talk about how to pick language that helps you achieve your goals – essentially, helps you get what you want.

As you say, manipulation happens in every conversation or encounter you have (with yourself, too!). So the question of manipulation becomes another very slippery slope.

I also think that the face-to-face versus electronic (whether online or phone or whatever) interaction is one of those cases where different people have different needs, expectations, and experiences. I have several very good friends – some of whom I’d call my best and most reliable friends – whom I’ve either met in person only once or twice, or in one case, not at all. And yet I know that I can call on these people for pretty much any sort of help or support I might need.

Yes, there’s a richness to the face-to-face contact, but it’s not everyone’s experience that it’s necessary to have a deep, authentic connection.

What a great conversation! Thank you all for joining in.

Blogs, and all this nifty internet communication that I don’t quite grasp – facebook, twitter – help trick us into feeling as though we’ve had an authentic exchange. Or experience, if it’s simply reading a post. We have, but.

And the but is important.

The but is what folks who have grown up with AIM do not understand – are they called Gen Yers? – an AIM exchange is not a coversation.

It is not the same as sitting face to face with a person LIVE and in COLOR and experiencing all the subtle communication that comes with human presence and face to face interaction.

AIM/social media removes a significant layer of authenticity…like a massage through terrycloth. Or perhaps, more accurately, it’s like a massage via Skype.

Isn’t marketing manipulation? Think of the live manipulation you experience everyday? Is the person trying to manipulate you disingenuous? Inauthentic? Self-serving? Trying to have a need met? Exercising personal power? Doing what they think is best for you? Or just for themselves?

Really? Are we so sure about the authenticity of folks we see every day? Or is it consistency?

Hmmmm…thanks for letting me think out loud. Authentically.

I like your point about evolution. Yes. It’s an evolutionary path, and I think you’re reflecting what Heidi and Victoria have said: that ultimately, the manufactured authenticity will stand revealed as what it is – and likewise, the real authenticity.

Victoria – Phew! I tend to dive into philosophical discussions with my focus on the topic … and then I thought about what I wrote, and I was a tad concerned, to say the least, that you wouldn’t appreciate my saying your logic was faulty. I’m SO glad you weren’t offended.

Yes. Ultimately, when you really tune into what’s true, there’s just no choice left. And I find that amazingly freeing, actually.

A freedom you apparently found a lot earlier in life than I!

And what your friend said about it no longer being an option to not speak from the heart totally rings true to me.

This coming from the girl whose 2nd grade teacher wrote on her report card, “There is never any question what Victoria thinks about an activity or assignment.” Ha!

I am intrigued by the concept of manufactured authenticity. I’m not uncomfortable with the question at all. In fact, I think it is exactly where marketers who understand this medium have already gone. And more will follow. Yet in a medium where your tracks cannot be erased, motives will ultimately show. Manufacured authenticity will be revealed for what it is.

We’ll evolve…with this medium of communication…for better and worse.