Literature Review: Contextualising Instagram Behaviours and Branding of Dogs
Leaver et al (2020) is drawn upon in providing a background to the functioning of Instagram, describing what the platform is, how it is typically used, and what impacts user behaviours.
The frameworks of globalisation and imagined community contextualise user’s networking while they embody the fur baby identity, and connect with like-minded individuals (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018; Steenveld & Strelitz, 2010; Maddox, 2021; Morris, 2002). Fur baby identity is expanded upon, detailing sets of behaviours required in order to be labelled as such (Maddox, 2021; Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020)
The politics of fur baby identity must simultaneously be adhered to while performing relational labour within the cute economy (Baym, 2015; Maddox, 2021). This situates pet influencer accounts within a particular ecology of internet communications (Maddox, 2021).
Lastly, dog as “man’s best friend” is explored from a psychological perspective, suggesting reason as to why dogs are the most popular choice of animal influencer on Instagram (Hänninen, 2021). Our psychological relationship with dogs foregrounds effective advertising strategies to market not just pet-care items, but products that apply exclusively to human too.
What is Instagram?
In simplest terms, Instagram describes itself on their website as follows;
Instagram is a free photo and video sharing app available on iPhone and Android. People can upload photos or videos to our service and share them with their followers or with a selected group of friends. They can also view, comment and like posts shared by their friends on Instagram (Instagram, 2022).
This gives the impression that Instagram is a social media platform purely defined by user interactions. But its visual focus makes it significant, as argued by Leaver et al (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Rather, Instagram is "a conduit for communication in the increasingly vast landscape of visual social media cultures” (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020, p. 12). Not just a “free photo-sharing app” as described above, but a space where communication and commerce coincide, igniting struggles for authenticity, selfrepresentation, and power over content visibility (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020)
Standard Instagram Conventions
Certain technological developments and “etiquettes” concerning publishing content to one’s social media accounts impact praxis on Instagram. “Aesthetic” is found as a common denominator in all of these areas.
Influencers engage in particular aesthetics of self-representation online (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Trends change frequently, prompting Leaver et al (2020) to identify persistent rupturing of previously established norms. For example, influencers no longer use heavy, prominent filters on their imagery as they would have 10 years ago.
Aesthetic developments in Instagram’s software or application interface also prompt users to take up or abandon trends and certain aesthetic decisions. For example, permitting non-square images, and the conscious decision to shift focus from filters (the latest being added in 2011), to other forms of engagement (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). These changes made way for a new commitment to vertical visual aesthetic.
With their vertical format, Stories, IGTV, and Reels present new aesthetic possibilities (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Stickers, borders, music, and different fonts that are not available elsewhere on the platform could be explored with these features. The lack of permanence in crafting Stories allowed for distinct creative expression, with the expectation that it has not been carefully curated.
While no aesthetic is granted permanence, there is still a ritualisation of aesthetic (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Users are driven by aesthetic decision-making, and take part in trends in order to persistently reflect popular aesthetic. Leaver et al (2020) refer to user content and aesthetic decisions as “templatable”. Users engage in “rinse and repeat” actions; posting visuals, captions, hashtags, and curating their content in a homogenous way (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020, p. 158). For example, a stereotypical bathroom selfie. Or a typical travel selfie whereby the subjects/influencers pose in similar ways to each other, in front of a tourist attraction.
Templatability can be viewed as a product of globalisation in world flows of information, whereby members of the same imagined community express homogeneity.
Globalisation and Imagined Community Globalisation is conceptualised as “a social process in which the constrains of geography on social and cultural agreements recede and in which people become increasingly aware that they are receded” (Waters, 1995). The process encourages similarities between world social and cultural influences (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018). It can be traced through three areas of social life; the economy, institutional/diplomatic policy, and culture.
“Culture” concerns the production, exchange, and expression of symbols representing facts, meanings, values, and beliefs (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018). Public relations on social media often makes use of such expressions of symbols in marketing a product or service. Individual users and businesses involved in public relations harness the process of globalisation to navigate networking, express personal opinion, and disseminate information (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018).
The fur baby identity is an example of how geographical and social boundaries can be transcended in the era of globalisation. Anyone from anywhere in the world can embody the fur baby identity as it simply encompasses devotion to one’s pet, and a relationship between “cuteness” and labour that can be replicated (Maddox, 2021). This denotes an "imagined community” in the media studies sense, whereby users with shared values or experiences find belonging (Steenveld & Strelitz, 2010).
It must be noted that I do not expand on or make use of “globalisation” as a nationalist or empirical concept in this paper. “Globalisation” isn’t necessarily positive, and has also come to be synonymous with “top-down forces” such as corporate media monopolies with regards to global flows of information (Morris, 2002). Dominant forces typically restrict the agency and exchange of information from other sources.
The process of globalisation can also work conversely, whereby local content influences globalising forces in an act of resistance (Morris, 2002). This has been dubbed “glocalisation” (Morris, 2002). For example, an international corporation producing localised advertisements for viewers in particular regions, or South African music increasing in popularity overseas.
Being part of a globalised imagined community, such as “fur baby parents”, may require certain exchanges, beliefs, and representations of meaning (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018).
Politics of Self-Representation in Embodying the Fur Baby Identity
Maddox identifies three orientations that people may have towards pets; “humanistic”, “protectionistic” and “dominionistic” (Maddox, 2021, p. 3334). Those who occupy a humanistic stance view pets as companions, and beloved family members. Protectionistic humans grant pets an elevated status - equal to that of a person and deserving of protection. Those with dominionistic viewpoints see a pet’s status as lower than that of a human. However, they still view the pet as useful. Those who occupy a humanistic stance are most likely to adopt the fur baby identity, and incorporate love for their pet into their own self-representations online (Maddox, 2021).
Maddox identifies a delicate balance reflected in the phenomenon of the “decontextualised pet” (Maddox, 2021, p. 3333-3334). Accounts hosting many selfies or imagery of the pet that reflect direct ties to the owner are seen as lacking in wholistic content (Maddox, 2021). Rather, content should be varied, and decontextualisation is preferable. A decontextualised pet allows viewers ambiguity in drawing meaning from images, and removes personal feelings they may have towards the owner. Selfrepresentation should not be overt.
In order for a pet account to be deemed “authentic”, capable of resistance to the internet’s dominant toxicity trends and human influencer’s “fake authenticity”, it must possess wholesome content (Maddox, 2021). Wholesomeness and authenticity are values held in high regard on social media.
There is irony in this notion. Only an elite group of users are able to achieve influencer status on Instagram (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Inherently elitist accounts are therefore trying to embody “authenticity”. This is typically through content that appears to be more “relatable” to followers, and does not give the impression of flawless curation (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020).
As well as adhering to these politics of self-representation on Instagram, “relational labour” is performed to remain members of the “cute economy” (Baym, 2015; Maddox, 2021).
Situating Pet Instagram Accounts within the Internet Economy
Pet accounts and associated online behaviours form part of the “cute economy”, a visual economy of the internet consisting of ubiquitous photography featuring animals, babies, animations and mascots (Maddox, 2021). Anything driven by “cute aesthetic” here is said to elicit feelings of care and empathy from the subject (Maddox, 2021). Subjects are prompted to create an indexicality of wanting to nurture an innocent animal in the case of pets. A relationship dynamic is created, whereby the consumer subject must assist the object of their affection.
It is also argued that there is an entrepreneurial dynamic to this relationship (Maddox, 2021). Through Neoliberalism, “cute aesthetic” can be equated to labour, with “cuteness” being performed on social media as work. The intention is earning an income - financial or social capital. The cute economy can therefore be viewed as both a cultural exchange, and attempt to secure physical financial transactions (Maddox, 2021). Predominant “cute aesthetics” of “purity” and “innocence” within the economy fall in contrast to these goals.
Similarly, Baym’s conceptions of relational labour explain pet owner behaviours on Instagram (Baym, 2015). Maintenance of online relations is engaged in with the intention of monetising creative work. For example, musicians participate in relational labour to craft an environment on social media in which fans feel comfortable (Baym, 2015). This is seen as a “domestication” of economy, whereby production or profit relies upon values of comfort and consolation. Maintaining follower’s comfort prompts those behind a social media account to assume the role of “host”, a “feminist” communication tactic (Baym, 2015). Baym labels this phenomenon the cultural feminisation of economic life, whereby mediated acts are committed with the intention of designing work that pleases an audience, and culminates in economic value.
Joy is a recurring theme cited amongst owners. It is said that owners continue to engage in this labour, and run pet Instagram accounts to spark joy (Maddox, 2021). Bringing joy is viewed as an act of resistance, countering a human influencer culture of perfection, false authenticity, politics, and internet toxicity (Maddox, 2021). However, citing joy and “purity” lies in contrast with commodification attempts or financial gains owners may strive to attain when their accounts become successful (Maddox, 2021).
Accounts whereby the above behaviours act out are predominately those focused on dogs, with half of the most-followed animal influencers on Instagram being dogs in 2020 (Statista, 2020). This is amongst other accounts featuring cats and exotic pets. But why are dogs so prevalent in the cute economy?
Man’s Best Friend
Dog-human relationships are seen to be symbiotic, with a sense of emotional attachment that mirrors human relationships (Holbrook & Woodside, 2008). Psychology scholars have drawn particular comparison to the bond between mother and child (Hänninen, 2021). Shared features of the relationship from human attachment theory framework include “dependency”, “proximity seeking”, and “caregiving”. Dogs also typically turn to their caregivers during stressful situations, showing that these features are exhibited mutually (Hänninen, 2021).
Further, a mother’s brain releases oxytocin when gazing at her child (Hänninen, 2021). The process of mutual gazing is said to play a significant role in the formation of social bonds. Dogs too engage in mutual gazing, prompting human owners’ increase in oxytocin concentration (Hänninen, 2021).
Characteristics of human friendships are seen in one’s relationship with their dog, such as intimacy, companionship, loyalty, trust (Hänninen, 2021). This bond can even serve as a catalyst for human relationships, whereby people bond over their mutual love for their dogs (Hänninen, 2021).
Even in the case of Instagram users following exotic pet accounts, they tend to enjoy animal content that depicts similar characteristics to their own domestic pet with which
they share a bond (Hänninen, 2021). For example, Juniper the fox is loved by many who compare her to their dog (Hänninen, 2021).
Marketing to Humans through Dogs
Lastly, knowing this, it is unsurprising that there exists a very profitable dog-care industry — everything from food, to accessories and grooming products. Dogs are used to advertise such products (both online and offline), eliciting an emotional response from consumers who want the best for their own companions. But why do we use pets to advertise products outside of the pet industry?
Connell’s research regarding baseline physical similarities to humans in animal mascots concludes that anthropomorphic portrayals of animals with a lower baseline physical similarity are viewed as less favourable than non-anthropomorphic portrayals (Connell, 2013). In other words, animal mascots that do not visibly reflect human qualities or characteristics do not resonate with consumers.
When looking at actual pets (as opposed to animal mascots used in advertising), similar conclusions are drawn. Park and Kim argue that owners who share an emotional bond with their dogs are very sensitive to how “facial expressions” are portrayed regarding imagery of dogs on packaging (Park and Kim, 2021). Imagery of a dog’s mouth and eyes that appear to infer happiness have a direct positive impact - consumers perceive the product as higher quality, and are more likely to purchase it (Park and Kim, 2021).
Similar to pet imagery combating negative happenings online, large corporations (such as Google and Dyson) are said to make use of dog influencers because they are seen as “safe” and “apolitical” (Loudenback, 2021). A chosen celebrity promoter has potential to go awry — politics, unfavourable actions within the public eye. But a dog’s behaviour and value system remains constant.
Methodology
Rationale
Qualitative interviewing is seen as a versatile method of data collection, and used widely through different areas of social scientific research (Bauer & Gaskell, 2000). Conducting in-depth, semi-structured interviews with account creators allowed for access to primary sources of information, gaining detailed insight into individual’s experiences and motives for this project (Bauer & Gaskell, 2000). A content analysis or discourse analysis of their profiles would not have been adequate. This may have been dependent on my interpretations, and more so subject to my own personal biases. Rather, researching content created with its roots in self-representation requires one to obtain data from the creator themselves.
Participants
I chose to investigate pet influencer accounts showcasing dogs as they were easiest to access, forming the majority of animal influencer Instagram accounts. Accounts were chosen based on number of followers, and connection to previous interviewees — a method known as “snowballing”. This is said to represent “natural” groupings or social milieu, with participants having at least one commonality between them (Bauer & Gaskell, 2000)
I have attempted to include a diverse range of dog breeds, and accounts of differing reach or popularity. Three creators run accounts with a limited reach (under 6000 followers), while three run accounts with more significant reach (over 14K followers).
This is in order to draw conclusions that can be applied to a range of dog influencer accounts, not exclusively amateurs or pedigree “celebrities”.
The following table details participant data, and is later relevant to discussion and findings. Number of followers is accurate as of May 2022, during the time of interviews.
Humbug
also sometimes feature)
Dog’s Name Instagram Handle Breed Number of Followers Kiwi @speckledfreckledkiwii Beagle 6 688 (“amateur”) Klaus @Klausthecreamgsd German Shepard 3 274 (“amateur”)
@shibainu.aizen Shiba Inu 1 370 (“amateur”)
@goldengirlcalibear Golden Retriever 18,4K (“professional”)
Aizen
Cali
@poodleandhisgirls Standard Poodle(s) 14,1K (“professional”)
@mytitantherottie Rottweiler
14,4K
Titan
(Bulldogs
(“professional”)
Ethics
This paper does not rely on participants’ personal information or identities in any way, but rather how they represent their dogs online. Human participants are therefore unnamed and afforded some anonymity, although many appear on very public Instagram profiles. This choice has been made with the consideration that social media often produces social convergence (Posel & Ross, 2015). Naming interviewees potentially interferes with their sense of privacy online, and how they may currently control viewer access into their lives (Posel & Ross, 2015). Instead, Instagram handles and dog names are referenced, allowing the humans behind them the right to be forgotten.
As the dogs cannot speak for themselves, neither I nor their owners can be truly certain of their feelings when capturing them on camera. However, I assert that no dogs were harmed during the research process.
It can be said that research took place with the journalistic principle of beneficence in mind, and risk of harm to human participants or their dogs is negligible (Posel & Ross, 2015).
Findings and Discussion
Findings from interviews have been relayed in five sections; curating an anthropomorphised personality online, creator identity and self-representations, marketing through sponsorships, South African habitation of dog influencer accounts, and standard Instagram use and behaviours.
Dog owners (account creators) referred to as “professional” possess over 14K followers, and are typically “Instagram veterans” with a longstanding presence of many years. Those referred to as “amateurs” possess 1000-7000 followers, and are newer accounts.
Account creators have been granted anonymity, so quotes and information revealed in interviews are attributed to their Instagram handles.
Curating an Anthropomorphised Personality Online
Emotional attachment seen in human relationships is replicated, whereby a pet is viewed as more than the extension of oneself (Holbrook & Woodside, 2008). Rather, they represent a unique bond worth the investments of love, attention, and money. This close bond has drawn comparisons to attachment seen between mother and child (Hänninen, 2021).
I call myself a fur mom. And I understand my dogs aren't children, but I think they're the closest thing I'm ever gonna have to children. I focus on them the way that I think a lot of parents do, and build that sort of relationship. Not only do I add value into their lives, but [they] kind of push me out of my comfort zone, get me doing things I wouldn't usually do (@poodleandhisgirls, 2022).
The curation of dog influencer accounts is predicated on this notion of “fur baby”, whereby one’s relationship with their dog is akin to a human familial relationship, or intimate companionship (Hänninen, 2021). Account creators therefore attribute human personality traits to their dogs in the act of anthropomorphism, assisting followers in conceptualising the relationship they have with their dog.
She's really funny. She’s not really like a cuddly dog. She's very independent. She loves doing things. Loves to sniff. She used to play with other dogs a lot, but now she just likes missioning. Loves her treats, loves the beach. And yeah, but she's very energetic and curious (@speckledfreckledkiwii, 2022).
He’s like — he’s an introvert. He likes to do his own thing when we go hiking, almost every weekend. He prefers like, being on his own. He doesn't like being in a pack of other dogs. He's very socially-awkward (@Klausthecreamgsd, 2022).
Mischievous, quirky and sweet, I think would be how I describe him. And yeah, I think I represent that on Instagram through trying to make light hearted-content and you know, trying to mirror his kind of persona that I've created (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
As well as using typically human traits, owners described their dog’s personalities in action-related terms (“independent”, “loves to sniff”, “missioning”), and through activities
they enjoy. This is represented in account content by featuring these activities, such as sniffing, hiking, and playing with toys.
Interviewees relayed that sponsors usually capitalise on the action-oriented nature of dog accounts, requesting Reels of dog reactions to their product. Choosing to abide by sponsors’ wishes and film the pet performing requests frequently (as opposed to filming an animal going about their daily lives) does not make a significant difference in displays of anthropomorphism This is unlike human influencers. A dog cannot display “inauthenticity”, but reacts according to breed traits and life experience (their “personality”) no matter the situation. Their reactions may not always be predictable either.
Values of honesty and authenticity are held in high regard amongst followers (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Dogs are always “authentic” — no matter what they are doing, or who is encouraging them to do it. Unlike human influencer subculture, there is no opportunity for “fake authenticity” (Maddox, 2021). This is perhaps another reason why anthropomorphised dog accounts are favoured online.
The “authentic”, action-oriented style of content gives way to another notable dynamic. Leaver et al (2020) notes that pets often appear alongside their human counterparts in selfies, or even within their own categories of visual content, whereby performance or presentation is revealed to be simultaneously mundane and extraordinary.
He is very vocal. And he makes a lot of very interesting noises that's quite unique to dogs, I suppose. Because I haven't really ever heard another dog make those kinds of sounds. So I did a compilation video of him making a whole lot of different sounds (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
One time, this pineapple leaf fell on the floor, and she was like so spooked. And I posted it and people loved it. Her funny reactions — people just love watching it (@speckledfreckledkiwii, 2022).
Everybody loves her dopey faces. She’s got like the most dur face. Yeah, people love that of her. And then the boys — the drool photos always do fantastically well (@mytitantherottie, 2022).
Interviewees described the mundane yet extraordinary phenomena, stating that humorous antics elicit the best responses and most likes from followers. Content published usually consisted of the dog doing something out of the ordinary — strange noises, energetically barking at an inanimate object such as a pineapple leaf. Dogs engaging in action simultaneously mundane and extraordinary provides increased entertainment value.
There is also an element of baseline physical similarity that intrigues followers (Connell, 2013). Dogs engaging in human actions, such as watching television, vocalising, pulling funny “dopey” faces is increasingly extraordinary. Research suggests dog owners are especially sensitive to dog’s facial expressions (Park and Kim, 2021). These sorts of anthropomorphic portrayals are viewed as particularly favourable (Connell, 2013).
But crafting a personality cannot solely depend on the owner’s projections, as there are certain things their dogs will not do, and always an element of surprise if they behave unexpectedly. Dogs also presented clear preference between different activities that
engaged them. Rather, crafting of personality depends upon the owner’s close relationship with the dog, and ability to correctly predict how they might react.
In this sense, a dog does have some “agency” in how their personality is crafted for online viewing. For example, Aizen’s owner (@shibainu.aizen) describes him as an “introvert” because he doesn’t enjoy socialising with humans continuously. His “shyness” (likely instinct typical to his breed and life experience), has been anthropomorphised as introversion. As a result, the Instagram account mostly displays Reels of Aizen undertaking activities alone.
Creator Identity & Self-Representations
Curation of an anthropomorphised personality is also affected by the dog owner’s adherence to certain politics of self-representation, their belonging to online pet influencer communities, and expressions of identity regarding aesthetic choice.
Two distinct reasons for creating a dog influencer account emerged. Firstly, owners recognise that their dogs may not live as long as the humans they love, and feel the intense need to capture or document as many moments as possible photographically. Their accounts act as a “portfolio” of their pet’s lives.
Professional pet influencers tended to take this approach, immortalising their pets online and posting very little sponsored content.
I don't do that [sponsored content] all the time. Because at the end of the day, it’s a sort of visual library of his memories. So I try and document things that I want to look back on (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
Initially, I had a dog before Humbug that passed away really young. I just wished I had a lot more images of everything we did and had captured that relationship. Because when he wasn't there, when I didn't have that relationship anymore, it was a huge part of my life that had gone. And it was a massive regret (@poodleandhisgirls, 2022).
Secondly, owners experienced complaints from friends, family, or followers when posting too many images of their dogs on their personal Instagram accounts. For fear of “spamming” people, they then created a separate account for the dog.
Everybody kept getting annoyed because my own Instagram was used for Klaus’s pictures. And then when I first got him I’d post like, ten times a day different pictures. And they're like, stop doing this. Cool, I’ll just get him he’s own account (@Klausthecreamgsd, 2022)
This suggests there is a politics of self-representation regarding pet influencer accounts. Despite being inextricably linked to their pet through the fur baby identity, owners tried not to feature heavily on their dog’s accounts, nor post too many pictures of the dog on their personal social media (Maddox, 2021). The practice may be contributed to the phenomenon of the “decontextualised pet”, whereby direct ties to the owner are viewed as unfavourable (Maddox, 2021).
Nevertheless, the irony of establishing these firm boundaries despite attempting to highlight oneness and unity in the relationship with their dog shows complexity in owner self-representations.
Interviewees stated that they continued to use these separate accounts for their dogs because they enjoyed curating them, and finding like-minded pet owners. A shared adoration for their dogs (the fur baby identity) results in a sense of community (Maddox, 2021).
Rather than garnering followers through people owners already knew outside of social media, they instead tended to accumulate like-minded followers first, and later establish friendships with creators behind these accounts. All Interviewees cited that they had established close offline relationships in the physical world through their dog’s Instagram accounts.
A lot of them I've met through Instagram. And I mean, I would say at least three or four of them I would consider really close friends. Like catch up with dinner, catch up for walks (@goldengirlcalibear, 2022).
I had no idea that there was like, a whole sort of dog community. And people behind those accounts — it's really a lovely place. It's a very positive place and very uplifting. It's been amazing (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
Amateurs and professionals alike enjoyed the benefits of partaking in the global dog influencer community online. Here, geographical and social boundaries are transcended (Waters, 1995). Anyone with an account for their dog may find belonging within this imagined community of people embodying the fur baby identity (Steenveld & Strelitz, 2010; Maddox, 2021).
As well as fostering offline relationships through providing a place for owners with shared values to interact, the community aspect of account curation was integral to Cali and Kiwi’s owners in spreading awareness about charity projects. This included the Beagle Freedom Project, which aims to ban animal testing, and the Dogbox Project, which provides kennels for dogs in need.
As discussed earlier, people bond with their pets in ways that resemble human relationships (Holbrook & Woodside, 2008). All interviewees stereotypically agreed that they possessed either a “humanistic” or “protectionistic” orientation towards their pets (Maddox, 2021). Those who elevated their dog’s value in the relationship were more likely to adopt the fur baby identity, and seek membership from dog influencer communities online.
It is expected that creators who belong to these communities are concerned with spreading joy through their accounts (Maddox, 2021). Only Klaus’s (@Klausthecreamgsd) owner admitted that she sometimes uses the account to post controversial opinions relating to dog-training, such as her use of a prong collar. She feels her contentiousness adds value to a space where owners are seeking advice online, and may not always be getting honest answers. Both spreading joy and controversial content was done with the aim of countering “false authenticity”, misinformation, or any negativity online (Maddox, 2021).
Most account creators desired to remain “apoltical”, and wanted to cultivate a “happy” online space devoid of conflict, in contrast to other areas of the internet (Loudenback, 2021).
I've been very controversial at times. Just because I didn't create the page for like fame or whatever the case may be. If I have an opinion on something, I'll post it. If you don’t like it — unfollow (@Klausthecreamgsd, 2022).
Positivity, love. I try to stay away from like, the Instagram politics. Or, I don't get into heated debates. I just feel like your account should be a place where you can go and just be happy to see [Cali], as opposed to going there with a message (@goldengirlcalibear, 2022).
In taking part in an influencer subculture, no interviewees viewed their accounts or antics as elitist. Owners did not necessarily view the creation of pet accounts as indicative of elitism, or themselves as having elitist tendencies. Rather, maintaining the account was an act of devotion.
Some admitted that having an expensive phone or camera is ideal, but anyone with an animal is able to create an account for them. The process is accessible. Klaus’s (@Klausthecreamgsd) owner even refuted elitist labels, stating that sharing her honest opinions about gifted products and being very selective about sponsors assisted other pet owners financially.
Only an elite group of users are able to achieve influencer status on Instagram (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). While all influencer subcultures attempt to project values of authenticity and relatability, dog influencers identifying as devoted curators rather than “the elite” highlights intrinsic motivation beyond a privileged lifestyle or monetising content. This can be drawn back to the deep bond between man and dog (Hänninen, 2021).
Lastly, owners expressed their creativity visually through presets. All amateur influencers used presets for their pet’s photographs. Some had created their own on Adobe Lightroom to apply uniformly, and those posting sponsored content very frequently had purchased professional editing packages with “polished” presets. Amateurs believed presets to be the most significant component to their “aesthetic”. Their attitudes suggest high templatability in this area (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020).
However, professional pet influencers can be said to be characterised by a lack of visual templatability, and will make practical choices about visual aesthetic. Both Cali (@goldengirlcalibear) and Humbug’s (@poodleandhisgirls) owners were opposed to meticulous presets. Cali’s owner prefers to keep the visual aesthetic consistent with earlier imagery for the sake of authenticity. Humbug’s owner features her two contrasting poodles with black and white fur, and finds individual images need adjusting, choosing not to apply presets uniformly.
When I first started Instagram, years ago, they didn't have any of those things. So you just kind of posted your photo — you could edit a little bit — and that was it. And then I remember, about five years ago, I thought to myself, I should delete all her photos and start again, and start with a style. But then it would lose its authenticity you know? (@goldengirlcalibear, 2022).
I do use Lightroom. But they're all picture-dependent. With a stark white dog and a soft black dog, it's really difficult to find a preset that's ever going to work (@poodleandhisgirls, 2022).
Marketing through Sponsorships
The process of negotiating sponsorships may indicate whether an account has elitist tendencies or not, and contribute to visual aesthetic. But importantly, it also highlights a key difference in how professional dog influencer accounts versus amateur accounts are run.
Amateur dog influencers tended to post more sponsored and gifted content. Professionals were highly selective about sponsors, and featured far less sponsored content - if any at all. Interviewees ascribed this to remaining “authentic”, and the need to be “relatable” online (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020).
You need to be truthful. And you need to stand with that — you can't be flaky. I mean, in my personal capacity, I followed a couple of influencers on Instagram. I don't follow them anymore. Where, you know, every week they're using the new best thing. And eventually you start going well, how can everything be the best thing? (@goldengirlcalibear, 2022).
We used to be sponsored by a lot of people and I actually just really hated it. Cause, I think in the beginning when you first start out, you just get so flattered about all these sponsors left, right and centre. But you actually don't even like the products. So then I became extremely fussy. And I only am sponsored by people who I really really believe in (@mytitantherottie, 2022).
Honesty and “authenticity” is valuable online (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Content creators need to be relatable in order to remain relevant. This is a stereotypical function of Instagram self-representations (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Dog influencer accounts mirror what is seen in other dominant subcultures on Instagram, showing a high degree of templatability in this area (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020).
Professional dog influencers also tend to focus on a limited number of sponsors because a multitude of sponsorships can result in complex contractual obligations. For example, advertising a specific brand’s dog beds means that contractually, the account cannot post content featuring other brands who also provide dog beds. This is difficult to fulfil, because most pet care brands do so.
When one possesses a successful account with thousands of followers, they are offered many sponsorships for different products. Humbug’s account features PupSak dog beds as the predominant sponsor. Rather than accept sponsorship from multiple dog bed brands, the account creator chose to support a brand that her dogs already enjoy — one that she is familiar with. This is to avoid being bound by a contract in an oversaturated market. The account is now free to accept other opportunities for sponsorship, if the creator wishes to do so.
A lot of the time, the sponsorships come with a really heavy contract. Especially in such a small market here in South Africa. I found that unless it really is something,
like for example, dog beds, it's no use sticking to one brand to be sponsored by — because every second or third South African brand does make dog beds. So what you want to do is to [purchase] something and work with the brand, rather than be contracted into it (@poodleandhisgirls, 2022).
This is a practical consideration, whereby choosing to focus on a specific product is not exclusively to show authenticity or reliability, but an act of exercising of agency. Typically, maintenance of online relations is engaged in with the intention of monetising creative work (Baym, 2015). But here, a host of online relations are being avoided altogether. Firstly, in order to accentuate values of authenticity and reliability. And for some professional pet influencers, to also minimise contractual obligations. In exerting this agency, account creators abstain from “domestication” of economy, or cultural feminisation of economic life (Baym, 2015).
On the other hand, amateur pet influencers align with conceptions of relational labour (Baym, 2015). They typically accept sponsorship in the hopes of monetising content, and film reels or post images of their dogs with these products. This content relies upon values of comfort and “cute aesthetic” for audience interaction (Baym, 2015; Maddox, 2021). Popular content draws more followers to engage with, which in turn draws more sponsors — and therefore increased profits. The cultural feminisation of economic life is shown through a satisfied audience, culminating in economic value (Baym, 2015).
Effectively, amateur pet influencers choose to participate in domestication of economy and relational labour, making them more likely to monetise content (Baym, 2015). However, while professional pet influencers chose values of authenticity over relational labour and opportunities for monetisation, such values may be of less importance to amateurs.
Most account creators were unlikely to partner with sponsors which did not align with their own personal values. For example, those partnering with raw dog food brands were major proponents of the diet.
But the converse is not necessarily true for amateurs. Sponsors will sometimes partner with account creators without querying their values. For example, “@speckledfreckledkiwii” aims to spread awareness about the Beagle Freedom Project, and testing on beagles during cosmetics trails. However, the account creator admits they do not always use cruelty-free certified makeup.
South African Habitation of Dog Influencer Accounts
Unsurprisingly, there is little that separates South African dog influencer accounts from those of different geographical origins. The globalised nature of online imagined communities tends to encourage similarity regarding cultural influence (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018). The theory of the “decontextualized pet” appearing more enjoyable to viewers may also encourage the publication of content that appeals to a globalised audience (Maddox, 2021). Viewers do not desire content with a strong emphasis on the pet’s nationality.
Included in cultural influence is the expression of meaning and dissemination of information (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018). No strictly South African discourse or colloquialisms are relied upon amongst South African dog owners online, or their
followers. Exceptions are always contextual, never intentional. For example, feeding the dog biltong.
Rather, account creators and followers alike use discourse relating to their fur baby identities. For example, popular phrases and diminutives like “toe beans”, “snoot”, “chonky boy”, “walkies”. This is universal, seen across pet influencer accounts around the world that are members of the cute economy, displaying behaviour driven by “cute aesthetic” which elicits caregiving and empathy (Maddox, 2021).
I use sort of dog words, like, for example — like snoot! You know, the nose of the dog. So I use a lot of those (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
Accounts who posted sponsored content frequently did not necessarily support local businesses. Most were sponsored by both South African and overseas partners.
The only way South Africa is significantly represented through its dog influencer accounts is in the overemphasis of landscape imagery. Both amateur and professional influencers posted a multitude of pictures featuring dogs in nature — on hikes, beaches, and in their favourite park. This is part of their action-oriented approach to crafting an anthropomorphised personality.
So we tend to spend a lot of time outdoors. Like I said, the dogs need their exercise. So mountains and beach. Both of them absolutely love the beach. And even when we do get away and things like that, our focus is really on having as much outdoor natural space as possible. Also, water sources are always really nice (@poodleandhisgirls, 2022).
Just the park where we go — it's literally just in the next street. Every now and then we do adventures. Wolwespruit, and other little adventure places we go. I always take photos of the adventures (@mytitantherottie, 2022).
Standard Instagram Use and Behaviours
A new vertical format prompts users to make new aesthetic decisions, and presents new aesthetic possibilities (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Amateurs were more dependent on Reels and Stories, relaying that sponsors preferred Reels specifically. These features enabled owners to spontaneously film an energetic dog, and upload it quickly. Individual posts of high-quality images were usually reserved for content from professional photoshoots.
In contrast, professional account creators posted less video content, and more images. They shot and edited photographs themselves, rarely employing photographers. These images were still always of high quality.
I don’t do Reels and things like that. I'd love to say I have the time for it, or even knew how to do them. But I actually don’t (@goldengirlcalibear, 2022).
I really can't stand that people actually photoshop their dogs, and I really don't understand why they do that. So it's more just real natural photos, and that usually gets a good reaction (@mytitantherottie, 2022).
Developments in Instagram’s software or application interface prompts users to take up or abandon trends and certain aesthetic decisions (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). This isn’t true in the case of South African dog influencers. For while amateur dog influencers (as well as the human influencer subculture) have taken up the vertical format video trend, professionals have remained dependent on square images.
This is not necessarily a rupture of previously established norms, as both trends of visual aesthetic thrive simultaneously (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Leaver et al (2020) states that no aesthetic is granted permanence, but there exists a ritualisation of aesthetic. In a sense, professional dog influencers have ritualised the square image format rather than engaging in templatability, and highly homogenous content curation (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). This may be due to the fact that professionals have usually been on Instagram for longer, and curated content before vertical video formats were popular.
Currently, the use of sound bites is a popular trend amongst amateur dog influencers. It emphasises the anthropomorphic nature of accounts, with human voices or song layered over Reels of the dogs. Again, engaging in a trend that is employed across many Instagram communities or subcultures suggests high templatability (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). Users engage in “rinse and repeat” actions, curating their content in a homogenous way.
I kind of copy trends that are on Instagram. So whenever I see that there's something quite cute or something quite entertaining with an audio, then I will save the audio. And then once I feel like I've got content to go the audio, then I'll share it (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
Some owners assumed their dog’s identity in captions, while others labelled this behaviour “inauthentic” (Maddox, 2021). This was a point of contention for many interviewees, who were either vehemently opposed to the concept of assuming identity, or found it very enjoyable.
All the Stories, and Reels, and posts, are always from his perspective. So it's quite funny when you're typing it, and you realise you're typing it like as a dog (@shibainu.aizen, 2022).
I’ll be like, our first day of the walkathon has started. We’re going to do our very best. It's a huge challenge for us . . . So that's definitely from their point of view. But I definitely absolutely hate that [assuming identity], with smushy baby language words (@mytitantherottie, 2022).
Dog influencer discourse surrounding the featured animal therefore shows a low degree of templatability and homogeneity (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020).
In general, hashtags were used to group photos for personal use, let pet influencer community members know new content had been posted (#beaglesofInstagram), or simply grow follower count. No interviewees used a routine method for hashtag selection. They usually tended to hashtag in accordance with individual image’s context, then copypaste some pre-saved hashtags which they felt ordinarily worked.
Conclusions
Through the six in-depth interviews that occurred, research questions were answered and expanded upon, revealing important information about the functioning of dog influencer accounts.
Pet owners craft Instagram profiles for their dogs as portfolios, with the intention of immortalising their dog online, and preserving their memory. Many were prompted to create this portfolio as a space for their dog outside of personal social media after friends and family accused them of “spamming” others with dog imagery.
The primary objective in continuing to use these accounts was the desire to spread joy, combating internet “toxicity” or the plethora of negativity found online (Maddox, 2021).
Account creators express their dog’s personality online through anthropomorphism, attributing them with human personality traits, and highlighting their “human” characteristics through action-related imagery.
A strong emotional connection with one’s dog is required to believably anthropomorphise their personality, understand what engages them, and predict humorous reactions to stimuli. Anthropomorphism is typically action-oriented, and inherently “authentic”. Dogs performing actions that are simultaneously mundane yet extraordinary provide increased entertainment value (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020). “Extraordinary” may pertain to actions that exhibit baseline physical similarities to humans (Connell, 2013).
Anthropomorphism acts as a form of self-expression for account creators. In this, there are certain politics of self-representation. Dog influencer accounts should be used as a portfolio of the pet’s life in which their human companion does not feature frequently. Likewise, pictures of the dog on owner’s personal Instagram profiles should remain limited.
These boundaries show complexity, conflict, and irony in owner self-representation as they attempt to portray a close bond through which they are inextricably linked with their dogs via two separate accounts.
Participants relayed that “elitism” cannot necessarily be viewed as a theme intrinsic to dog influencer subculture, or in reference to their own socio-economic markers of identity. This is in contrast to how Leaver et al (2020) conceptualises achievement of influencer status.
Professional pet influencers were not dependent on presets for aesthetic, unlike human influencer subculture. This “lack of visual aesthetic” did not have a bearing on their follower count, again raising questions about how one conceptualises influencer subculture, and how some divergence from the norm may still result in success.
A global imagined community of dog influencers spawned close offline friendships for members, as well as opportunities to leverage charitable causes (Steenveld & Strelitz, 2010).
Marketing anthropomorphised personalities to an audience takes place largely through sponsorships — or lack thereof. Professional accounts are highly selective regarding
sponsorship. These account creators value authenticity and relatability over monetising content, and traditional practices of relational labour (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020; Baym, 2015). Amateur accounts accept more sponsors as they do not value authenticity as highly, placing less emphasis on each sponsors’ values. They may also accept sponsorship from businesses whose values they do not seek to replicate. Amateurs keenly participate in traditional relational labour, and domestication of economic life (Baym, 2015).
Approach to sponsorships is one of three ways whereby amateur accounts diverge from professional dog influencers in their positioning. Secondly, amateurs are also more likely to use non-manual presets on their imagery, and display uniform visual aesthetic. Professionals prefer to “tweak” photographs themselves.
Thirdly, amateurs are more dependent on video content and new vertical format’s popularity, with professionals ritualising the square image format (Leaver, Highfield, & Abidin, 2020).
The only significant way in which South African dog influencer accounts differ in their curation from other global community members, is an overemphasis on nature photography and landscape settings. Overall, the dog influencer subculture promotes homogeneity in cultural exchange, particularly language use (Ifigeneia and Dimitrios, 2018). This can be attributed to the theory of the decontextualised pet, but also the nature of globalised imagined community membership (Maddox, 2021).
Assuming of the dog’s identity elicited unexpectedly controversial discussion from interviewees who either supported, or strongly rejected the practice. This suggests that discourse used to describe their dogs is not homogenous amongst online community members.
Lastly, no interviewees described using hashtags methodically.
All findings can be extended to the curation of dog influencer Instagram accounts globally. In line with Leaver et al (2020), trends or behaviours occurring across many Instagram communities or subcultures suggest templatability.
However, this paper has highlighted that there are numerous differences in how dog influencer accounts are crafted compared to curation for human influencer subculture. There are also notable differences within dog influencer subculture regarding how professional and amateur accounts curate content.
References
Bauer, M. W. & Gaskell, G. D. (2000). Qualitative Researching with Text, Image and Sound: A Practical Handbook for Social Research. London: SAGE Publications.
Baym, Nancy K. (2015). Connect With Your Audience! The Relational Labor of Connection. The Communication Review (Yverdon, Switzerland). 18(1), 14–22.
Connell, Paul. (2013). The Role of Baseline Physical Similarity to Humans in Consumer Responses to Anthropomorphic Animal Images. Psychology & Marketing [Online]. 30(6), 461–468. Available from: https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.ezproxy.uct.ac.za/doi/full/ 10.1002/mar.20619 (Accessed: 19 April 2022)
Hänninen, Carina. (2021). Why does my neighbor’s labradoodle have eight million followers on Instagram? Exploring pets as social media influencers [Online]. Available from: https://helda.helsinki.fi/dhanken/bitstream/handle/10227/441217/ Hänninen_Carina.pdf?sequence=1 (Accessed: 31 May 2022)
Holbrook, Morris & Woodside, Arch. (2008). Animal companions, consumption experiences, and the marketing of pets: Transcending boundaries in the animal-human distinction. Journal of Business Research [Online]. 61(5), 377-381. Available from: https:// www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.uct.ac.za/science/article/pii/S0148296307001865
(Accessed: 19 April 2022)
Ifigeneia, M. and Dimitrios, A. (2018). Globalization, Social Media and Public Relations: A Necessary Relationship for the Future? [Online]. Available from: https:// knepublishing.com/index.php/KnE-Social/article/view/3546/7438#info (Accessed: 31 May 2022)
Instagram. (2022). What is Instagram? [Online]. Available from: https:// help.instagram.com/424737657584573 (Accessed: 31 May 2022)
Leaver, T, Highfield, T, & Abidin, C. (2020). Instagram: Visual Social Media Cultures. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Loudenback, Tanza. (2021). People are being paid up to R230,000 for a single picture of their dog on Instagram [Online]. Available from: https://www.businessinsider.co.za/petowners-earn-thousands-dog-photos-instagram-influencers-2018-12 (Accessed: 21 February 2022)
Maddox, J. (2020). The secret life of pet Instagram accounts: Joy, resistance, and commodification in the Internet’s cute economy. New media & society [Online]. 23(11), 3332–3348. Available from: https:// doi.org/10.1177/1461444820956345 (Accessed: 21 February 2022)
Morris, N. (2002). The Myth of Unadulterated Culture Meets the Threat of Imported Media. Media, Culture & Society. 24(2), 278–289
Park, J. and Kim, A. (2021). A dog doesn’t smile: effects of a dog’s facial expressions and gaze on pet product evaluation. Journal of Product & Brand Management [Online]. 30(5), 641-655. Available from: https://www-emerald-com.ezproxy.uct.ac.za/insight/content/doi/ 10.1108/JPBM-04-2019-2335/full/html (Accessed: 19 April 2022)
Posel, D., & Ross, F. C. (Eds.). (2015). Ethical quandaries in social research. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
Statista. (2022). Petfluencers with the most Instagram followers worldwide 2020 [Online]. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/785972/most-followers-instagrampetfluencers/ (Accessed: 31 May 2022)
Steenveld, Lynette & Larry Strelitz. (2010). Trash or popular journalism? The Case of South Africa’s Daily Sun. Journalism 11(5), 531-547.
Waters, M. (1995). Globalization. London and New York: Routledge
