From Clicks to Caring: Why Marketing Must Go Beyond Social Media Engagement

Introduction
The most precious substance in today's hyperconnected society is attention, and social media platforms are experts in capturing it. In today's world an average individual taps, scrolls, and reacts for hours on end, frequently without purpose. Lin et al. (2015) found that university students used smartphones for an average of 4.2 hours per day, yet many significantly underestimated their actual use, a phenomenon the authors attribute to "time distortion", a recognised cognitive symptom of behavioural addiction. Marketers thrive in this engagement-driven environment. But at what cost? Social media now shapes how we live, feel, and relate to others. Users' emotional and cognitive capital is extracted, actions are influenced, and identities are reinforced. Although visibility has benefits, the negative consequences are hard to ignore, which include emotional separation, screen addiction, deteriorating mental health, and curated perfectionism. This article explores how marketing contributes to these harms through additive design, curated identities, and professional silence and argues for a shift towards ethical, well-being-focused marketing.

Cost of Engagement
Social media platforms are now made to captivate user attention rather than just to facilitate connections. Features like unlimited scrolling, autoplay, and real-time notifications undermine natural stopping signs and promote obsessive behaviour. According to Montag and Diefenbach (2018), these platforms use the brain's seek-system, a primal emotional circuit that drives curiosity and reward-seeking, by triggering it through likes and notifications, creating a loop of passive consumption. Sherman et al. (2016) discovered that adolescents were more likely to engage with posts that had more likes, which activated reward-related brain regions, showing how peer approval fuels digital addiction. Marketers have amplified this by crafting content that taps into emotional triggers, urgency, and visual chaos to drive engagement.

Social media algorithms reward content that is emotionally charged or easily shareable, incentivising a shift from value-driven to visibility-driven strategies (Immorlica et al., 2024). To remain prominent in algorithmic feeds, brands publish frequently, but that leads to cognitive overload and declining content quality. For instance, Shein's TikTok hauls, filled with fast visuals and trends, prioritise engagement over ethics (Carter 2025). These digital pings disrupt flow states and reduce users' ability to focus (Montag & Diefenbach, 2018). The ethical implications of the attention economy are becoming increasingly difficult to ignore, particularly as platforms and marketers continue to exploit cognitive vulnerabilities for engagement and profit.

Prolonged social media use is linked to poor mental health, including anxiety, digital exhaustion, and what Montag and Diefenbach call "digital depression" a byproduct of overstimulation, emotional detachment, and social comparison. It is becoming crucial to consider the ethical responsibility of individuals who support addictive design as this environment continues to normalise it. From a utilitarian perspective, designing for addiction contradicts the broader goal of maximising societal well-being (Crane & Matten, 2016). Marketers, intentionally or not, contribute to this by exploiting cognitive vulnerabilities. These strategies influence how people display themselves online in addition to sustaining the designs of addictive platforms. Social media has commodified identity as well as attention. When exposure equals value, identity becomes performance. Marketers feed this dynamic by collaborating with influencers, promoting curated lifestyles, and selling items based on aspirational aesthetics. As a result, authenticity is frequently traded off for engagement, perpetuating the cycle of self-comparison.

Attention and Identity as Commodities
Social media sites commodify identity in the same way that they commodify attention. Curated profiles become products optimised for algorithmic approval. Similarly, autoplay videos, infinite scrolling, and instant notifications are designed to capture attention and keep users locked in. This commodification has broader implications. It has created a culture in which individuals meticulously produce and showcase idealised versions of themselves in exchange for social validation. According to Goffman's (1959) dramaturgical theory, social media turns into the ultimate front stage, where users actively control perceptions by choosing what they display and what they keep hidden. Concealed beneath filters, captions, and carefully composed personas, the backstage, where the chaos of daily life exists, is kept hidden. Hogan (2010) expands on this by distinguishing between performance and exhibition arguing that social media is less about spontaneous, in-the-moment connection and more about the planned curation of a long-lasting, algorithm-friendly archive of the self. While performances are often time-bound and reactive, influenced by a specific audience in real-time, exhibitions are more like digital showcases, in which individuals carefully collect and present information that is available throughout time. In this setting, identity is transformed into a product, something carefully constructed, optimised for visibility, and constantly updated to conform with platform norms. This idea is especially evident in influencer culture, where perceived authenticity is carefully staged. Influencers are rewarded for portraying a version of "realness" that adheres to aspirational norms - perfect bodies, pristine home interiors, and idealised routines, with companies aligning with these depictions. When platforms encourage compulsive attention and manicured perfection, and marketers promote these ideals, the outcome is not coincidental, but rather systematic. However, even with an increased understanding of these negative effects, many marketers continue to say nothing.

Complicity and Silence in Marketing
Marketers either keep quiet about the negative effects of addictive digital design and crafted identities, or worse, they contribute to its perpetuation. The profit-driven environment in which marketing functions is the structural cause of this silence, not merely a result of individual behaviour. Marketing of dangerous products (tobacco, alcohol and highly processed foods) has been shown to drive consumption, with over 480,000 tobacco-related and 300,000 diet-related deaths in the U.S. annually. This illustrates how commercial strategies prioritise profit over well-being (Westling et al., 2025). The same profit-driven reasoning applies to platform-based systems like Instagram or TikTok, where engagement metrics frequently take precedence over ethical considerations. Marketers are often prevented from questioning harmful platform norms by internal organisational regulations, targets for performance, and algorithmic dependency. Ethical problems are understood but addressing them challenges a system built for growth. Better World Books donates to literacy initiatives but still operates within a market that prioritises profit, highlighting the limits of socially responsible models (Yunus, n.d.). Similarly, Trkulja et al. (2024) note that systemic bias, cultural resistance, and corporate rigidity often block meaningful DEI initiatives. Drumwright and Murphy (2004) define this silence as "moral myopia", failing to see marketing's broader social impact and "moral muteness", avoiding critique of unethical practices. H&M's "Conscious Collection" promotes sustainability while continuing mass production, exposing a gap between message and practice (Whiting, 2024). These issues are signs of a culture that values efficiency above empathy, not just personal shortcomings. However, acknowledging these tensions opens the door to reimagining marketing's role in society.

Choosing a Different Future
In a digital landscape where attention is currency and identity is a commodity, marketers sit at a powerful intersection of influence. This piece has illustrated how marketing strategies, often designed for reach rather than responsibility, contribute to harmful design, performative identity norms, and the silent normalisation of digital addiction. While these dynamics are deeply embedded in today's systems, they are not irreversible. By embracing moral imagination, marketers can pivot from complicit actors to conscious change makers. The question is no longer whether we can engage with audiences, but how we do so and at what cost. It is time to shift the metrics of success from clicks and conversions to connection, care and collective well-being. The future of marketing depends on the choices made today: to perpetuate harm or lead with purpose.

References

1. Crane, A., & Matten, D. (2016). Business ethics: Managing corporate citizenship and sustainability in the age of globalization (4th ed.). Oxford University Press.Drumwright, M. E., & Murphy, P. E. (2004). How Advertising Practitioners View Ethics: moral muteness, moral myopia, and moral imagination. Journal of Advertising, 33(2), 7-24. https://doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2004.10639158
2. Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. Anchor Books.
3. Hogan, B. (2010). The Presentation of Self in the Age of Social Media: Distinguishing performances and exhibitions online. Bulletin of Science Technology & Society, 30(6), 377-386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893
4. Immorlica, N., Jagadeesan, M., & Lucier, B. (2024). Clickbait vs. Quality: How Engagement-Based Optimization Shapes the Content Landscape in Online Platforms. arXiv (Cornell University). https://doi.org/10.48550/arxiv.2401.09804
5. Lin, Y., Lin, Y., Lee, Y., Lin, P., Lin, S., Chang, L., Tseng, H., Yen, L., Yang, C. C., & Kuo, T. B. (2015). Time distortion associated with smartphone addiction: Identifying smartphone addiction via a mobile application (App). Journal of Psychiatric Research, 65, 139-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.04.003
6. Montag, C., & Diefenbach, S. (2018). Towards Homo Digitalis: Important research issues for psychology and the Neurosciences at the dawn of the Internet of Things and the Digital Society. Sustainability, 10(2), 415. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10020415
7. Sherman, L. E., Greenfield, P. M., Hernandez, L. M., & Dapretto, M. (2017). Peer influence via Instagram: Effects on brain and behavior in adolescence and young adulthood. Child Development, 89(1), 37-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12838
8. Sherman, L. E., Payton, A. A., Hernandez, L. M., Greenfield, P. M., & Dapretto, M. (2016). The power of the like in adolescence. Psychological Science, 27(7), 1027-1035. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616645673
9. Trkulja, M., Primorac, D., & Bilic, I. (2024). Exploring the role of socially responsible marketing in promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion in organizational settings. Administrative Sciences, 14(4), 66. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci14040066
10. Carter, L. (2025). Influence of social media on fashion trends: The case of Shein and collaborations with influencers. Warnseer. https://warnseer.com/us/influence-of-social-media-on-fashion-trends-the-case-of-shein-and-collaborations-with-influencers/
11. Westling, E., Gordon, J., Meng, P. M., O'Hara, C. A., Purdum, B., Bonner, A. C., & Biglan, A. (2025). Harmful marketing: an overlooked social determinant of health. Prevention Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-024-01763-x
12. Whiting, T. (2024, November 5). Sustainable style: the greenwashing truth behind H&M's conscious collection adverts. Tabitha Whiting: Content Writer and Strategist. https://tabithawhiting.com/2024/02/23/hms-conscious-collection/
13. Yunus, M. (n.d.). Case study on socially responsible marketing. Scribd. https://www.scribd.com/document/36664637/Case-study-on-study-on-socially- responsible-marketing?