Scholar, google thyself.

A couple of weeks ago I was asked by a foreign university to provide a written reference for someone I didn’t know.

Usually when I am asked to write a reference I know the person well and can speak to their strengths. In this case, the university in question wanted my expert opinion about the work of one of their staff members. This ‘blind peer review’ of a person – rather than a paper – was a new process for me.

The university sent me a portfolio of ‘stuff’ which I had to review before I wrote the letter. I diligently read this material, but still felt like I didn’t know the person well enough. So I got on the Google machine and did a bit of academic stalking. If you have done anything like this recently you will know just how much information is floating around about you on the internet. We leave bits and pieces of our digital selves all over the place. 

After an hour I had a pretty good idea of this person. I knew what he did in his off hours. I was able to view samples of his work – the less polished ones that weren’t included in the portfolio. I saw pictures of his wife and kids. I even snooped on his Twitter account and watched him for a couple of hours, just to see how he talked to others. As John Scalzi says, “the failure mode of clever is asshole”. I know attitude supposedly has nothing to do with how well a person does their job – but it matters to me. I didn’t want to inadvertently help promote an academic asshole into a position of power and authority.

I am happy to report that the person I was able to construct via Google seemed to be consistent with the portfolio of materials I had in front of me: competent, clever and useful to his colleagues. I wrote a glowing reference letter with evidence of his professionalism and engagement with the broader scholarly community.

In fact, I was much more confident and warm in this letter than I would have been if I only looked at the portfolio. Thanks to Google I had the coveted ‘360 degree’ view; I could ‘see’ how that person behaved when they didn’t know I was looking at them. This increased my confidence and trust in the ‘picture’ they had carefully constructed for me in their CV.

Then I got paranoid.

How do I look to someone who wants to academic stalk ME on Google?

How you appear to yourself in a search is not necessarily how others will see you because Google creates a ‘filter bubble’ around each user. Basically Google knows who you are, where you are and what you like and will shape the search results to help you.

When I google myself I see this:

Screen Shot 2015-08-11 at 3.53.19 pmThe first link is to ANU. That’s good – being linked to a prestigious institution makes me look immediately credible as a scholar. The second link is this blog – I want people to see that. Reading my blog gives you a good sense of who I am and what I do.

I like how I look in the Google mirror – but is this how others see me?

I asked people on Twitter to help me test my Google Filter Bubble. When @katemfd in Wollongong Googles me she sees this:

Screen Shot 2015-08-11 at 3.57.06 pmANU is still first, but Linkedin and Twitter are ahead of the blog. Interesting. You might not think this is relevant because the blog still appears on the front page, but look what happens when @21stCteaching Googles me on his phone:

Screen Shot 2015-08-11 at 4.02.51 pmThe blog – my most important internet asset disappears from the front screen. We know people rarely go to page two, so this might affect how people see me.

@21stcenturyteaching is located very close to me – does this affect how he ‘sees’ me? Maybe, because here is what @jeroencl sees when he Googles me on his phone from Utrecht in the Netherlands:

Screen Shot 2015-08-11 at 5.08.08 pmNow the blog is up the top. Why? I don’t know. Google’s search engine is a closely guarded secret.

I can’t tell Google how to display me, I can only influence it by how I behave.

Even more reason to keep it nice and professional online right?

By the way, thanks to this Twitter experiment I know that when someone Googles ‘Inger Mewburn Hot Chick’ there are no rude surprises!

Screen Shot 2015-08-11 at 4.21.27 pmSo how should you behave so that Google will project the scholarly self you would like others to see?

In my presentations to ANU students about this I encourage them to create a ‘minimum presence model’. By making sure you have information on yourself in high profile sites, the first page of Google is less likely to show that picture of you, sloppy drunk on your 21st birthday.

The start of a minimum presence model is:

A university page (if it’s available to you): make sure you have all your publications in the relevant research repository and a current photo. I recommend you get a professional portrait done, but if you can’t afford it, get someone you love to take lots of photos of you over a week and you’ll find one you like. Be true to your style – your portrait can express your personality too. Here’s a Pinterest board I created with some ideas.

Linkedin: It comes up high in most searchers and trust me – the university recruiters are looking at it. Use the same, good photo and include a user friendly bio in plain language which others can also use for a conference bio or talk blurb.

To strengthen your minimum presence model I recommend, in addition:

About me, or flavors me – or some other aggregator: an aggregator site lets you ‘collect’ the pieces of your digital self and display them on a page. Useful for curating a list of your papers, blog posts and other content that might give people a sense of your capabilities.

Join Twitter: I know many people are scared of it, but it’s the very best way for someone to see you react and respond in ‘real time’. If you can’t face it, that’s fair enough – but if you are going to be there, say something, even if only occasionally. An empty Twitter feed, where you haven’t even bothered to change the default egg avatar, says to the world that you can’t commit.


I don’t blame you. It’s a very confusing digital world out there, which is why I will be hosting a Twitter chat about how to shape your scholarly online presence which will be simultaneously broadcast live on Periscope next Monday, 17th of August from 7 – 7:30pm Eastern Standard Time.

This live broadcast will also show people who have joined our MOOC How to Survive your PhD course how to join in on the conversation via Twitter, Instagram and Facebook. The plan is to share some of my tips and techniques, based around the questions you leave in the comments section to this post.

To participate on the day, download the periscope app to your phone and search for Thesis Whisperer – if you follow me on periscope you will get a notification when I am live online and when you click the link you will be able to see and hear me. Alternatively, at 7pm Canberra time you can watch my Twitter feed for the periscope link and follow along with the conversation via the #survivephd15 hashtag.

I will structure the live broadcast around any questions you leave in the comments below, so ask away and I will answer next week! Hope to see you then.

Related posts

How to survive your PhD – a free course

This is not just a post about Instagram

Are most academics lonely at work?


50 thoughts on “Scholar, google thyself.

  1. M-H says:

    Why did they ask you to ‘review’ this person Inger? I’ve never heard of this process. It seems very odd to me.

  2. amanibell says:

    I’m curious as to why you didn’t mention sites like academia or research gate? I’ve always resisted invitations to join LinkedIn as I perceive it as non- academic. More for people in IT or advertising. I could be totally wrong!

  3. Tori Wade says:

    You are going to have to work really hard to convince me that Twitter is useful. Twitter seems to me as destructive to concentration as a fluffy black and white cat trying to climb onto your keyboard and lick your hand all the time. Twitter seems like email only worse. If I respond to things in “real time” throughout the day then I don’t do any actual work, and in particular no writing. I tried it and then left it alone.

    • M-H says:

      You don’t have to be reading it all the time. I keep it hidden and just check in when I take a break. I don’t try and keep up – you’d go mad. Anything important will be retweeted many times, so you don’t miss much. My thesis has been downloaded from the Uni website nearly 1000 times in the last 2.5 years, and the only place I really promote it is on Twitter. There have been a few hits from Google Scholar and, but not that many.

  4. hatfulofhistory says:

    I’ve found that with a last name like Smith, people will never find me on google unless they include my university or research interest/publications. This usually brings up my university page or my blog, but also linkedin before my twitter account or academia page.

    See what you get when you google “evan smith flinders” or “evan smith communist party”…

  5. kate20694 says:

    Google searching you from the UK, gives me slightly different results on laptop v iPad. Also a slightly different set of images. The 6th pic is Pat Thomson. Fascinating piece, very thought provoking, thanks.

  6. marycatherine72 says:

    This was a very interesting and informative post, thank you! I have often wondered about how my digital presence could affect job prospects, academic prospects, and my overall life. One time, in an interview, I actually had my interviewer tell me to adjust the privacy setting on my facebook account because she was able to find out too much information about me without being my “friend.”

    • Thesis Whisperer says:

      not really – they were asking me to use my expertise as a research educator. I was given a huge pack of curriculum materials, impact evidence and so on. No different to the promotion process at my own university where they can request the same. It’s something you need to be prepared for as an academic.

  7. Jim C says:

    This is new to me, can anyone in fact should anyone provide a reference for anyone unknown to them and even then based purely what one can find on the internet. This smells of all sorts of wrong to me.

    • Thesis Whisperer says:

      If you read the post, you will see I was provided with a big pack of evidence to use – it wasn’t ‘purely what anyone can find on the internet’ – but there was nothing forbidding me to look further. In fact, the materials encouraged me to. I initially looked on Google to explore some of the online materials that were referred to (such as videos on youtube) – I found the personal stuff without trying at all.

      • Benjamin Huttner-Koros says:

        I agree. This sounds like a ridiculous process. I think judging someone’s professionalism (as you say you did) based on supplied materials and what you found on the internet is ridiculous. What if you saw a video, then a blog and thought well they seem arrogant here but open minded here but then in these tweets they seem topical and clever. . . Hmm, I don’t what to say. Not to mention you can shoot some videos 5 times and pick the nicest version to post. I’m worried by your description of writing a ‘glowing reference letter’. Were you so convinced by what you read? Surely if you wrote a reference after this sort of process it would have to start with ‘this reference has been written using information gained from supplied written material, impact factors and internet searches of the person.’ . . .
        I also think what this person does in their off-time, pictures of their wife and kids is none of your business until they choose to share it, and is totally unrelated to a recruitment process.
        Also, “Thanks to Google I had the coveted ‘360 degree’ view; I could ‘see’ how that person behaved when they didn’t know I was looking at them.” Really? What you had was a view of what that person does on the internet. Maybe it would be good to complement this process with calling someone that you know works with the person. That you found the personal stuff without trying at all seems irrelevant to me.

  8. amin013kfupm says:

    Interesting !!
    You showed screen shoots from your own search and others; what will be the effect if you share the link of your search with them, will they get the same as you got? or they will get the same as they got?
    Does it mean same link, can show different results in different locations ( or for different users I mean) ?
    I tried to search using my name Amin A. Mohammed, how ever, I found many people have same name?
    This the link I go if you could check.

  9. Rosemary says:

    Hi Inger, For the broadcast, I’d be interested in your thoughts on multiple professional identities online. For instance, a professional artist who is an academic in an area outside their creative practice. I’m building profile in both domains of practice.

  10. Erik says:

    Something else to consider…while Google is the most common search engine, you will often get different results if you search on Yahoo or Bing. For example, I think Google has partnered with LinkedIn to push LinkedIn pages higher in search results, but I don’t know if that applies to the other engines.

  11. Kennedy says:

    Forgive me if someone has already asked this, but how important is your following and followers? Quantity? Who they are? The concentric circles and such?

    Thanks for hosting the broadcast.

  12. Custom Essay says:

    This is a great piece, Good job. I understand that is the service writing service and solution. With the knowledge I have gained from there, I think you wrote a great article

Leave a Reply