"The very nature of communication doesn't allow us to accurately define influence in a way that transcends perception and locality.
" What a complex quote, but nonetheless interesting.
Defining influence seems to be the biggest issue when it comes to influencing consumer behavior.
And for good reason: Besides the fact that merely anybody can have a social influence on another person, it's also the world influence itself.
What does it mean to influence? And how can we measure influence it? It is a number game, like whoever has the most money or most friends is more influential? Or is it more quality over quantity? How we communicate, whether online or in the real world, puts a strain on how to interpret social "influences".
Imagine walking into a dinner party and having to observe the guests interacting with one another.
It would be very difficult to tell whether the ladies laughing at a gentleman telling a story are actually laughing or only doing so to be polite.
Or whether the group of gentlemen who have been quiet for an hour are disinterested in the person speaking to them, or just happen to be quiet people.
Human beings are so different in every fashion, and it is this alone makes it extremely difficult to conclude whether they are being influenced, or not.
Now imagine trying to judge a person's perception based on their online activity alone.
This is why it is difficult to influence consumer behavior online: people are hard to read, and online personalities are even harder.