We often treat social data – likes, follows, bios, curated posts – as a window into people’s real beliefs and preferences. But that view can be distorted because social media isn’t a mirror.

It’s a stage.

And when we’re on stage, we perform.

That instinct is deeply human. In fact, psychologists identified it nearly 100 years ago in what’s now called the Hawthorne effect, a phenomenon where people change their behavior for no other reason than they know they’re being observed.

Back then, it was factory workers reacting to changes in lighting. Productivity increased when management made the lights brighter. But it also increased when they dimmed the lights. The driver of this behavior wasn’t the brightness of the lighting. It was the fact that every time the lighting changed, it signaled a human behind it, making the workers feel they were being monitored.

Today, the lights never go off. The feed is the factory floor. And everyone’s behavior is shaped by the fact that someone might be watching. So when we rely solely on social signals to define an audience, we’re often capturing the aspirational identity people want to project, not what they actually believe.

To cut through the performance, you have to remove the stage.

Before there was social listening where we could scrape millions of digital footprints, there were surveys and interviews.

Primary research has been a trusted method for understanding perceptions, attitudes, and mindsets for over a century. Yes, it relies on smaller samples. And yes, it’s sometimes critiqued for being too narrow. But when done well, it’s still one of the most powerful tools we have for surfacing the “why” behind the “what.”

Surveys and in-depth interviews strip away the performative layer that’s baked into public platforms. No audience. No pressure. Just an opportunity to be honest. But that honesty doesn’t happen by accident.

The effectiveness of the method also hinges on the quality of the questions. And that’s where journalistic training becomes a serious advantage.

We tend to think of primary researchers as analysts. But the most underrated skill in research isn’t what happens after the data is collected. It’s what happens before.

Journalists are trained to earn trust, ask with nuance, and create a space where people feel safe enough to reflect. And real enough to share.

They know when to follow the script, and when to throw it out.

They can tell the difference between a surface-level response and something that really matters. And they’re comfortable sitting in the silence that often precedes truth.

That skill doesn’t just improve the interview. It sharpens the entire research process.

Because if you want insights grounded in authenticity, not assumption, you need to be more than a data collector.

You need to be someone who knows how to ask the kind of question that makes people stop, think, and tell you something real.

Interested in learning more?

Dm me.