The phrase 'virtue signalling' is ubiquitously deployed to describe people who express opinions (predominantly on social media) that demonstrate their moral rectitude and garner approval. Whether they are expressing compassion for disaster victims, denouncing a racist comment, or demonstrating their support for a good cause, they are clearly asserting their high moral standing. There is really nothing new about this phenomenon – unfortunately, there have always been people who promote their virtues rather than acting upon them – but social media provides a perfect platform for this kind of behaviour.

Virtue signalling is not just about individuals’ behaviour. This is clearly demonstrated in the world of corporate promotion, when large companies trumpet their compassionate employment policies, their ethical sourcing practices, or their prioritisation of environmental concerns (greenwashing) simply as a way of honing their image and making themselves more acceptable to a concerned public.

Virtue signalling is used as a term of disapproval because it is seen as a performative gesture, designed to make the perpetrator feel better about themselves while making minimal effort. Volunteering at a food bank or helping with your elderly neighbour’s weekly shop involves expending energy and demonstrating commitment in the real world. Supporting a political cause or movement on our online profile is the work of a moment. Without real-life engagement, it begins to look self-serving, a lazy short-cut to the moral high ground. An obvious motivation for virtue signalling is to seek an endorsement from our wider social circle for our demonstrable sense of responsibility and compassion. These self-centred agendas imply that perpetrators may not actually believe in what they are professing and are acting out of bad faith, opening them up to the charge of hypocrisy.

Doing the right thing when nobody is watching or applauding your actions, is a virtue, because you are acting for others’ benefit, not for your own gratification. The tendency to burnish your social reputation by broadcasting your moral attributes is a form of boastfulness, and not ‘practising what you preach’ makes it an empty gesture.

Is virtue signalling always bad? It could be argued that at least virtue signallers are highlighting causes and concerns and bringing them to wider attention. They are contributing to public discourse, reminding us of current issues and – even if their own motivation may be dubious – they may play their own part in bringing about positive change. They may, of course, feel genuinely passionate about the causes they espouse and accusations of hypocrisy are therefore ill-founded

While many of us may be outraged by other people’s tendency to jump on various bandwagons, then have the temerity to sanctimoniously lecture us about their moral superiority, we should be careful about over-using the term virtue signalling. It is all too often wielded as a lazy term of abuse by people who hold opposing political views, who are ever ready to condemn anyone who posits an argument that puts them in a good light, even if they are making that argument from a passionately held and committed viewpoint that has very little to do with advertising their moral credentials. Dismissing other people’s arguments as ‘virtue signalling’ or ‘self-serving’ is an excellent way of casting doubts and aspersions without troubling to engage with their point of view or properly rebut it.