4 ms·

Social media and 'influencers' are not going away. Instead of being critical and dismissive I would rather try and accept this fundamental change in human inter

Social media and 'influencers' are not going away. Instead of being critical and dismissive I would rather try and accept this fundamental change in human interaction. It is another step from collectivism where everyone is paying for their own icecream to the next level of individualism. Humanity will have a lot more 'influencers' or 'stars' who stand out and have incredible influence. This can be entertainers who have a billion followers, or software developers who make a living as speakers and 'evangelists', but can also mean political influence: The last elections in Germany were massively impacted by a polarizing video from a blue haired Youtuber - why shouldn't that guy run for office himself next time? There are still many institutions and gatekeepers due for disruption. This is economically fueled by advertising. Firstly, using influencers to present a product is fundamentally stronger than classic advertising. Secondly, it's cheaper for the advertiser, while the influencer just needs a few thousands/month to quit their job.

SwiftyBug 7y ago
> The last elections in Germany were massively impacted by a polarizing video from a blue haired Youtuber - why shouldn't that guy run for office himself next time? This happened in Brazil. Kim Kataguiri[1] gained visibilty as a YouTuber and is now a congressman. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Kataguiri https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Kataguiri
t0astbread 7y ago
Not every "influencer" is the same. Some have actual skills and adequate reach to justify advertising via them (I believe this is what you labeled "influencer" in your comment) while others are just trying to get freebies without contributing any value back to the client. Additionally, regarding politics: While I do believe that empowering people who are actually concerned with the well-being of their community is important and an area in which our political systems could improve, I also think that "disrupting" politics by giving power to influencers would ultimately lead to more bad than good (in the form of indoctrination, corruption and populism).
- UweSchmidt 7y ago
  Influencers trying to get freebies and Youtubers disrupting the political landscape may just be the growing pains during a massive overhaul of society. It's no longer about "empowering" a grassroots initiative with a website, it's changing how humans interact on a fundamental level. Expect lots of indoctrination populism from mega-influencers during their 24/7 livestreams, but maybe less corruption too....
  - austinshea 7y ago
    Yeah, maybe. It’s just more complicated than YouTube and free distribution. The way in which people use free distribution provided the internet has changed, and will change a lot. The problem with your ideas is that they are just concepts extrapolated from very current trends. You should get a wider scope, and make fewer lazy predictions.
narrowtux 7y ago
> The last elections in Germany were massively impacted by a polarizing video from a blue haired Youtuber I'm gonna have to say [citation needed]. It is true that the video went viral and was very controversial, but the only effect was that the green party gained about 5% in the 18-29 age group, according to polling statistics. All other age groups were unaffected [1]. Also note that this election was for the parliament of the European Union. [1] https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/rezo-effekt-hat-er-der-cdu-geschadet-oder-den-gruenen-genuetzt-a-1270620.html https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/rezo-effekt-hat-e... (German)
corodra 7y ago
I'm pretty sure it gets old real fast when people with bot followers keep asking you for freebies. Are there legit ones? Yes. But there are far more fake ones that game the system. That's why there's a "backlash".
defertoreptar 7y ago
> It is another step from collectivism where everyone is paying for their own icecream to the next level of individualism. Eh, do you have that backwards? Wouldn't we classify "everyone paying their own" as individualistic? On a side note, we've always had "influencers." They were the celebrities that appeared on ads. This is just the internet-enabled, more granular manifestation of that phenomenon.
Mordisquitos 7y ago
> Firstly, using influencers to present a product is fundamentally stronger than classic advertising. Secondly, it's cheaper for the advertiser, while the influencer just needs a few thousands/month to quit their job. Assuming you're right, I would argue that the kind of "influencer" who sets their price point to advertise your ice cream truck at "one free ice cream" is unlikely to provide enough value to offset the opportunity cost of actually selling an ice cream to a paying customer, moreso if we take into account dishonest freeloaders. There is no value in providing products for free to self-proclaimed advertisers who just arbitrarily show up at your business.
HeadsUpHigh 7y ago
No influencer worth their salt will beg for an ice cream cone. The big accounts have managers and make deals etc well in advance. These guys are beggars who have just found their new tool for attempting to get stuff for free.
jriot 7y ago
Or be critical and dismissive since as don't need to accept this nonsense. Some changes are in the wrong direction with influencers being in that direction.

SwiftyBug 7y ago

> The last elections in Germany were massively impacted by a polarizing video from a blue haired Youtuber - why shouldn't that guy run for office himself next time? This happened in Brazil. Kim Kataguiri[1] gained visibilty as a YouTuber and is now a congressman. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Kataguiri https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Kataguiri

t0astbread 7y ago

Not every "influencer" is the same. Some have actual skills and adequate reach to justify advertising via them (I believe this is what you labeled "influencer" in your comment) while others are just trying to get freebies without contributing any value back to the client. Additionally, regarding politics: While I do believe that empowering people who are actually concerned with the well-being of their community is important and an area in which our political systems could improve, I also think that "disrupting" politics by giving power to influencers would ultimately lead to more bad than good (in the form of indoctrination, corruption and populism).

UweSchmidt 7y ago
Influencers trying to get freebies and Youtubers disrupting the political landscape may just be the growing pains during a massive overhaul of society. It's no longer about "empowering" a grassroots initiative with a website, it's changing how humans interact on a fundamental level. Expect lots of indoctrination populism from mega-influencers during their 24/7 livestreams, but maybe less corruption too....
- austinshea 7y ago
  Yeah, maybe. It’s just more complicated than YouTube and free distribution. The way in which people use free distribution provided the internet has changed, and will change a lot. The problem with your ideas is that they are just concepts extrapolated from very current trends. You should get a wider scope, and make fewer lazy predictions.

narrowtux 7y ago

> The last elections in Germany were massively impacted by a polarizing video from a blue haired Youtuber I'm gonna have to say [citation needed]. It is true that the video went viral and was very controversial, but the only effect was that the green party gained about 5% in the 18-29 age group, according to polling statistics. All other age groups were unaffected [1]. Also note that this election was for the parliament of the European Union. [1] https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/rezo-effekt-hat-er-der-cdu-geschadet-oder-den-gruenen-genuetzt-a-1270620.html https://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/rezo-effekt-hat-e... (German)

corodra 7y ago

I'm pretty sure it gets old real fast when people with bot followers keep asking you for freebies. Are there legit ones? Yes. But there are far more fake ones that game the system. That's why there's a "backlash".

defertoreptar 7y ago

> It is another step from collectivism where everyone is paying for their own icecream to the next level of individualism. Eh, do you have that backwards? Wouldn't we classify "everyone paying their own" as individualistic? On a side note, we've always had "influencers." They were the celebrities that appeared on ads. This is just the internet-enabled, more granular manifestation of that phenomenon.

Mordisquitos 7y ago

> Firstly, using influencers to present a product is fundamentally stronger than classic advertising. Secondly, it's cheaper for the advertiser, while the influencer just needs a few thousands/month to quit their job. Assuming you're right, I would argue that the kind of "influencer" who sets their price point to advertise your ice cream truck at "one free ice cream" is unlikely to provide enough value to offset the opportunity cost of actually selling an ice cream to a paying customer, moreso if we take into account dishonest freeloaders. There is no value in providing products for free to self-proclaimed advertisers who just arbitrarily show up at your business.

HeadsUpHigh 7y ago

No influencer worth their salt will beg for an ice cream cone. The big accounts have managers and make deals etc well in advance. These guys are beggars who have just found their new tool for attempting to get stuff for free.

jriot 7y ago

Or be critical and dismissive since as don't need to accept this nonsense. Some changes are in the wrong direction with influencers being in that direction.