• skulblaka
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    2 months ago

    Right. There have been folks getting paid for (and enjoying) being the center of attention since culture has existed. The entire concept of cinema comes from this. I wouldn’t call Rowan Atkinson or Penn & Teller “attention whores or people who only want free shit” but they are the “influencers” of their time.

    The dynamic has shifted, but I don’t see it as some inherently bad thing, this just reads as a “kids bad!” kind of statement.

    • billwashere@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I can definitely see your point. Celebrities are the center of attention and can influence people. But the two you mentioned, well three actually, are entertainers first and foremost. They had a skillset that was interesting to watch and people would pay to do so. So it gets back to the definition of “influencer”… it’s always the nuance of definition isn’t it 😀

      So I guess my definition would include some no talent YouTube or Instagram C-rated “celebrity” that is essentially famous for being famous. They expect special treatment and recognition when it isn’t deserved or warranted. They are often pretentious and obnoxious. When I think of “influencer” this is the image in my mind.

      • abhibeckert@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        When I think of “influencer” this is the image in my mind.

        … OK. But that’s not what the term “Influencer” actually means. The actual definition is basically just “anyone with a lot of followers”.

        And there are plenty of people with a lot of followers who produce great content. For example this one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpuX-5E7xoU