What's on your mind?

[bèlla]

Well I was referring to the pose, not the character. ^-^ Just pretend it's this guy doing it, then =>

Much better! *scrubs my brain*

 

[DragonFox91]

I feel sad.

 

[GodDoesListen55]

Can you explain this please?

I am SO sorry! It was a typo. I didn't realize that the beginning of my other post was attached to ours. Please forgive me.

 

[bèlla]

No worries. I thought that was the case but I wanted to be sure.

 

[bèlla]

I feel sad.

Why? Did you make a decision about the cat?

 

[JustSomeBloke]

That's crazy. Reality shows used to be really popular. I watched a few in the early days. We had one along those lines about marrying a millionaire. They gather the worst snippets! Many did it to gain notice before social media took off.

I'd need a wardrobe and lots of jewels of course! And I love Bridgerton.

I haven't watched TV for a very long time, so I don't watch those shows. However, one of my friends from years ago was watching Joe Millionaire when I went round to visit. The basic idea is that a bunch of girls compete to be Joe Millionaire's girlfriend or wife. But the kicker is that he's not really a millionaire, he's a construction worker, and the huge and beautiful chateau seen in the show doesn't really belong to him. The tests involve the girls doing some quite menial tasks, such as picking grapes in the chateau vineyard. Some of the girls were bewildered that a millionaire would expect them to do those jobs, while others took it in their stride, and did it all with a smile. It was fun to see him trying to use the tests to work out which girls really liked him, and which girls only had dollar signs in their eyes. If I recall correctly, another of the tests involved the girls firing a steam engine with coal, which is a fantastically dirty job, and an absolute nightmare for any woman who spends hours preening in front of the mirror. I found it all quite amusing, which I'm sure is probably a reliable indicator that I'm evil, and destined to remain single.

 

[bèlla]

I haven't watched TV for a very long time, so I don't watch those shows. However, one of my friends from years ago was watching Joe Millionaire when I went round to visit. The basic idea is that a bunch of girls compete to be Joe Millionaire's girlfriend or wife. But the kicker is that he's not really a millionaire, he's a construction worker, and the huge and beautiful chateau seen in the show doesn't really belong to him.

I remember that program. There's always a measure of sensationalism. Most are humiliated to some degree. If I wanted to a reality show I'd have to produce it. I've contemplated something along those lines.

 

[JustSomeBloke]

I remember that program. There's always a measure of sensationalism. Most are humiliated to some degree. If I wanted to a reality show I'd have to produce it. I've contemplated something along those lines.

I don't understand. Do you want to appear on such a show, or produce a show like that?

I agree that people can end up being humiliated on these types of shows. But there's always people who are desperate to get themselves on TV, because for them it's usually a stepping stone to other more lucrative stuff, such as being an influencer. Look at the typical career path of people who appear on Big Brother, or Love Island. From that point of view, I think both the producers and the people who volunteer to be on these shows get something out of it. I don't watch any of it, but I have some idea of the typical content, because I often scroll past the latest Love Island news.

As the saying goes:
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.

 

[Niels]

How many people are truly influenced by so-called influencers, and to what extent? Influenced to change their lives in a meaningful way, or mostly influenced to press a button? I see a lot of clickbait, view counts, and folks getting paid for goofing off. The lines become blurred with content creators, who often work with similar metrics but may not be as well recognized.

 

[bèlla]

I don't understand. Do you want to appear on such a show, or produce a show like that?

I would never be on a show or produce one. I like the idea of going behind the scenes and sharing a journey. That's more informative and edifying. I've considered doing it for school. I'm working out the logistics.

Look at the typical career path of people who appear on Big Brother, or Love Island.

I've watched Big Brother in the past. Paradise Island was the turning point. The shame-o-meter was off the charts. I felt bad for the contestants.

As the saying goes: Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people.

It's only a saying. Most conversations include a bit of each at some point.

 

[bèlla]

How many people are truly influenced by so-called influencers, and to what extent? Influenced to change their lives in a meaningful way, or mostly influenced to press a button? I see a lot of clickbait, view counts, and folks getting paid for goofing off. The lines become blurred with content creators, who often work with similar metrics but may not be as well recognized.

Influencers are content creators. Their content gets more recognition and engagement. That's why they're influencers.

 

[Niels]

Influencers are content creators. Their content gets more recognition and engagement. That's why they're influencers.

How much does a mouse-click truly equate to influence, though? Maybe a lot, or maybe not so much. Who influences the so-called influencers? I don't see much in the way of new ideas or creativity from the typical influencer. Not to knock them for monetizing whatever it is they do. It's cool that they have the opportunity, but there's a difference between real world influence and internet fame. That's what I'm getting at. The two can coexist, of course, but it's not necessarily equivalent or measurable with typical metrics.

 

[JustSomeBloke]

How many people are truly influenced by so-called influencers, and to what extent? Influenced to change their lives in a meaningful way, or mostly influenced to press a button? I see a lot of clickbait, view counts, and folks getting paid for goofing off. The lines become blurred with content creators, who often work with similar metrics but may not be as well recognized.

Evidently 'influencing' works, or we wouldn't have articles like this one.

Edit: Removed link because there's a picture of her wearing a skimpy top

From the article:
How much does Molly-Mae Hague get paid for Instagram posts?
It has previously been said in a number of reports that she can also earn an eye-watering £10,890 for each sponsored post she shares on Instagram.

She can also charge up to £10,000 for a joint personal appearance with Tommy.

 

[DragonFox91]

Why? Did you make a decision about the cat?

No, was just lonely.

That avatar pic is the best one you've tried btw

 

[bèlla]

How much does a mouse-click truly equate to influence, though? Maybe a lot, or maybe not so much. Who influences the so-called influencers? I don't see much in the way of new ideas or creativity from the typical influencer. Not to knock them for monetizing whatever it is they do. It's cool that they have the opportunity, but there's a difference between real world influence and internet fame. That's what I'm getting at. The two can coexist, of course, but it's not necessarily equivalent or measurable with typical metrics.

Popularity doesn't require new ideas or creativity. Nor does building a platform. Every message has an audience. You present your position to the people who want to hear it. They interact and share it. That's how influencers are born.

Your issue isn't the influencer. It's society's response. They're not interested in certain subjects. Or there's a problem with the person providing it. They don't connect with them. The Internet is a launchpad for most. They build a following and go on to bigger projects.

 

[bèlla]

No, was just lonely.

That avatar pic is the best one you've tried btw

Thank you. Are you feeling better today?

 

[Niels]

Popularity doesn't require new ideas or creativity. Nor does building a platform. Every message has an audience. You present your position to the people who want to hear it. They interact and share it. That's how influencers are born.

Your issue isn't the influencer. It's society's response. They're not interested in certain subjects. Or there's a problem with the person providing it. They don't connect with them. The Internet is a launchpad for most. They build a following and go on to bigger projects.

Yes. Society's response, and how the term is used. Admittedly, I'm splitting hairs regarding the definition. It's already common parlance, but perhaps I attach more weight to the word influence than how it's used in this context. I don't blame the influencers themselves, and I do "follow" several on YouTube and elsewhere. It's mostly stuff that caters to my various hobbies and interests. I tend to think of their content like TV shows. They don't have much of an impact on my life choices or spending patterns.

Evidently 'influencing' works, or we wouldn't have articles like this one.

Edit: Removed link because there's a picture of her wearing a skimpy top

From the article:
How much does Molly-Mae Hague get paid for Instagram posts?
It has previously been said in a number of reports that she can also earn an eye-watering £10,890 for each sponsored post she shares on Instagram.

She can also charge up to £10,000 for a joint personal appearance with Tommy.

Oh, I agree that it works in the way that you're describing. At least for the influencer, and their ability to extract money from people. That may be where most of their influence lies. Not so much in terms of inspiring societal change, or starting new creative movements, but influencing others to give them things. Although, as I mentioned earlier, I don't think these are mutually exclusive.

I've had a few crowdfunding ideas floating around in my head for years now, which would use this model to finance my projects. Assuming that others would be interested, which is an admittedly big assumption.

 

[bèlla]

Yes. Society's response, and how the term is used. Admittedly, I'm splitting hairs regarding the definition.

No you aren't. Content creators aren't always influencers. Some derive income from products and affiliate income. They don't work with brands. Whereas, influencers (in the Insta sense) rely on brand associations and they're paid for posts.

Personality is the selling point. If you're outgoing and personable and translate that well to text, imagery, video, or audio recordings you'll do well. Attention spans are short and people want to be entertained. There's a place for serious types. But the algorithms favor the other.

It's already common parlance, but perhaps I attach more weight to the word influence than how it's used in this context. I don't blame the influencers themselves, and I do "follow" several on YouTube and elsewhere. It's mostly stuff that caters to my various hobbies and interests. I tend to think of their content like TV shows. They don't have much of an impact on my life choices or spending patterns.

That's what it is. Certain topics do well. Aspirational subjects, DIY, hobbies, and self-help.

 

[DragonFox91]

Thank you. Are you feeling better today?

I am okay. Work keeping me busy

 

[Vinter]

Vanilla Lion haven't posted in a week. I hope she's allright.