Social Influencers

A barometer of how fcuked the world is, that these people exist, and there's an actual term for them.

It is the natural progression of web 2.0 with 4G internet speeds.

Before faster internet access and cumbersome load times for video content, you had blogs and some niche blogs were (and remain) capable of generating serious money from adverts and sponsors.

Now those same niches are expanding into video content/youtube/pod casts in line with 4G access.
In essence, they provide value to people and there's an income derived from it.

Tom Mann Centuria wrote: »

A barometer of how fcuked the world is, that these people exist, and there's an actual term for them.

Why though? At the end of the day they're just freelancing PR spokespeople or marketing workers. Your influencer who posts photos of stuff and extols their virtues on Snapchat or Instagram is no different to the person who actually runs the company's own profile and posts directly to it, it's just that they're doing it on a freelance basis and aren't formally attached to a company the way a traditional marketing or PR worker would be.

To put this another way, it's kinda like the difference between someone who works directly for a politician, let's say Leo, with the job of appearing as his spokesperson and talking up his policies in public, and someone who doesn't work for any particular politician specifically but makes themselves available to talk about them for a fee on a case by case basis.

I don't get all the negativity about it. Many jobs and roles which would once have been done by full time employees have shifted to freelance style work in the era of zero hours and "the gig economy" - this is just that same concept applied to marketing. I don't see anything inherently wrong with that myself.

Do you find it annoying when a well known personality endorses a product in a more formal setting? For instance, when Brian O'Driscoll appeared in those ads for a travel agent, or when various sportspeople endorse products such as lucozade as being helpful and relevant to their field? Personally I don't see how the influencing thing is any different.

No. Never have and never will.

All I'm going to say is Dan TDM and Stompy. Chances are that if you have kids your are plagued by at least one of them. What is an attraction of watching a guy with bad teeth or blue hair playing Minecraft is beyond me.

No I do not follow these fûcktards. No stupid god damn “celebrity” no matter how big or small will influence anything in my life.

Anyone who follows them or even worse wants to be like them because of their “influence” needs to be drop kicked.

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Why though? At the end of the day they're just freelancing PR spokespeople or marketing workers. Your influencer who posts photos of stuff and extols their virtues on Snapchat or Instagram is no different to the person who actually runs the company's own profile and posts directly to it, it's just that they're doing it on a freelance basis and aren't formally attached to a company the way a traditional marketing or PR worker would be.

Go watch one of the Fyre Festival documentaries.

They're like the new religion: find ignorant lazy vulnerable ****wits and get them to blindly follow you because only THEY will make you happy.

To put this another way, it's kinda like the difference between someone who works directly for a politician, let's say Leo, with the job of appearing as his spokesperson and talking up his policies in public, and someone who doesn't work for any particular politician specifically but makes themselves available to talk about them for a fee on a case by case basis.

I don't get all the negativity about it. Many jobs and roles which would once have been done by full time employees have shifted to freelance style work in the era of zero hours and "the gig economy" - this is just that same concept applied to marketing. I don't see anything inherently wrong with that myself.

Do you find it annoying when a well known personality endorses a product in a more formal setting? For instance, when Brian O'Driscoll appeared in those ads for a travel agent, or when various sportspeople endorse products such as lucozade as being helpful and relevant to their field? Personally I don't see how the influencing thing is any different.

Except these people are accountable.

And if you go to a certain travel agent JUST because Brian O'Driscoll does, you're an idiot.

I'd argue that people who follow this self-important morons are sheep, but sheep do atually serve a purpose.

Social Influencer - Horrible phrase

There's been an issue of tax payment in the past as there has been with the #ad usage.
There's clever ways around the #ad though, keep an eye on sports stars using instagram and managing to get logos into the shot e.g. steering wheel, car badge seen on keys.

Deleted User wrote: »

Jesus was a social influencer, and a pretty darn good one at that.

2000 years later and he has a billion people on their knees everyday.

In fairness, that wasn't Jesus - that was his various "followers" piggy-backing on his reputation!

Like many here I've no interested in these narcissistic people.

However. I did come across this while having breakfast (warning video auto starts with music so turn down volume if in work!)

https://www.bbc.com/reel/video/p070bkx0/how-to-become-a-successful-digital-influencer

In Spain, fashion and beauty brings approximately €30bn per year to the economy.

This video shows how the Autonomous University of Madrid is working to create the next generation of virtual and visual influencers.

wasn't there a story recently where some snowflake was crying because she didnt get hotel room or meal in Dublin and was told to take a hike :pac:


I get advertising business properly, but some twat claiming they have following and will promote your business is most stupid thing to come out.

I know a girl who is trying to become one of these. She fancies herself as some sort of lifestyle guru. In reality she's a bit thick.

Started off with "designing" her self build home. Then came all the interior posts. Like all these "influencers" every wall in the house is grey, along with every piece of grey furniture.

Then her and her fella got married last year. Again she went on about her wedding as if by having a civil ceremony was a totally new and unique experience and "blogged" every minute of it, including on her wedding day. I believe she spent most of her wedding day at the top table on her phone looking at the likes she was receiving on her instagram. Funny thing is that she doesn't have a big following outside her friends and family (who were at said wedding). Its monkey see monkey do with the likes of her, who hang on every word of these "influencers". Pathetic.

If you want to know my real opinion on this be sure to check out my insta stories, like and subscribe to my YouTube channel and give this post a thumbs up. Thanks guys.

I think it's good. There's millions of youtube channels/twitter users/instagram users out there. Follow who you like. Before people had to make it onto TV or radio. This cuts that part out.
2 people (twins) that used to live near me started a youtube channel. They were idiots imho, a bit like Jedward. They started up a youtube channel and now earn €2m a year and drive around in Audi r8's! Fair play to them.

The beauty of it is you can follow who you like. Or ignore it altogether.

The term influencer genuinely bothers me.

Its like the advertising industry couldn't be arsed trying anymore instead they're like lets get these people to influence you because you're incapable of forming your own opinion on anything.

With that said it appears to be another side effect of people incapable of living life without their phones in their hands

Red_Wake wrote: »

It's made stalking young attractive women easier than ever.

This would be funny if it weren't true.