What do influencers actually do? Is it a viable career?

[SheffieldForum]

There are many different types and levels of 'influencer', that do different things.

 

It is basically a new term for something like 'personality' used in the past. New terms for modern versions of old trades.

 

They can be really, really good folk and entertaining - think YouTubers who make great, engaging informative content. Those would have perhaps been 'TV Personalities' in yesteryear, but now they are 'influencers' who work independently on their own terms. Other types of 'influencer' may be Podcasters (old term: Radio Personality), Instagram models (old term: Models... basically newspapers and magazines are a dying trade so models are prevalent on Instagram and the likes now), there are some who do little skits on TikTok or Facebook (old term: Comedians), etc, etc.

 

So, they aren't really doing something 'new', so to speak. The overarching types of trades have been around for years, they've just moulded into modern forms and fit into current trends and technology. You could say that it is the 'democratising' of entertainment through self publishing avenues.

 

And yes, all the ones I know (Sheffield has plenty!) do things properly and pay their taxes, invest for the future, etc.

 

 

[Al Bundy]

24 minutes ago, SheffieldForum said:

There are many different types and levels of 'influencer', that do different things.

 

It is basically a new term for something like 'personality' used in the past. New terms for modern versions of old trades.

 

They can be really, really good folk and entertaining - think YouTubers who make great, engaging informative content. Those would have perhaps been 'TV Personalities' in yesteryear, but now they are 'influencers' who work independently on their own terms. Other types of 'influencer' may be Podcasters (old term: Radio Personality), Instagram models (old term: Models... basically newspapers and magazines are a dying trade so models are prevalent on Instagram and the likes now), there are some who do little skits on TikTok or Facebook (old term: Comedians), etc, etc.

 

So, they aren't really doing something 'new', so to speak. The overarching types of trades have been around for years, they've just moulded into modern forms and fit into current trends and technology. You could say that it is the 'democratising' of entertainment through self publishing avenues.

 

And yes, all the ones I know (Sheffield has plenty!) do things properly and pay their taxes, invest for the future, etc.

 

 

Good post, never really looked at it like that.

[ECCOnoob]

45 minutes ago, SheffieldForum said:

There are many different types and levels of 'influencer', that do different things.

 

It is basically a new term for something like 'personality' used in the past. New terms for modern versions of old trades.

 

They can be really, really good folk and entertaining - think YouTubers who make great, engaging informative content. Those would have perhaps been 'TV Personalities' in yesteryear, but now they are 'influencers' who work independently on their own terms. Other types of 'influencer' may be Podcasters (old term: Radio Personality), Instagram models (old term: Models... basically newspapers and magazines are a dying trade so models are prevalent on Instagram and the likes now), there are some who do little skits on TikTok or Facebook (old term: Comedians), etc, etc.

 

So, they aren't really doing something 'new', so to speak. The overarching types of trades have been around for years, they've just moulded into modern forms and fit into current trends and technology. You could say that it is the 'democratising' of entertainment through self publishing avenues.

 

And yes, all the ones I know (Sheffield has plenty!) do things properly and pay their taxes, invest for the future, etc.

 

 

 

I partly agree but I do find tagging them all as some differing level of "influencers" to be quite insulting to the ones who actually do it as a real job and put the effort in. 

 

Personally, I would equate successful YouTubers who are doing genuinely entertaining, comedic, educational, nostalgic or even longform documentaries with genuine facts, interviews and statistics to be equated not as "influencers" but calling them presenters, comedians, performers or documentary makers.  After all, for many in the current generation, YouTube etc is their television equivalent.

 

The ones who are doing travel videos,  factual product reviews, technical breakdowns or accommodation reviews to simply be called critics or consumer journalists because that's what they are doing just on the internet rather than on some TV program or newspaper column.

 

As you say, the ones who are doing podcasts, interviews vlogs are equated to basically same as any radio host. 

 

Then we have two very distinct tiers of 'models'.  The one's pouting away on Instagram, taking pictures of their dinners, showing off their hands and eyes covered the latest makeup trend or wearing  X  brand's gear might as well just be called fashion models or advertorials because as you say, they're equivalent to the sorts of tabloid newspaper and magazine posers of yesterday. 

 

The ones who are wiggling their bums for clicks on certain types of or website getting piecemeal donations from their 'fans' are 

influencing sod all (except a certain part of the body), so might as well categorise them  exactly the same as the models doing it on late night television. They're simply pornography actors. 

 

As for everyone else with a YouTube/insta page/tiktok channel with less viewers than the test card, well let's just call them what they are. Hobbyists. They're nothing more than people back in the day going round with a camcorder filming their home movies to share and giggle at with their friends, nothing more than the amateur photographers who might every now and then throw some of their work onto a market stall to make a few quid just that's it. They are nothing more than people sat in their bedrooms recording their own voices, singing away, making their mixtapes or recording copyrighted works off the radio to replay it out with their commentary on.   For that lot, the modern buzzword of influencer is far too grand. It's just people having a hobby and the reality is, that's what 99% of the so called "influencers" really are.  Just the same as yesterday there was the  millions of wannabe pop stars.... the millions of desperate hopefuls who think they are so beautiful ready to be  the next Kate Moss.... the millions of people in their kitchens who think they are only a step away from being the next Gorgon Ramsay..... and barely anyone actually makes it to the top.

 

So, back to the original post. The fact is if that's what she wants to do, she will need to treat it as the same mindset as those desperate wannabes described above from back in the day.  It may well be doable IF (and it's a huge if) they having enough talent, draw, personality and skill to stand out from the crowd, get a following and get noticed.  But like many of their predecessors who have done it off the internet world, it can take years. It will take knock back after knock back. All the while they will need to make damn ensure that they have a real world job to fill in the gaps. 

 

Just like all of those things I mentioned, there are thousands of wannabes just waiting to be the next big "thing" and only a handful of them ever make it. 

[SheffieldForum]

2 minutes ago, ECCOnoob said:

 

I partly agree but I do find tagging them all as some differing level of "influencers" to be quite insulting to the ones who actually do it as a real job and put the effort in. 

 

Personally, I would equate successful YouTubers who are doing genuinely entertaining, comedic, educational, nostalgic or even longform documentaries with genuine facts, interviews and statistics to be equated not as "influencers" but calling them presenters, comedians, performers or documentary makers.  After all, for many in the current generation, YouTube etc is their television equivalent.

 

The ones who are doing travel videos,  factual product reviews, technical breakdowns or accommodation reviews to simply be called critics or consumer journalists because that's what they are doing just on the internet rather than on some TV program or newspaper column.

 

As you say, the ones who are doing podcasts, interviews vlogs are equated to basically same as any radio host. 

 

Then we have two very distinct tiers of 'models'.  The one's pouting away on Instagram, taking pictures of their dinners, showing off their hands and eyes covered the latest makeup trend or wearing  X  brand's gear might as well just be called fashion models or advertorials because as you say, they're equivalent to the sorts of tabloid newspaper and magazine posers of yesterday. 

 

The ones who are wiggling their bums for clicks on certain types of or website getting piecemeal donations from their 'fans' are 

influencing sod all (except a certain part of the body), so might as well categorise them  exactly the same as the models doing it on late night television. They're simply pornography actors. 

 

As for everyone else with a YouTube/insta page/tiktok channel with less viewers than the test card, well let's just call them what they are. Hobbyists. They're nothing more than people back in the day going round with a camcorder filming their home movies to share and giggle at with their friends, nothing more than the amateur photographers who might every now and then throw some of their work onto a market stall to make a few quid just that's it. They are nothing more than people sat in their bedrooms recording their own voices, singing away, making their mixtapes or recording copyrighted works off the radio to replay it out with their commentary on.   For that lot, the modern buzzword of influencer is far too grand. It's just people having a hobby and the reality is, that's what 99% of the so called "influencers" really are.  Just the same as yesterday there was the  millions of wannabe pop stars.... the millions of desperate hopefuls who think they are so beautiful ready to be  the next Kate Moss.... the millions of people in their kitchens who think they are only a step away from being the next Gorgon Ramsay..... and barely anyone actually makes it to the top.

 

So, back to the original post. The fact is if that's what she wants to do, she will need to treat it as the same mindset as those desperate wannabes described above from back in the day.  It may well be doable IF (and it's a huge if) they having enough talent, draw, personality and skill to stand out from the crowd, get a following and get noticed.  But like many of their predecessors who have done it off the internet world, it can take years. It will take knock back after knock back. All the while they will need to make damn ensure that they have a real world job to fill in the gaps. 

 

Just like all of those things I mentioned, there are thousands of wannabes just waiting to be the next big "thing" and only a handful of them ever make it. 

 

Good post, well argued. 👍

 

Certainly agree with yuor last couple of paragraphs. Treat it as a job, put lots of effort and work ethic into it and you can do well from it, but it is a slog - and you do need talent or something to stand out.

 

 

[Padders]

Patrick Dickinson, Gimbal Walk, Walk with Tim, The Mc'master, are all very good U-Tubers and worth watching..

[ECCOnoob]

17 minutes ago, Padders said:

Patrick Dickinson, Gimbal Walk, Walk with Tim, The Mc'master, are all very good U-Tubers and worth watching..

 

Tim Lindon is a great example of what we are talking about.  He is a guy who has been in the world of TV.    He did the whole stepping stones of holiday camp, blue coat style entertaining for years, no doubt lots of auditions and knock backs, bit parts, got a few very low rent TV presenting gigs fronting shows on obscure cable channels and quiz networks, doing the odd corporate video before eventually starting his Youtube walking channel  during lockdown which has now turned into full blown travel blog reviews ranging from seaside crumbing hotels to palace suites in Dubai and LA. 

 

Some would argue that its almost a downgrade going from the magic dreamy world of actual TV to that crappy internet Youtube but just shows how the reality is for those  naive (and often delusional) fame hungry wannabe stars.    I bet Tim is more well known, "influential" and respected now than he ever was fronting cheap quiz channels on proper TV networks. However, its probably taken him 15+ 20+ years to get there. 

Edited August 21 by ECCOnoob

[SheffieldForum]

28 minutes ago, Padders said:

Patrick Dickinson, Gimbal Walk, Walk with Tim, The Mc'master, are all very good U-Tubers and worth watching..

Bloody Gimbal Walk… Tsk!

[geared]

People don't realise that quite a large amount of effort goes into much of the work, and there's absolutely no guarantee there will be any kind of payment at the end.  For ever successful influencer, there's an army of those who never made it.

 

People think you can sling up some posts, the likes and followers will flood in and Instagram will pay for you to go on Holiday every other week.

[El Cid]

On 21/08/2024 at 20:06, geared said:

People don't realise that quite a large amount of effort goes into much of the work, and there's absolutely no guarantee there will be any kind of payment at the end.  For ever successful influencer, there's an army of those who never made it.

 

People think you can sling up some posts, the likes and followers will flood in and Instagram will pay for you to go on Holiday every other week.

 

Here is one that is influential, so influential that she was detained for spreading racial hatred. It's a shame more of our prominent figures are not detained in the clink.

I feel they do it on purpose in order to gain notoriety.

 

"An apology issued by The Mirror to Katie Hopkins ranks among the best to ever grace the pages of a British newspaper.

Back in 2018, the right-wing loudmouth won a complaint against the Reach title after a headline left the impression that she was prevented from leaving South Africa for taking drugs.

She took umbrage to the headline: “Katie Hopkins banned from leaving South Africa after taking ketamine” used to promote a story published online in February, arguing it could damage her reputation by suggesting she had been arrested for taking a drug used for illegal purposes in the UK.

In actuality, Hopkins had been detained for allegedly spreading racial hatred, leading to complaints that the Mirror had conflated two separate issues in its original headline on social media.

The Mirror argued its reporting was accurate but later added a correction to the story which the newspaper felt made the chain of events clearer: “A previous version of this article suggested that Katie Hopkins was stopped from leaving South Africa because of the consumption of ketamine. We are happy to clarify that Ms Hopkins was detained for spreading racial hatred, which took place after the ketamine incident.”"

[El Cid]

Just watching Star Trek, perhaps the cast were my first influencers?