I read this fascinating article of the NY Times about the nature of celebrity, or in marketing terms, success.
In short, it says that according to a study, celebrity is a very social phenomenon. Our choices are partly based upon what other people like, however independent we think we are.
The conclusions of the article are:
- to get famous, you need to first attain a certain critical mass of celebrity. Once enough people know you, you’re on the roll, nothing can stop you
- fame is not an indicator of quality. As long as you don’t stink too much, it doesn’t really matter whether you’re Joe Bloggs or JS Bach (the hitlists are a daily reminder). The only important factor is to get that nuclear reaction going.
In my opinion, what goes for popstar celebrity, also goes for brand recognition, or new ideas.
This is both encouraging and disheartening. It’s pretty random, all things told (though i’m pretty sure obscene amounts of money and a great network can throw that random distribution out of whack).
You just have to pray for that magical number of people mentioning you or buying your stuff, before they do it for your competitor.
Talking about the emergence of new ideas – it seems the idea of webtops (see previous posts) is on its way up – i just read a blogpost devoted to the subject. Except he doesn’t call it webtops, but BBDE (browser-based desktop environment).
Well, i’ve said my piece about webtops, and since i’m not particularly in favour i won’t help it getting over the celebrity threshold. Let’s see if that particular idea/product reaches enough minds to end up becoming our daily reality. The coin is spinning, the die is rolling.