Selling Influence: The Profitability of Fame and the Demise Legacy & Creativity

Image sources from Sprout Social

The concept of power and fame seems to have exponentially multiplied with the rise of modern visibility and technology. As the entertainment industry provides more capital and more work, we have invested more into it as a society; it serves as a place of escape for the consumer and a guaranteed return on investment for those funding it.

TikTok and Instagram Reels — these short-form platforms — have created new avenues for revenue and fame. They provide instant entertainment and instant gratification, allowing the ultimate form of quick consumption while providing the perception of power and influence. But are we conflating purchasing power with influence? What power does an online presence hold now that anyone can become famous, now that anyone is entitled to their 15 minutes of fame?

The word fame has its roots in the Latin word fama, meaning rumor (Merriam-Webster, s.v. “fame”). This word began to circulate during the time of the Romans to describe those who had gathered a reputation or rumors around them. So, fame is no new concept; however, the monetization of fame, and the currency that fame currently provides, is an entirely modern invention.

Many people share the sentiment of wanting to be famous. As a young girl who wanted to entertain people through performance, I always thought that fame would be paramount to a career in the arts. However, the older I get, the more I’ve started to think about what fame really means, especially as the “influencer” has become more and more popular throughout my adolescence.

When I was younger, famous people were actors, politicians, or singers. They were people who utilized being in the public eye to build careers. Fame didn’t register to me then as a platform to promote your creativity; it seemed more like a prerequisite. It seemed like the only way to become famous was to seek out one of these positions — to become an actor or musician, a politician too, if that was your cup of tea. But fame didn’t seem to be something that you could accrue on your own. Fame was something that came with the rise of a career in the public eye.

In 2006, YouTube cemented itself as a part of the pop culture zeitgeist. Videos could experience virality for things that would not have otherwise made someone famous: siblings biting each other’s hands, “Charlie bit me” (2007), viral wipeout clips, or animations like “The Duck Song” (2009). With the rise of YouTube as a home video platform came the rise of a new type of fame: self-made.

Self-made fame has only continued to rise as social media has evolved. The early 2000s to 2010s transformed the way that we thought of fame traditionally. It allowed people to provide entertainment outside of a media or production company. It allowed people to rise to fame and renown for things that perhaps fell outside of the traditional constraints of the entertainment industry. It also allowed musical artists to promote themselves in a non-traditional sense. There was no label, no one promoting them; it was just the music they wanted to create and whatever audience they could gather on their own.

This concept continually grew with new media platforms coming about like Instagram, Snapchat, and even Vine — apps that naturally outdated Facebook and Tumblr, and allowed people to become even more parasocial with strangers.

There are distinctly two celebrities that I have personally followed who have built not only successful careers from YouTube and other platforms, but have elevated themselves into true celebrities: Liza Koshy and Emma Chamberlain. Both of these young women got their start on YouTube — Emma Chamberlain for her relatable content and woes of teen life, and Liza Koshy for her quick comedic timing and innovative content. Both women have now moved past the YouTube awards and on to bigger things. Emma Chamberlain is the creator of Chamberlain Coffee Co. and a current brand ambassador for Mugler, and Liza Koshy has transitioned full-time into acting and producing.

I never thought that social media could or would evolve so much beyond YouTube and self-creation, but in 2019, coinciding with the worldwide COVID pandemic, everyone seemed to turn back to their phones as a form of escape, and a new app, TikTok, took off.

TikTok merged with an app and company formerly known as Musical.ly; the platform offered space for short-form content creation. TikTok was and is a catch-all. TikTok displays current news from well-established outlets like CNN, The New York Times, BBC, and more. TikTok also allows consumers a closer look into their favorite celebrities’ lives, offering a permanent space for ‘casual’ videos that show the inner lives of others. Additionally, you can find dance videos, singers, bakers, and so much more. TikTok’s greatest strength is its algorithm, which seems to morph with each new consumer.

If the rise of the influencer was in question before the pandemic, TikTok and what seemed to be a public need for escape from about 2019–2021 cemented the position of the influencer into reality. TikTok pushed people we now consider to be celebrities into the current conversation — people like Addison Rae, Charli D’Amelio, Alix Earle, Jake Shane, and more. The best thing about TikTok and the type of celebrity it could and can provide is that it feels as though you’re just FaceTiming your friend. It opens up a new world for parasocial connection. By allowing strangers into your life, you open yourself up to brand partnerships and a following that can provide you with notoriety and fame. TikTok has allowed normal people to become celebrities. It has made the classic 15 minutes of fame somewhat attainable for anyone with a phone.

With this turn toward media as not only a form of entertainment but a tool, many things have changed. Journalism now relies heavily on clickbait: what will not only make people click on a story, but what will make them want to read it? Marketing relies heavily on influencers to promote products. Even long-standing fashion houses have turned toward inviting influencers to events to promote fashion that used to be more understated. Businesses can now sink or swim if the story is good enough to sell on the algorithm. The distinct turn toward media hasn’t just affected the concept of fame; it’s also affected the market value of influence and a social media following.

But has that change in value affected our perception of not only fame, but power? Have we confused media attention for true influence, profitability for power? Celebrity has always been another form of currency, one that can be promoted to increase profits, or promoted to increase power.

In 2016, this was truly tested in the election between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Not only was the election heavily publicized and promoted due to Hillary being the first woman up for election, but perhaps also because Donald Trump was the first reality TV star to run for president. Many people have remarked that politics seems to have distinctly changed since 2016, not just in the reality of who has been in office, but also in the way that elections are conducted and in the ways the parties promote themselves.

In this past election, things seemed to be almost dystopian. Not only was the online hate and vitriol of both parties at what seemed to be an all-time high, but it was incredibly public, and, more than that, profited off of. The Democratic and Republican parties now both have TikTok accounts, and, more than that, they were each weaponized against each opposing side. Now more than ever have we conflated power and fame with profitability.

Political figures and monarchs have always, historically, been in the public eye due to the power they hold, but now, technology has changed that (O’Brien, 2019). They aren’t promoted solely off of policy or the power they have to change the country they preside over. They are promoted by and profit off of not only their own scandals, but the scandals that surround the government. Donald Trump was famously banned from Twitter, now known as X, so he started his own platform, Truth Social. In this new age of technology that seems to seep into every aspect of our lives, so too has it encroached on politics and the governing rule of the United States.

This past year, I have been out of the United States. I have seen things occur in pop culture and other forms of media from what seems to be through a window. This window initially frustrated me because I felt so out of touch with the online community I had been so keyed into; however, the longer I have been less “plugged in,” the more time I have had to think about the weight of an online presence and the profitability of fame.

At the time of what seems like great writers, the only way to spread your intellectual property or intellectual currency was through paper, and more and more things became accessible after the creation of the printing press. However, there are many “famous” figures or celebrities throughout history who gained acclaim due to their creative influence without the instant gratification of an online audience. People who come to mind are Dante Alighieri, Socrates, William Shakespeare, Empress Elisabeth of Austria, Voltaire, Jane Austen, and Mary Shelley. Some of these individuals only experienced fame posthumously, yet some experienced fame during their lifetimes, solely through rumor, word of mouth, and the written word. Empress Elisabeth was perhaps the closest thing to an influencer during her time. Her fame was less due to her creative pursuits and mostly due to the way she conducted herself in the limelight.

The interesting thing is that the fame and acclaim these individuals had didn’t exactly equate to monetary value or power — especially for those like Socrates and Jane Austen, who really only became acclaimed after death. These individuals built a legacy. They created a lasting impact on culture and society, so marked that we still discuss their work and influence years later. That is true power and influence. As I’ve come to understand this more and more, and as the value of modern fame seems cheapened, I’ve thought more about what we are seeking in this modern world where fame is currency. Are we truly seeking to leave an impact, or do we seek the perception of power that comes with modern fame? Are we just chasing that ‘salary’ attached to an influencer’s position?

If there was no technology, if all we had were our thoughts and our own creative interests and pursuits, what would we do? More specifically, what would you do? Would we still seek publicized lives and want to circulate our work and our wares, or would celebrity fall to the wayside in search of credibility and creativity? What is true power in our modern age without technology and notoriety?

Is power influence?

In “Song of Myself”, Walt Whitman writes,

“Trippers and askers surround me, People I meet, the effect upon me of my early life or the ward and city I live in, or the nation, The latest dates, discoveries, inventions, societies, authors old and new, My dinner, dress, associates, looks, compliments, dues, The real or fancied indifference of some man or woman I love, The sickness of one of my folks or of myself, or ill-doing or loss or lack of money, or depressions or exaltations, Battles, the horrors of fratricidal war, the fever of doubtful news, the fitful events; These come to me days and nights and go from me again, But they are not the Me myself.”(Whitman 1892, sec. 4)

Whitman mentions the “askers” — the people who question our worth and how we fit into society, whether that be in the way we conduct our life or the way we conduct our work — but Whitman comes back to himself, and in “Song of Myself” he invites the reader to shut out the outside noise and come back into ourselves.

In her 2008 collection, Red Bird: Poems, Mary Oliver wrote, “We will be known as a culture that feared death and adored power, that tried to vanquish insecurity for the few and cared little for the penury of the Many.”

Oliver, a woman of literary power, of literary influence, saw our impending demise as thinkers, creatives, and cultivators of intellectual prowess.

So, my initial question remains: what would you do without the temptation of technology, without the need to exchange creativity for cultural currency? Does power come from fame, or does power come from impact? And in the end, is it power we are chasing, or the need to be remembered?

Marcus, Sharon. “The Long and Strange History of Celebrity.” Interview by Bridget O’Brien. Columbia Magazine, Fall 2019. https://magazine.columbia.edu/article/long-and-strange-history-celebrity.

Merriam-Webster. “Fame.” In Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary. Accessed June 4, 2026. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/fame.

Oliver, Mary. “Of the Empire.” In Red Bird: Poems. Boston: Beacon Press, 2008. Reprinted on Red Tree Times, January 24, 2025. https://redtreetimes.com/2025/01/24/of-the-empire-mary-oliver/.

Whitman, Walt. “Song of Myself.” In Leaves of Grass. 1892 edition. Poetry Foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45477/song-of-myself-1892-version.