Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

behindthequest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 211 posts

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#181

Post by Zenbit_UX »

reureu wrote: post #64
esotericn wrote: post #47

The use of the term "merit" in this context feels fraught with issue. One could say that, almost by definition, the individual with the most ability to game the system has the highest merit. If a poker player is able to read the opponents' faces where no-one else can - they win based on merit. The losers may well disclaim this as being some sort of 'hack'. We are speaking here about some pictures on a small, rectangu…

I stopped reading when the author complained about being able to "buy reposts and shout outs from feature accounts and influencers." Isn't that exactly what being an influencer means: people paying for shoutouts? So it's ok when you're getting paid, but it's fraud when you're paying someone else for the shoutout?

How about when OP repeatedly talked about the old school days of Instagram, where nobody was interested in doing whatever it takes for fame and money.

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#182

Post by Zenbit_UX »

president wrote: post #9

> This is how it works: someone working at facebook is taking bribes in exchange for the blue mark, a middle man will take your money (anywhere between $1000 and $15000 dollars, depending on your stupidity) and the friend at fb will submit an application for you to be verified. Hopefully it will be approved. This is interesting if true

It's a 100% true, I've seen some youtubers talk about all the nitty-gritty of the Instagram world and this was mentioned.

I wonder if it's just an employee filling in a form with their name on it or just some Dev flipping a bool on the backend though. If the former, it does sound risky if Facebook ever gets tired of the corruption and starts investigating.

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#183

Post by Zenbit_UX »

joe_hoyle wrote: post #68
aj7 wrote: post #45

As a nine-year old, I watched commercials on our black and white TV showing famous baseball players claiming they "smoked Camels." I knew then that smoking was dangerous, and that it was unlikely that the players "smoked Camels," either. So I don't get this influencer crap. I mean I really do not get it.

I don't think the intentional is to get people to smoke who otherwise wouldn't. It's to get the people who are going to buy cigarettes, and in doing so, chose their brand. When confronted with many choices of competing products, having someone you trust and admire favour a particular product may be enough to tip the scales and get you to take that option. I find myself doing this often, due to all the podcast ads I h…

You don't think the tobacco industry wants people to start smoking???

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#184

Post by Zenbit_UX »

peteretep wrote: post #75

Can't imagine this is going to be my most popular comment but... the first thing I did was Google for one of the services she's complaining about and give them $35 for one of the things she's complaining about. If it works, I'll pump more money into it. I've spent about $1,200 so far building an Instagram following -- albeit it's quite small. I'm shooting for 5,000 real, engaged followers, and willing to spend $5,000…

What do you do in life that makes you feel this is a worthy investment?

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#185

Post by Nasrudith »

pitt1980 wrote: post #57
esotericn wrote: post #47

The use of the term "merit" in this context feels fraught with issue. One could say that, almost by definition, the individual with the most ability to game the system has the highest merit. If a poker player is able to read the opponents' faces where no-one else can - they win based on merit. The losers may well disclaim this as being some sort of 'hack'. We are speaking here about some pictures on a small, rectangu…

So who is paying the scam Instagram influencers? My impression is that who’s interested in this sort of service is something like small start up fashion brands that can’t afford an actual celebrity. My brother makes independent video games, at one point he was approached by someone who offered to broker deal with Twitch streamers to promote one of his games. How real the popularity of these streamers really was, effe…

The streamers seem to be some of the more honest "influencers" acting as entertainers. At least ones I follow (there are many subgroupings within) will disclose if they have any special connections or contractual obligations (can't show this cutscene or boss fight prerelease), sponsorships, or even if they just received a free copy.

I would advise treating unaffiliated middlemen as scammers like those offering jobs for money. (If there is some affiliated group of streamers and they handle communications that is fine.) If you want cheap marketing releasing some free copies generate no to marginal expenses.

It is respectful to all involved - you are giving away a few potential sales in exchange for a potential larger market, they can give it a fair shake and let people know what they think.

The viral effect can be real but it seems to depend on its own merits even if the "merit" is a gimmick like being hillariously glitchy.

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#186

Post by Nasrudith »

ignoramous wrote: post #10
derekp7 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, the Internet makes so many people aware of scams so there is less chance of any particular target falling for it. Of course, some people get so over sensitized to scams that they filter out all legitimate items to thinking it may be a scam.

That's game theory 101. The grudgers/cheaters always thrive in the long run in an environment of zero-sum, miscommunication, and mistrust. https://ncase.me/trust

Scammers also don't need to fool all people some of the time - just some people all of the time. Nigerian Prince Scamming already filters for maximizing gullibility to reduce time wasteage.

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#187

Post by peteretep »

Zenbit_UX wrote: post #184
peteretep wrote: post #75

Can't imagine this is going to be my most popular comment but... the first thing I did was Google for one of the services she's complaining about and give them $35 for one of the things she's complaining about. If it works, I'll pump more money into it. I've spent about $1,200 so far building an Instagram following -- albeit it's quite small. I'm shooting for 5,000 real, engaged followers, and willing to spend $5,000…

What do you do in life that makes you feel this is a worthy investment?

I’m not sure I understand the question? I think I’ll make more than I spend on this project

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#188

Post by rchaud »

aj7 wrote: post #45

As a nine-year old, I watched commercials on our black and white TV showing famous baseball players claiming they "smoked Camels." I knew then that smoking was dangerous, and that it was unlikely that the players "smoked Camels," either. So I don't get this influencer crap. I mean I really do not get it.

And yet you still remember Camel cigarettes, despite the fact that their ads haven't been aired in half a century.

Most advertising isn't designed to force you to buy, that's not how people behave. Ads are about establishing name recognition first, then nudging you one small step at a time towards a purchase.

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#189

Post by Nasrudith »

olefoo wrote: post #116
Havoc wrote: post #20

Scams, conmen and pretenders. None of this is new and certainly doesn't mean the death of meritocracy. At most this is a conversation about how IG is enabling bad behaviour, but it's not quite end of the world territory.

The meritocracy was always a sham. The "natural aristocracy of talent" is just an attempt to gaslight those cut out of the opportunities so that they will acquiesce to their exploitation.

It depends on how one defines merit and natrual. Meritocracy technically only needs ability to determine - with no regard to fairness, potential, or optimality in how the ability is obtained.

It is immaterial if the interutero cannibal shark that wins because it developed first and the consummed would have been stronger it is still the sole survivor.

Actual aristocrats were better at fighting as they could afford the diet, equipment, and to train from birth essentially. They had advantages but martial abilities still ultimately provided the limit. No money or royal blood could save chevaliers from changes like establishment of pike formations, or armor piercing crossbows on the battlefield, let alone guns no matter how much they cried foul about honor.

Ultimately they were part of a high value specialist-low value generalist cycle like how professional weavers did better than just any peasant in a cottage but worse than factories designed by more educated engineers but staffed with unskilled factory workers who in turn may be displaced by increased automation or cheaper labor elsewhere.

So their surviving descendants "administratized" and had others do the fighting more while they ruled through other means.

Re: An epidemic of fake influencers and the death of meritocracy

#190

Post by rchaud »

Good article. I like that it's been written in the frantic style of someone who's just discovered the dark patterns inherent in the Internet sharecropping industry. Hopefully some of the aspiring Youtuber/IG people read this and understand that the market for influencers is way past the saturation point.

They own the beach, and you are a single grain of sand screaming for attention among all the other grains of sand.

Post reply on HN