I clicked on a link to Rolling Stone that Christine Kless had posted on Facebook and took a look at a slide show of still photos featuring the cast of Mad Men including this quote “If Rob Lowe had been cast in the part, it would have been different,” says Jon Hamm, on the set in L.A. “There was no back story with me.”
So true. An absence of superstars on Mad Men has contributed to it being greater than if it had been cast with well known names and faces.
This got me thinking about various discussions regarding superstars in social media that I’ve observed and the perceived need to get thousands and thousands of followers in order to enjoy success, be proclaimed an influencer and get voted in to SXSW, etc.
It’s hard to argue the gravitas that comes with social media stardom. An individual’s ability to bring an audience of 60,000, 150,000, 200,000 and more with them does much to grease the skids leading to paid speaking gigs, book deals and other opportunities to monetize. Even people who are published on a regular basis, have their own radio and TV shows have turned to Twitter to enjoy the benefits that come with a large following, in some cases enjoying a following much larger than the number that tune in for the broadcasts.
For those of us who feel a jolt to the heart when we see an above average increase in numbers of hits to our blog that numbers in the hundreds – the right RT by the right person can blow those stats into the stratosphere. And so we covet (a bit).
But it occurred to me, when I read the Hamm quote that I’d rather be part of a brilliant performance than a superstar. Please don’t interpret that as judging – if you want to be a superstar, Godspeed. But as a consultant, there is a finite number of people that I can realistically serve. I have no intention of ever hiring a staff. I don’t want to manage other people. So it boils down to quality and performance.
How about you? What is your preference and why?