She's famous for being famous, and for having a famous father. She's everywhere but brings nothing to the table other than her money; whenever she opens her mouth, anyone with an ounce of sense regrets it.
Actually, she USED to be famous for being a sort of a reporter, via her newsletter. If she were still doing that, we'd call her a Famous Blogger, right up there with Xeni Jardin and Morgan Webb.
These days, she does actually blog, but I don't know what she says, and I don't know anyone who knows what she says.
Therefore, I christen her The Godmother of the New Media Douchebag (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSP8xm_gaK4). The only difference between the New Media Douchebags and her, though, is that back then, people didn't derive fame, fortune, and political power by hating everything in a mildly amusing manner.
I don't know if people in California see it, but from outside it seems they all follow Gurus of one sort or another, as a culture, and Esther Dyson was one of them for a while. Gurus just don't seem as big elsewhere in the US, but Cali folks are always looking to the big thinker of the day, which means that people seem to get supported for thinking alone. Elsewhere in the US, leading by alleged native contact with the forces that influence or control one's subculture is the stuff of late night infomercials and endless iterations of that first self-help book.
Esther Dyson's cover or promotional standee or something for... Whateverthefuck 2.0 her book was-- it said Guru to me. So my Guru theory of California springs from Esther Dyson, actually.
And she is accessible to the press and to academics, both of whom often don't know all that much about technology.
Paris Hilton, at least once, was funnier and more self-deprecating (which is hilarious only if you've got a reputation for being totally self-involved.
For the analogy to be complete (well, at least so far as names go), she should have been named Sphere. In today's world of branding, that could then become eSpher.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 03:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 03:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 04:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 04:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 07:16 am (UTC)These days, she does actually blog, but I don't know what she says, and I don't know anyone who knows what she says.
Therefore, I christen her The Godmother of the New Media Douchebag (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zSP8xm_gaK4). The only difference between the New Media Douchebags and her, though, is that back then, people didn't derive fame, fortune, and political power by hating everything in a mildly amusing manner.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 03:16 pm (UTC)Your christening rocks. And so does that video. But where does that leave us, the old-school haters?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 07:15 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 07:37 pm (UTC)Esther Dyson's cover or promotional standee or something for... Whateverthefuck 2.0 her book was-- it said Guru to me. So my Guru theory of California springs from Esther Dyson, actually.
She's a PR figure
Date: 2009-03-05 12:53 pm (UTC)Paris Hilton, at least once, was funnier and more self-deprecating (which is hilarious only if you've got a reputation for being totally self-involved.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 07:28 pm (UTC)The tech world's Terrace Hilton, more like
Date: 2009-03-05 04:28 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 04:43 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-05 06:51 pm (UTC)