Social Media may have killed "authority bias", here's how

In the age of social media, it's become difficult for big industrialists and businessmen to project the aura of an intellectual. Now a lot of them really expose themselves as extremely inadequate, if not downright laughable.

In the earlier times (actually, just over a decade ago), whatever we used to know about a business tycoon used to be pitch perfect, colour corrected, ultra-refined "showcase" coming from an authorised source, i.e. a PR firm. The person himself (or herself) used to be way out of reach, and nobody actually heard from them. The so called "interviews"? They weren't spontaneous exercises which showed their way of thinking. Instead, they were carefully curated PR pieces designed to boost their image. For challenges, there were occasional "hit pieces", yes. But they were dealt with at an org level. Good press against bad press. Nobody really knew how the magnates actually thought.

Then came social media. Every "personality" got a megaphone; their own Twitter profile. Now their voice could finally reach their countless admirers without gatekeepers of any kind. Suddenly, a businessman didn't have to be just a businessman, he could be an influencer as well. A thought leader. Someone who inspires an entire generation to push the envelope. A much needed source of learning, and hope.

But what happened next?

He came out as a Chhapri. A source of cringe. A harvestor of second hand embarassment, and a giver of occasionally funny memes.

Now while this isn't great, it is very revealing. Although it should be natural to understand that just because someone found great success at something like cracking an exam, or building/running a company, it doesn't mean they'll automatically be great thought leaders as well (after all, success in a particular sport doesn't make one a master of everything) - it's still very hard for people to seperate a man from his achievements.

I'll say that again: It's very hard for people to separate a man from his achievements.

Most people make the mistake of considering credentials as proof of inherent greatness, and then comes an interview in which they see a founder of a multi-billion dollar company giving the dumbest possible answer to a Finance101 question on valuations; or a post by another founder of similar stature, responding to very basic questions about his company's IPO in the most awkward and crass kind of a way.

Just a while ago, this would've been impossible. Carefully created "personas" of the ultra-rich would have continued to correlate all that success with virtuous traits like "intelligence", "grit", "leadership", and so on. Stories would've been sold, people would've bought them, nobody would've known.

But now, all that's over. Now even Mr. Gates is scrutinised (and mocked) for intellectual inadequacy (or dishonesty) and there's nothing he can do to "cover up".

With this newfound light, I think it's end of the road for "Authority Bias". And this is probably the biggest gift of Social Media.

Social Media has left no place for authority bias or credential waving.

P.S. You just read an honest (and hopefully valuable) article for free. If you like reading my writings, consider making donations. Amounts don't matter, gestures do. Here's a big cheers to all my Patrons!

Read more articles here.