In the past ten years, we have seen quite a few extraordinary individuals stand up in times of despair, provide hope in times of darkens, and grant opportunities for several “you’ll be telling your kids about this someday” moments. A mayor who offered courage when none was to be found, an athlete who beat the odds not once – but seven times, and a President who simply changed the game; these individuals’ feats were miraculous, but were they enough to be named the most influential person of the decade?
You did good, Lance, but not good enough
Quite frankly, no. Barack has given us hope, Lance – strength, and Mayor Giuliani offered unwavering leadership, but in a decade where Twitter has become the most credible news source and where ‘crowd-sourcing’ has replaced traditional agency partnerships, one individual could not be the most influential. Instead, we are.
Not ‘we’ as in my dog and I as Iwrite this post, but ‘we’ in the sense of the masses. Sure, Obama ran an unprecedented campaign, but the movement was our doing. Lance Armstrong provided a platform, and stood atop one for seven consecutive years, but his LIVESTRONG foundation is supported by us. See what I’m getting at here? Advertisers seek out individuals to have an influence over the masses, but it is our choice whether to accept or reject the endorsement. Why do you think Market Research is so heavily relied upon? For example; Tiger hit a hydrant, a tree, some nightclubs – and public perception of him sank quicker than Joaquin Phoenix. What followed? Endorsements were dropped, a Tiger is hibernating, and arguably the best golfer ever to play the game has taken an indefinite leave of absence.
Do you see the power we wield?
Not to take credit from individuals such as Mayor Giuliani, but give yourselves a pat on the back. We are the most influential person(s) of the decade.
