Paris Hilton
January 3rd, 2008 link to (permalink)
Its really hard to recognize what defines a decade when you are in it, but I would hazard a guess that mindless celebrity culture might be it. Obviously, celebrity has always been a huge component of culture, but recently it has become the dominant one. This has been a decade where America went to war and nobody paid attention because they were more interested in Paris Hilton’s court outfit.
There are three ways to become famous: create something, kill someone or take your clothes off in public. Paris chose the latter and, amazingly, managed to become a stable of mainstream TV, where you can’t say the word fuck, by actually fucking in front of millions. Paris Hilton is interesting because she wanted fame not fortune, she already had money. A person so utterly desperate for fame that she literally prostituted herself to bootstrap it, when she really didn’t have to turn any tricks.
I can’t get away with accusing Paris Hilton for her part in the downfall of Empire, like the decadents of latter day Rome, without a theory as to why that might be, so here it is:
It’s the Internet’s fault.
When you connect things together to make information flow more easily, you exacerbate the fame effect. No single theater actor had ever been as famous as Valentino had become, within a few years of the development of cinema. The Internet is an even bigger force for celebrity, but its not in the web savvy people’s interest to acknowledge, so people will automatically champion ideas of benign plurality like ‘the long tail’.
There is a long tail, but it is of finite size, the number of niches within it being defined by people’s natural grouping and competition for their attention. This fixed size is analogous to the distribution of species on earth which is incredibly constant. In other words there may be a place for a guy from Ohio who knows everything about folding bicycles to do very well on the internet, but only at the expense of the other folding bicycle niche sites. At the other end of the spectrum we have Paris Hilton, who occupies of of the niches that is larger than the entire long tail itself. Paris Hilton is a Gorgon monster whose fame is big enough to swallow whole, 99.9% of all the other niche celebrities put together by occupying the slice marked: mainstream.
There is a light at the end of the tunnel, thankfully. The Internet will create a more bland YouTube, celebrity clip culture, but like the span of clips themselves, the lifespan and churn of mega stardom with be faster than ever before. Life will be hard for celebrities as they realize that the meritocracy of the Internet is not in the ability to be famous, but the fact that fame and fall from grace are in the hands of the masses, like never before.
In 2018 most people will never have heard of Paris Hilton. But her fall into obscurity will be as traumatic as being shown fucking on YouTube would be for all of us who will, thankfully, always be obscure.
Here is a documentary that examines this morbid reality.
44 min 11 sec Jan 3, 2008


3 responses so far »
ashley johnston : Jan 4, 2008 at 5:00 am
I think I hear some darwinist rhetoric in there.
The net will become like the media. News papers are naturally decentralized. So are votes. Even labour for that matter. Things tend to take on structure.
There will be a few companies that get the majority of web traffic, as there are a few companies that sell majority of newspapers.
Everything new gets old again.
anonymous : Jan 4, 2008 at 3:45 pm
The internet gives and the internet taketh away. I like to think that eventually people will realise that sudden, overwhelming online popularity via attention whoring means nothing and the tay zondays and chris crockers of the world will fall back to obscurity where they deserve to be, but i think that one only applys to flash in the pan overnight memes.
Every community site has its untouchable celebrity type, and the stroking of the ego of these creatures by users equally desperate for attention and on-site fame borders on creepy-especially when- cult-like- they pursue you back to your own page to attack you for attacking their god.
I guess its just human nature to look up to someone else, and desire to be looked up to by others.
Kevin : Jan 11, 2008 at 8:41 pm
“downfall of Empire” ?
Better check your history… the downfall of empires has always been foolish wars, not skinny girls.
Anonymous is completely correct. We all are pack animals. We all know this. So why is it surprising that we tend to look for someone to look up to? Why is this so bad? More to the point, who cares?
Hell, what if Paris reforms, and becomes the greatest force for good in the world in 20 years eh? It’s totally possible… the memory hole is alive and well, and she would not be the first person to have a wild youth and settle down to make meaningful change ( See years 18-30, of the life of christ… oh wait, you can’t , because nobody wrote it down. What would we think of the man if they had had youtube and cell phone cameras then eh?)
Leave a Comment