'Modern fame is redefining talent'

Have you ever looked at someone - most likely on their Instagram or YouTube page - and wondered: how on earth did he/she become famous? Widely acclaimed celebrity authority Jeetendr Sehdev may be able to help you decode that mystery. Author of The Kim Kardashian Principle, the 42-year-old - who was in town last week as part of collaborative efforts with the UN to combat modern-day slavery - has spent years analysing the worlds of the rich and famous, and coming up with his own interpretation of their collective formula for success.
A man of many obsessions - all of which he has steadily been ticking off the list over the last couple of decades, starting with attending Oxford and Harvard, and ending in Hollywood - Jeetendr has steadily built himself into a brand name, one whose insights into pop culture and marketing strategies are much sought after by media and international organisations alike. He has fairly strong views (such as why people like Meryl Streep are giving the #MeToo movement a bad name; see below) and, as far as he can tell, the millennials-bashing train is in for a long ride if brands refuse to accept that there's a new breed of consumers - with new values and talents - in town.
Excerpts from the interview:
You went to both Oxford and Harvard, before embarking on an advertising career. How did you end up in Hollywood?
I've been obsessed with celebs ever since I can remember. When I was 11, my father took me on a trip to Los Angeles. When I came back to the UK, I put up a big poster of the LA skyline over my bed; it was there till I left in my early 20s. I was bullied a lot at school and LA felt like a fantasy place I could escape to. Don't tell my dean, but I really went to Harvard in order to get to Hollywood!
Can you sum up 'The Kim Kardashian Principle' in a sentence?
Sure. To me, it is about focusing on what you believe and what you want to create, regardless of the blowback.
Your book has been creating quite the buzz. How did you come up with it?
The book was the result of a personal transformation that occurred when I moved from a very different world - a buttoned-up British world where there were very clear rights and wrongs - to Hollywood and found that different types of people were being valued. People who didn't have a posh accent, or graduate from Oxford, but were successful for entirely different values that were also legitimate.
It's about acknowledging a new world with new rules. I think it's horrifying when younger generations, in particular, are so easily vilified, and labelled everything from narcissistic to stupid. First off, I don't believe it to be true. But also, the reality is that we're looking at a new generation with new values and we need greater empathy. Why do they value the things they do? The Kim Kardashian Principle came from the paradigm shifts I underwent in order to understand this new world we're operating in.
Millennials today are constantly derided but you believe people should sit up and take note of them. Why is that?
Because they're the first digitally native audiences and they're showing us a new way of living. Technology has made them the leaders and they're defining what tomorrow looks like. People like Kim Kardashian and Elon Musk, for example, are sharing a glimpse of the future - whether you like it or not. As marketers, if we want to get in on that conversation, we need to recognise that.
How did YouTubers become the new celebs?
There was a time when no one was more influential than Brad Pitt, Jennifer Lopez and Taylor Swift. Then, YouTubers like PewDiePie and KSI came along - and they had no filters. They were candid and authentic; no one was telling them what to say or how to dress - they were just who they were. Suddenly, they were bigger than 'regular' Hollywood celebs. There is a high level of 'authenticity detection' that is built into today's audiences. So, what resonates with people now is when you can be brave enough to show your imperfections, like YouTubers do - because then, they too feel okay about their imperfections. They begin to relate on a human level, and that is not just inspiring - it is freeing.
How do you see the UAE's recent One Million Arab Coders initiative - that aims to provide free software development training to one million Arabs - as a real-world expression of The Kim Kardashian Principle?
To me, the One Million Arab Coders initiative is one of empowerment. The end point is not for them to just be good coders. His Highness Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, understands that educating people in any way equals empowerment. When you have a leader who is brave enough to empower his people through education, the world becomes an endless opportunity that goes far beyond coding - and he knows that.
According to you, hate is a status symbol and, if you're not being hated, you're not in the game. What about Oprah Winfrey and Ellen DeGeneres who are practically loved by all and at the top of their game?
Ellen has enough haters, actually; Oprah too. Once you're a public figure, because of the nature of social media, there's no stopping people from disliking your work. That comes with the territory. The trick is to use that to your advantage. We have a good example of a leader in the US who uses a lot of hate to his advantage.
Is that working in his favour?
Well, he's in office, isn't he? (laughs) Elon Musk is another leader at the receiving end of an enormous amount of hate. It's a new style of leadership - and, whether you agree with it or not, it's braver.
Hate is a really strong word though.
Well, the thing is it's really easy to hate people. Rather than putting the impetus on leaders or brands to not want to be hated and force them to coil away from what they believe in, I think we need to be asking ourselves, as consumers, why do we need to hate so much? Just look at Kim Kardashian's feed, and you'll see the onslaught of horrifying hate - even when she tries to contribute to, say, the gun control debate. Why do we need to respond to a post like that?
Is it not because audiences are seeking more authenticity from her?
I think Kim Kardashian is incredibly authentic. Everybody's expression of authenticity is different, and hers is what you see. If someone wants to make their lives by doing beauty tutorials or by playing video games, that is a legitimate form of talent to me. You don't have to play the violin or go to drama school anymore. Modern fame is redefining talent.
Is it reckless for brands to "stick to beliefs regardless of the blowback" - when the consumer is ultimately king?
The challenge is that younger audiences want to connect with brands on a 'values' level today. That wasn't necessarily the case before. So, when an organisation doesn't take a stand on political, social, environmental issues, people can see that they're trying to cater to the lowest common denominator. And, today, audiences don't want to feel like one in a million people.
The positive side of making clear what you stand for is that you're empowering your audiences to decide whether they like you or not. And it's okay for people to not like your brand or leadership style. What you want is to be true to what you believe in because, in the process, you won't only create fans, you'll create fanatics.
Nike seems to have followed that principle with its recent campaign featuring Colin Kaepernick, and it resulted in some pretty fierce backlash.
The campaign had people burning their products - but Nike didn't mind. They didn't lose customers - they fired customers. People who stood for the same values became even more fanatical about the brand. And, because there's so much choice in the marketplace today, it's difficult to play in that middle area and just get 'fans'. You need that extra bonding to keep your consumers from jumping to other market players.
Nike is a big enough brand, but smaller companies may not be able to afford such a backlash.
Actually, it was much braver for Nike to take such a stand, because they're a bigger brand. It's easier to do something 'disruptive' when you're a smaller brand without shareholders to answer to. Also, the objective is not to alienate your audiences. But if you're not doing something disruptive, you'll be absolutely invisible. It doesn't have to be an expensive move, but it has to be a brave one.
Thinx did that with their period-proof underwear. In a very established category, Thinx was a small brand that disrupted the market by sparking an honest, open conversation about an issue usually tackled with blue liquid advertising. They redefined the category - and guess what? The older, stodgier players will now start following their lead.
If all of us are authentic, how do we stand out?
I don't see a lot of disruption as a bad thing. For brands, in particular, it is necessary because, at one stage, what used to be considered disruption will eventually become convention - and the whole scene will need to be disrupted again. I think that's great because, out of that, comes a dynamic society and interesting minds.
JEETENDR'S CELEBRITY TAKE FIVE
Ellen Degeneres - "Believe it or not, [TV's 'nicest' host] has her fair share of haters. It's true."
Elon Musk - "He's showing us a glimpse of the future - it's a brave kind of leadership."
Kim Kardashian - "A cultural force that's inspiring audiences to create their own followings and movements."
Donald Trump - "He gets a lot of hate - but he also uses it to his advantage."
Meryl Streep - "An example of female celebrities making people care less about feminism by tapping into a once-meaningful movement for the sake of being relevant."
karen@khaleejtimes.com