@ Duane – thanks for the comment. I think appearing on Oprah will only help Rand become even bigger in our industry … what would he be famous for outside our industry (unless he's got something cool up his sleeve we don't know about yet:) Again, there has to be substance to sustain notoriety outside our industry.

@ Mariam – thank you for commenting. I hope you will again too! I appreciate your comment. I love what Lyndon wrote; “Respect amongst peers, yes. Fame and being loved, I can do without.”

@ Paul – absolutely Paul … to each his own. Just make sure its accompanied by authority too.

@ Lee – well said! My personal belief is that it is about setting expectations, then exceeding them. Consistently doing so will build authority … which essentially is as you state; trust, credibility, and confidence.

I think you've hit it right – authority is different than celebrity. In fact, the notion of "celebrity" is a bit silly in an industry as little as ours.

Building authority is like building a brand. You make promises about capabilities and you deliver on those promises time and time again.

Trust, credibility and confidence in a person or company all come from a reliable representation based on truths as well as the consistent delivery and superior knowledge of the subject matter/industry.

That's my opinion anyway.

@Jeff, Another great piece, my take in all of this is "live and let live" … if some wish to chase a dream of fame, let them … if others wish to shun the spotlight, let them … if others just wish to blog and be part of the community, let them …

There's space for everyone.

Frankly – the famous SEO thing took me as a bit of a surprise. It is that people really want fame or wealth that is frequently the byproduct of fame?

While I wouldn't mind being wealthy, I would personally loathe being famous, and I guess it's always been my assumption that most people making use of industry-oriented SM are doing it in hopes of networking…not so people will worship them.

The series of posts around this topic (including yours) have been interesting to me because they point to a concept that people are, indeed, hoping to be celebrities. Hard for me to see the sense in that.

Appreciated what you wrote.
Miriam

1 – content is king
2 – to get, you must give
3 – any help is precious, so open appreciate it

I'd have to say your definition suits my own "moral compass" on the topic nicely. Very nice to see a couple of "brand names" from the industry in agreement not just with themselves, but aligned in your direciton as well.

I wrote a post parallel to this topic (on my own blog) last year and dragged Vanessa Fox into it (with permission. ) – the basic thrust was:

We've got a lot of names being built in our industry, can any of them cross over to "absolute celebrity"? The thinkign being that exposure + financial success seems to be pretty much all that's needed to qualify as a "celeb" these days – as vacuous as that it.

In the end it seemed that many online names are destined to never become celebrities for one simple reason – they know better.

…though appearing on Oprah might hasten one's acsednancy into the hotter night clubs.