A successful businessman once told me he made a decision early on in his career, to choose between having power or having influence. He chose the latter, as it had a longer shelf life.

Influence is not as overt as control and it is not as detached as inspiring others. Influence works subconsciously. It can be the result of a deliberate policy to direct people to make certain choices or buy particular products, or it can be unintentional, influencing others by one’s own lifestyle, such as parents or a role model may do. Influencers have the power to create change without necessarily taking direct action.

As soon as humans settled into larger social groups, there must have been individuals who could sway the community to, for instance, go to war or migrate. As civilisations and nations grew, it became even more important to create consensus and obedience through formulating laws or religious doctrine.

Where there is a system, there are inevitably those that challenge the system by promising alternatives — Prester John, Abdullah bin Saba, Robin Hood or Che Guevara — with the legend having greater importance than the reality.

What books get published, what editors place as headline news, which films get funding, which popstars are signed on by record labels, what is included in educational curricula, or the alternate list of what gets suppressed, is presented as market-driven, but is also a subtle shepherding towards preferred societal values and aspirations.

But people don’t always comply. In 1863, a large group of artists had their work rejected by the official Paris Salon exhibition. Undaunted, the rejected artists displayed their work the following year in an exhibition called the Salon des Refuses and became hugely popular as the Impressionists. It set in motion the acceptance of experimentation in art.

Bob Dylan’s Blowing in the Wind, John Lennon’s Imagine, and Band Aid’s Do They Know It’s Christmas? influenced anti-war sentiments and awakened social responsibility. Charlie Chaplin championed the poor. Sultan Rahi spoke for downtrodden villagers.

All these vigorously fought-for milestones are swept aside by the new, and often confusing, phenomenon of digital ‘influencers’. The first celebrity endorsement was by Michael Jordan for Nike in 1984. But influencers really came into their own in the 21st century — with blogs in 2004, and Instagram micro-bloggers in 2010 — now with over a billion users. Individuals with an idea to sell could reach audiences without an intermediary.

Most influencers are motivated by the opportunity to earn large sums of money. In Pakistan, a well-known influencer can earn 200,000 rupees per post. Kylie Jenner, with 138 million followers charges a million dollars per post. Iraqi American Instagrammer Huda Khattan was named by Forbes as one of the richest self-made women. Digital marketing companies like Vamp, established in 2015, connect brands with social influencers. Influencers spawned thought leaders, think-fluencers, micro-influencers, and even nano-influencers.

Some influencers have had enormous positive impact, such as Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, who battles climate change. More controversially, Qandeel Baloch may have inspired many Tik Tok creators. Were the thousands of Jordanian civilians who marched to liberate Palestine in May this year inspired by Ertugrul Ghazi?

Inevitably, the darker side of the power influencers wield has emerged — manipulating voters, discrediting political opponents, spreading misinformation, promoting fraud etc. Fact-checking sites were developed to counter false news. Most people forward posts without verifying their authenticity, which is a concern when Kanye West has 4 million followers, and Amitabh Bachchan 44.8 million. This can have serious consequences.

A 2020 Harvard study has shown the connection between misinformation campaigns in India and hate crimes against religious minorities. Was the 20-year-old Nathaniel Veltman acting under the spell of a digital influencer when he mowed down a Muslim family in Canada?

We believe because we want to believe, especially if the source is a peer group. We have a desperate desire to trust people and social institutions. Digital platforms are here to stay, and the majority are useful and informative. IT specialists are working on ways to weed out fake news, but it is ultimately the responsibility of the user.

Chess champion Garry Kasparov warns us that, “The point of modern propaganda isn’t only to misinform or push an agenda. It is to exhaust your critical thinking, to annihilate truth.”

Durriya Kazi is a Karachi-based artist. She may be reached at durriyakazi1918@gmail.com

Published in Dawn, EOS, June 27th, 2021