An influencer’s immunity to cancellation depends on escaping attention-dependence

Evidence

And we do get an answer for why Star was, for a while at least, seemingly unable to be cancelled. In the first video of the series, Star says that, by the end of the series as a whole, “You’ll see a whole other side of me that people don’t really get to see.” This series, Star intimates, will be a document of Star not only as an influencer but as a capitalist-as a manager, not a worker. It will depict him as someone who speculates on real estate-not just glamorous houses but warehouse space and retail space he rents out to others. It will show him to be an investor-not just in makeup but in at least ten other industries. Star’s difference from other influencers, his seeming immunity to criticism, emerges from the material reality of his existence as an investor in business, as someone who does not rely on attention as his primary source of income: I love investing, that’s my thing, I’m a businessman . — Grant Bollmer, Katherine Guinness, The Influencer Factory, 298

Categorization

• DEFINE: Articulates the central inversion for the reader: the real creator who embodies the Corpocene is capitalist-manager, not attention-worker.
• ADDENDUM: Directly usable in the planned analysis applying the book’s four infrastructures (house, car, market, warehouse) to a real creator — Star’s warehouse space and rented retail literalize the infrastructures.
• SEED: Angle: cancellation immunity as the material payoff of becoming a genuine firm rather than an attention seller.