Daniel Craig may win my personal award for hottest actor in the world, but I’ve decided he’s better off mute. In a recent rant to GQ, Craig called the Kardashians “fucking idiots” for turning their soap-opera lives into entertainment. In doing so he lost my heart – though still not my lustful feral impulses – forever.
“You can’t buy your privacy back,” Craig said, probably with a gorgeous, calculating stare from those ocean-blue eyes. “We’ve been in your living room. We were at your birth. You filmed it for us and showed us the placenta.”
Craig may be beautiful, but he doesn’t live in the same world as the rest of us. In a digital world full of cleavage shots, personal tweets, and minute-by-minute Facebook updates, the Kardashians have taken turning-your-life-inside-out-and-sharing-your-shits and turned it into a religion.
Kris Jenner – Mommy Kardashian if you need a who’s who – has played the matriarchal role perfectly for the media: she says Craig has “crossed the line,” and that she wants him to issue a public apology. But in truth she probably cares little what Craig thinks.
And why should she? Craig will be remembered for being hot in swimming trunks, but the Kardashians will be remembered for much longer. They are a vital step in the evolution of digital behaviour. Years from now, philosophers will herald their importance.
Think about it. Sharing every facet of our lives may have started unwittingly with George Orwell and The Truman Show, before morphing into Big Brother and The Only Way is Essex, but in 2012 we will all be doing it the Kardashian way.
The Kardashians are prophets. A new breed of super-human. They teach us that if it is not broadcast to a mass-market audience, it didn’t happen. In space no one can hear you scream. On Earth, if it is not talked about online, you never really did it.
Some of us are already live-streaming our exploits at parties. We’ve Truman Showed ourselves not because we think we are interesting, but because we cannot bear not to have an audience. Every witty one-liner is put on twitter moments after it is said, every gossipy rumour is insinuated on Facebook.
Nobody is safe from the point-click-publish of an iPhone camera, and, the more we pose, the more we become immune to it, the more we even love it. We are photo-ready all night, rather than just at select moments, and if we are not mentioned on the soap opera of our friend’s social network of choice, do we exist?
That is not to say that being famous for being narcissistic and doing fuck-all is a good thing. Far from it. But social media has amplified our personal and collective lives in such a manner that broadcasting the Kardashian way – that is, sharing pretty much everything, as long it can be highlighted and edited – is inevitable. And it is only going to get worse, so we should embrace it. You can look forward to a lot of that from this column in the coming months.
Daniel Craig reportedly remarked: “I think there’s a lot to be said for keeping your own counsel.” It seems to me that in our digital, Americanised world, keeping your own counsel is tantamount to death. RIP, Bond.
Sean Parker, the entrepreneur famous for not being remotely as hot as Justin Timberlake, recently spoke at Loic LeMeur’s LeWeb conference about politics. Parker talked about the 2012 US Presidential election, and in typically grandiose back-to-front American syntax opined: “This election, social media will determine the outcome.”
Erm… no it won’t, sweetheart. It’s a pleasingly democratic-sounding idea, but Parker needs to remember that the internet does not run the world. Money does. And even if the web truly could make a difference, we need to remember that it is not the cash cows behind the social networks who are in control of what is said, but the masses who – if they were a singular person – could be personified as a lumpy, dim-witted, ordinary Joe. That is why the Republicans are building their colossal Themis database.
Social media, Twitter in particular, is over-run by humourless crazies with hysterical voices who insist on dominating discussions. They are opinionated, they are angry at the world and they, unsurprisingly, are the ones who think social media can make a difference. The world owes them a voice, and their outlet is social media. They seem to think that screaming and rhetoric “makes a difference”. But it doesn’t. Normal people just tune them out.
Sean Parker thinks social media is a critical new tool for politicians to build relationships with voters. But politicians in the states are too busy fundraising, hobnobbing with people who count and actually trying to pass bills to spend hours on twitter, brand-building. Those who do tend to be the more shrill and attention-seeking types, like Sarah Palin.
This should not worry us. If our politicians are doing their jobs properly, rather than spending their time promoting themselves, we shouldn’t hear much out of them on social networks. Because, let’s face it, lumpy Joe probably doesn’t even have an iPhone. Tom Watson MP, take note.
On the subject of Parker, one attendee of LeWeb told me how he got up close and personal with the infamous entrepreneur. “When he was on stage it was extremely obvious he was wearing make-up,” my source told me. “Apparently he had to wear foundation to cover up his partying ways.”
Which brings us neatly to a new trend in the start-up scene: entrepreneurs rocking the London Look. One start-up king told me in confidence that the pressure to play hard along with working hard this Christmas has taken its toll, and he’s resorted to using concealer to stay looking fresh. “I just wear it under my eyes, but it does the job,” he remarked.
At this rate Harley Street surgeons should be expecting calls from Silicon Roundabout in the New Year.