The Influenceds.

With a fair number of miles on the clock now I’ve witnessed a number of changes in the way the English language is used. “Nonplussed,” for example, used to mean so utterly surprised that one is unsure how best to react. But in recent years, through “misuse,” has come to also mean unperturbed*. A similar fate seems to await “drastic,” which used to mean acting rapidly, violently, and with severity and harshness, but is increasingly used to convey “significant.” “Impact,” meanwhile, increasingly “means” only a positive influence; something that would have puzzled “the dinosaurs.” And we hear statements like, “I’ve got mental health,” which are hard to know how to respond to. What to say? Is it gauche to ask, “Good or bad?” (And is “gauche” still permitted or has it already been cancelled?) Or should one just say, “Me too”?

Back in 1983, Genie Z. Laborde published Influencing with Integrity, my introduction to neurolinguistic programming (NLP). At the time, something about the practice caught my eye. As it turned out, I never delved more deeply into the concept than a basic understanding of how it is thought to function, deciding that my innate intelligence, charm, trusting nature, and sunny disposition would carry the day (I was wrong about that of course). But I remember well how important the “with integrity” part of the title was to the author, and I quote:

“Now for the difference between influence and manipulation. The distinction is simple. Once you know how to clarify your own desires […] you can use the same techniques to clarify the outcomes of any other party involved in the communication. Achieving that party’s outcome while you achieve your own is what I call influencing with integrity.

“Achieving your own outcome at the expense of or even without regard for the other party constitutes manipulation.

“I recommend influencing over manipulation.”

Clearly NLP was some kind of superpower. And with power comes responsibility.

Clearly (or, to me at least) influencing was in some way suspect, and should only be practiced when held to the highest ethical standards.

Four decades later and the world is brimming with “influencers”**. In 2022 Forbes put their numbers at 50 million worldwide and cited investments of USD 5 billion in the previous year alone.

And this may be “a good thing” or it may be “a bad thing.” But how should we describe, collectively, those gazillions of individuals who are influenced by influencers?

Someone somewhere should coin a term.

I propose “influenceds”. 

Like “How much do influencers influence influenceds” it’s difficult to say.

But that shouldn’t put us off.

* Or at least the Oxford English Dictionary says it has in North America. The excellent Merriam–Webster doesn’t comment.

** First known use, 1662: Merriam–Webster Collegiate.

[Illustration by ELCS.ch. My copy of Genie Z. Laborde’s Influencing with Integrity.]