Critics who don’t themselves make music “SHOULD BE UNEMPLOYED”, the American singer Lizzo tweeted to her 222,000 followers this week. The star was reacting angrily to an unfavorable review of her new album Cuz I Love You.

Lizzo was wrong about this. Publishers, studios and artists have always been publicists (推介者) as well as creators. Independent voices offer a crucial counterweight. Critics help people determine which music, TV, books and plays to spend their time and money on, and to make the most of those choices. The Internet has made it easier to sample culture, while social media has vastly increased the range of word of mouth. But in this digital age, the critics’ role has become more important.

Judgments, whether of opera or soap opera, are subjective. What is considered beautiful or interesting depends on perspective. But knowledge and experience matter. A person who has been reading poetry for decades, or has seen a play many times, will be able to tell you things about a new poem or performance that others can’t—even, sometimes, their creators.

Disagreement is healthy. Artists are free to disagree with critics, just as other critics are. The Internet was supposed to make this whole process more democratic (民主的) and open, since it could publish far more opinions than the printed pages of old. The wisdom of the crowd, in all its diversity, would enhance that of the traditional gatekeepers.

This partly worked. It is much easier to access a range of views than it used to be. Lively arguments about talked-about shows can quickly spread. But social media also provides a platform for performers to reveal their sensitivity, or for armies of fans to attack anyone who dares to dislike a favored star.

The evil critic, motivated by envy of creativity, is an overused term to flatter (奉承) artists. True, reviewers can be mean. Criticism is the exercise of judgment, and this applies to what is said but also how and to whom; as a rule, novices (新手) should be treated more gently. Yet performers and others who hate unpleasant words should be careful what they wish for. Critics are part of the proof that culture matters.

A star athlete at the college where I work recently stopped by my office. After committing a few unforced errors during a weekend match, she was tom apart by self-criticism. “I can’t stop beating myself up,” she told me. “I’m at peak fitness, and I practice hard. How is this happening?”

Many students I teach, like this athlete, believe that all-nighters in the library and hours on the field should get them exactly where they need to go. When they fall short of what they imagine they should accomplish, they are crushed by self-blame.

We talk often about young adults struggling with failure because their parents have protected them from discomfort. But there is something else at play among the most privileged in particular: a false promise that they can achieve anything if they are willing to work for it.

Psychologists have sourced this phenomenon to a misapplication of “mind set” research, which has found that praising children for effort will increase academic performance. But a recent analysis found that while praising effort over ability may benefit high-risk or economically disadvantaged students, it does not necessarily help everyone.

The cruel, messy reality is that you can do everything in your power and still fail. Instead of allowing our kids to beat themselves up when things don’t go their way, we should all question a culture that has taught them that feeling anything less than overwhelmed means they’re lazy, and that where they go to college matters more than the kind of person they are. It’s suggested that parents and teachers spend time helping students find purpose, or goals they genuinely love to pursue and that make an impact on the world, which may help them gain greater life satisfaction and become more psychologically mature.

The point is not to give our kids a pass on working hard. But we would be wise to remind our kids that life has a way of sucker-punching us when we least expect it. It’s often the people who learn to say “stuff happens” who get up the fastest.

Have you ever been on social media and seen your favourite celebrity talking about a product? These endorsements—might not be totally random, and are actually seen as a vital part of the marketing process. The question is: How do social media influencers ‘influence’ what you buy?

Human desire for status and making friends, combined with our need to belong to a group, make us susceptible to being ‘socially influenced’. Companies often use that desire to have a similar lifestyle to a celebrity we admire to hawk or launch a product. So, what do these endorsements actually do?

Firstly, they can be used to build brand awareness. A social media influencer should have a strong understanding of the platform they operate on, and therefore can create engaging content that not only adheres to the brand image, but sparks their followers’ interests in a product they might never have seen before.

Secondly, influencers can improve a company or product’s relationship with their customer base. According to In Moment’s 2018 US Retail CX Trends Report on customer loyalty, 77% of buyers have been brand loyal for more than ten years. This is also true of 60% of millennials. popular celebrity can target key demographics and talk or blog about a product, which can create an instant and lasting bond with the consumer.

Lastly, influencers can improve customer buying habits with seemingly ‘unbiased opinions’. We are more likely to respond to ‘peer recommendation’ than traditional ads, meaning the fact we see an influencer as a ‘friend’ can make us less likely to be sceptical about what we are seeing.

So, the next time you see a celebrity talking about a product, you might want to consider that this could be a carefully crafted marketing strategy designed to target your core needs. If you find yourself perusing a product you’ve seen on social media, you may well have been influenced.