<p>'More or less the public doesn't care to know about these aspects of life because 99.9% of them would never have a chance to land such a job.'</p>
<p>It's funny how the 'public' care to know so much about celebrities and professional athletes even though 99.99% of them would never have a chance to land such a career.</p>
<p>Nice use of circular thinking. These people are celebrities BECAUSE people care about them; not the other way around. There is no one set profession that qualifies someone to be a celebrity. There are actors, athletes, entrepeneurs, and even some bankers have been celebrities. Being a celebrity is mostly about a personality (Paris Hilton, Brad Pitt) rather than actual real-world skills. And the fact of the matter is that most people don't care about banking because it requires quite a bit of effort to progress in the industry.</p>
<p>100k? Weak. Muhahhahahahahahahah. Quarter mil for the best of graduates. No, but really 100k is good, very good for fresh grads. I prefer Wharton, but maybe that is because I go there 
But everyone is correct about what each school stresses. Look up what each type of career entails to see if it would suit you. Investment banking is rough, but some people like it (and it generally pays better on average). I am not sure about management. I don’t think it pays as much (at least until you get very high up), but I hear the hours are easier (aka- you don’t have to wake up at 4am to overhaul a report that some guy in Switzerland didn’t like).</p>
<p>Is 100K even seen as that impressive these days? I would hope a 2005 grad from one of the best business schools in the country working in the Bay Area would at least clear ~150K+/year, hopefully more than 200K/year.</p>
<p>why was this thread revived? you really had to dig back in the archives… 5 years?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>While I agree that being a celebrity can have little to do with “real-world skills”, that doesn’t necessarily preclude the possibility that you could become famous due to said real world skills. For instance, sticking with the field of business since, after all, that’s what got this all started and we are in the MBA forum…</p>
<p>Let’s quickly look at two of the world’s most famous (and richest) businessmen: Bill Gates and Warren Buffett. Are these guys extraordinary “personalities”? Is it their unique charisma that led to their fame? No. In fact, they are famous despite having very dry and dull personalities. They are famous because they are the absolute best at what they do and they have become enormously wealthy doing it. Their celebrity has little or even nothing to do with respective personalities. Taking it a step further, the general public has always “cared” / known / had a fascination with the wealthiest people / families (e.g. Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, Gates, etc.) –> what does personality have to do with this?</p>
<p>Now while I agree that the vast majority of today’s so-called celebrities that appear regularly on sites such as TMZ.com (e.g. Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan, Octomom, etc.) have no “real skills”, that phenomenon - in and of itself - does not define what a celebrity is. There are a variety of reasons you can become famous (or infamous), but generally speaking:</p>
<p>1) You are the best at what you do (e.g. Bill Gates, Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, Yo-Yo Ma, etc.)
2) You are in a profession (or born to a situation or family) that inherently provides you broad and consistent exposure to the public (e.g. Royalty, Celebrity Family, Rock Star, Movie Star, Athlete, Supermodel, Politician)
3) You do something extraordinary (good or bad) – (e.g. hero pilot Sully, OJ Simpson, Tiger Woods (again - hence the double whammy), etc.)</p>
<p>Shakespeare sums this up with his genius “greatness” quote: “Some are born great, some achieve greatness and some have greatness thrust upon them.”</p>
<p>In sum, I disagree with your view that being a celebrity is mostly about personality (though granted many celebrities have very distinct / unique personalities), and your statement that “people are celebrities BECAUSE people care about them; not the other way around” belies what drives the fickle and frenzied meter on Twitter and the TMZ.com’s of the world. People want the latest juiciest gossip of the day, the latest tidbit on the scandal of the moment (and all of the related players) – not because these players are extraordinary personalities – but because they have been thrust (or have thrust themselves) in the limelight. That’s why you have increasing coverage of those “15 minutes of fame” reality TV celebrities like Octomom getting constant coverage –> I mean ask yourself, is it their personalities that is driving the meter or the situation they have found themselves in?</p>
<p>Wow. Didn’t notice the dates. LOL.</p>
<p>PS, no way Kellogg beats out Wharton overall</p>