The chances of that happening to the average person are close to zero.

That's the whole point. People don't watch the news to hear "dog bites man" they watch it to hear "man bites dog".

No one wants to watch a 2-3 hr long movie about someone's regular Tuesday at the office they want to watch something that doesn't happen everyday like an adventure, the perfect couple meeting, or the world ending.

To pacify you by convincing you that you could be next, as opposed to you are regularly fucked by the rich.

Gotta keep the American dream alive.

Give people hope.

People with hope don’t revolt because they still have something to lose.

Its the US version of Arbeit macht frei

Z peasants require copium to stay docile.

For-profit media sells whatever makes them the highest profits. (Those who won't, make way to those who will, or remain in obscurity e.g. how many people have even heard of Ian Danskin of Innuendo Studios.)

They will sell anything it seems, with little to no regard for facts. Then they leave it to you to determine the lies of omission, while hunting for the real truth, i.e. to do the true work of journalism. But usually unpaid, painstakingly, and again you'll never be able to share that message by virtue of being in conflict with the for-profit sources. Or if you do, who would even understand you, especially among the sheeple who either cannot and/or also will not bother to read anything at all.

Some people like Jon Stewart have railed against this for decades... but he lost, and it's worse than ever before. Adjust your expectations accordingly. This is the world.

By highlighting singular instances of a sharp rapid success story; people can be shown a mirage-like image which encourages others to follow suit.

If by following the formula it works, then there should be an explosion of successful entrepreneurs in the market. This is untrue otherwise the market distribution would look unlike how it currently is (probably more mid class, less low income class, higher top income bracket).

The reality is that most of the time (>60% I'd approximate), replicating "rags-to-riches" strategies does not produce the same successes as the exhibited highlights. Sometimes a person stumbled onto gold, and by putting a spotlight on that instance you're showcasing only the business ventures that happened to pay off, sometimes it's skill, perhaps a combination of both, other times pure RNG🎲.

Ex: Sharktank, from the start you only see a fraction of the people that can even afford to start ventures show up as a contestant, just how many are able to get an investment, and what are the chances that they'd succeed without an investor, publisher, starting funds, etc?

To me "rags to riches" are a prime example of a combination/parallel of a couple of things:

• Survivorship Bias
• Focus Group
• Misdirection Propaganda
  • by repeatedly showcasing exception cases, the perception of common norms is deliberatly changed ("this is how people usually get rich", "Huh maybe I have a shot at getting rich too, maybe I should spend time to replicate their successes and turn it into my own🤔")

If rags to riches worked, I and many others would be millionaires if not billionaires.

Personally I don't trust the systems that these stories are built on and displayed as. I think the shows are entertaining but only that and nothing more.

Sensationalism sells.

It would feel hopeless if they didn't give you some "feel good" every once in a while. Just feels like the orphancrushingmachine sometimes

Something wrong with inspiring stories?

The chances of that happening to the average person

Pure lemmy right there. Hard work is useless and derided. Only chance determines success. What a miserable way to navigate life. Is there a word for "economic incel"?