History is littered with products which were launched with great fanfare and hoopla, but ended being wet squibs, some of them so soggy that even a conflagration would not have enabled them to take off. Companies behind such failed products went through the usual rigmarole of consumer surveys and pre-launch blandishments with smug corporate smiles, not sparing any expense because they thought they had a good thing going. But little did they know. Two good examples are - in the interest of fairness, from competitors - Crystal Pepsi in the 90s and The New Coke in the 80s. As we know, both companies habitually splurge on advertisements and try to smother consumers with an avalanche of commercials in the media. And they are no spring chicken when it comes to judging the tastes of the public. So, why such massive failures, where their fizz evaporated even before the cans were opened? Obviously they were presumptuous based on precedents and were wrong in imagining that people could be manoeuvred towards their own corporate goals. Their market research etc did not manage to unearth the reality, in this scribe's opinion; the primary game changers for the companies were the ones this author would call Sheeple.
Dictionaries define `sheeple' as a portmanteau word combining sheep and people and naively paint them as people who behave like sheep in that they can be easily led by the nose. The more intelligent people might object to this forced union with sheep, while ironically the latter themselves might stand on their hind legs and protest this rather unsheeply insult! This scribe, being neither too smart nor too sheepish, has a different take on the meaning of the word - "that crowd which can be herded down any desired path nonchalantly by a `leader' half the time; while for the other half, it quietly rebels without oozing any indication, such that the same leader is paralysed by the surprising outcome at the end." So, in short, sheeple is half herd and half muscular majority, which combine can turn out to be lethal in delivering knock-out punches, when they so desire. Ask those two-faced politicians, who grin like Cheshire cats on finding cream cheese during election time and are singularly bereft of vocal chords when results are announced!! Usually because their perch has been removed from under their backside without any notice, in a startling fashion.
But the mature observer is one who does not pile up all sheeple in one single stack. There are fine variations among sheeple. Only the most avid followers of the group, with a penchant for deep-dive research and relentless perseverance can appreciate the various nuances and raise above mediocrity to hope for podium finishes. The casual critic, going by the characterization associated with the name, - sheeple - will be impaled sooner or later, thanks to his/her practised, superficial knowledge.
First set of sheeple we look at are the ones, while going with the herd up to a point, display sharply deviant and unsheeply behaviour beyond, causing immense grief to the unsuspecting leaders. Take the example of the Anti-Hindi agitation in Thamizh Nadu in the 1960s. This author, as an impressionable school boy, was an amalgam of an under-duress member (because he was not really against Hindi and was part of after-school Hindi classes for years, but was threatened with reasonable violence to body parts) and willing participant (because it afforded an opportunity of throwing cricket-ball sized stones at various targets randomly designated by the glorious leaders!). The roaring irony was that the progeny of the respected teacher-couple who conducted the after-hour Hindi classes were also coerced members of the mob, but enjoying the outing nonetheless, for aforesaid reasons. As always, going staunchly with tradition and well-defined opening gambits, public buses were the primary targets and the cricketers in us enjoyed impressive strike rates as our throws ended with clattering glasses. But then a few diabolical ones among the sheeple also accurately lobbed stones into the police posse, stationed as audience to appreciate the skills displayed by the mob, unless provoked. And provoked they were, being used as targets contrary to the pre-violence agreement; they resorted to their own counter-violence and most of the senior coercers and leaders were severely beaten up and incarcerated for a few days, while those sheeple who astutely engineered that outcome were smirking away to glory!
The next sub sect which quietly causes significant diversion from the preconceived outcome is that which refuses to show its hand when surveymonkeys and exit polls are happening, but reacts at its own pace and trajectory almost malevolently, at the least opportune time for the leaders. Market surveyors and exit poll specialists are yet to fully grasp the fact that the specimens they coax opinions out of are exactly the ones who like hearing their own voices and fancy themselves as opinion-makers. The ones who actually swing the ultimate outcome one way or the other are in silent majority, watching without even a twitch, the brash and the bumptious making asses of themselves. Just because these low-key, quiet sheeple are not seen clamouring, those who are loud become the mistaken voices and alas, the result is disastrous for the exit polls and surveys. Members of this group imbibe all the opinions swirling around in their neighbourhood, on TV, in print media and elsewhere. They hold incisive, individual, internal debates in their own minds and get their fix unerringly, without so much as betraying a sign of being rebellious, inevitably subverting the grandiose plans of the chosen few!!
Other sheeple decide purely on the basis of their affiliations to those they consider their mentors, even if the latter have neither reasons nor pretensions to being that. Accordingly this group stays on the sidelines, indifferent to the end. Another section may just look at the alternatives and be influenced by the most strident voice -- be it the wife or father-in-law or an impudent friend, even the choice is diametrically opposite to the popular one. There are sheeple who make their picks and reject someone because that person stole his favourite marble during a game or she was hugely resented during childhood for her beautiful, long hair. In essence, sheeple come in all forms and shapes, the underlying and unifying factor being their unpredictability, which ends up thwarting popular choices.
As I was firming up the above thoughts, I decided to send a trial balloon up and asked my dear wife for her valued opinion on sheeple. She said she was in complete agreement (this indeed was alarming and I thought she was just getting my goat). She smugly continued that she intimately knew one prime specimen but this one, even when seemingly being led by the nose, was inherently rebellious and was capable of, nay, was almost always going to steer the leader the wrong way. She wanted to know whether my definition of sheeple covered this too. She would not elaborate and till this day I am looking to solve the riddle!!
Dictionaries define `sheeple' as a portmanteau word combining sheep and people and naively paint them as people who behave like sheep in that they can be easily led by the nose. The more intelligent people might object to this forced union with sheep, while ironically the latter themselves might stand on their hind legs and protest this rather unsheeply insult! This scribe, being neither too smart nor too sheepish, has a different take on the meaning of the word - "that crowd which can be herded down any desired path nonchalantly by a `leader' half the time; while for the other half, it quietly rebels without oozing any indication, such that the same leader is paralysed by the surprising outcome at the end." So, in short, sheeple is half herd and half muscular majority, which combine can turn out to be lethal in delivering knock-out punches, when they so desire. Ask those two-faced politicians, who grin like Cheshire cats on finding cream cheese during election time and are singularly bereft of vocal chords when results are announced!! Usually because their perch has been removed from under their backside without any notice, in a startling fashion.
But the mature observer is one who does not pile up all sheeple in one single stack. There are fine variations among sheeple. Only the most avid followers of the group, with a penchant for deep-dive research and relentless perseverance can appreciate the various nuances and raise above mediocrity to hope for podium finishes. The casual critic, going by the characterization associated with the name, - sheeple - will be impaled sooner or later, thanks to his/her practised, superficial knowledge.
First set of sheeple we look at are the ones, while going with the herd up to a point, display sharply deviant and unsheeply behaviour beyond, causing immense grief to the unsuspecting leaders. Take the example of the Anti-Hindi agitation in Thamizh Nadu in the 1960s. This author, as an impressionable school boy, was an amalgam of an under-duress member (because he was not really against Hindi and was part of after-school Hindi classes for years, but was threatened with reasonable violence to body parts) and willing participant (because it afforded an opportunity of throwing cricket-ball sized stones at various targets randomly designated by the glorious leaders!). The roaring irony was that the progeny of the respected teacher-couple who conducted the after-hour Hindi classes were also coerced members of the mob, but enjoying the outing nonetheless, for aforesaid reasons. As always, going staunchly with tradition and well-defined opening gambits, public buses were the primary targets and the cricketers in us enjoyed impressive strike rates as our throws ended with clattering glasses. But then a few diabolical ones among the sheeple also accurately lobbed stones into the police posse, stationed as audience to appreciate the skills displayed by the mob, unless provoked. And provoked they were, being used as targets contrary to the pre-violence agreement; they resorted to their own counter-violence and most of the senior coercers and leaders were severely beaten up and incarcerated for a few days, while those sheeple who astutely engineered that outcome were smirking away to glory!
The next sub sect which quietly causes significant diversion from the preconceived outcome is that which refuses to show its hand when surveymonkeys and exit polls are happening, but reacts at its own pace and trajectory almost malevolently, at the least opportune time for the leaders. Market surveyors and exit poll specialists are yet to fully grasp the fact that the specimens they coax opinions out of are exactly the ones who like hearing their own voices and fancy themselves as opinion-makers. The ones who actually swing the ultimate outcome one way or the other are in silent majority, watching without even a twitch, the brash and the bumptious making asses of themselves. Just because these low-key, quiet sheeple are not seen clamouring, those who are loud become the mistaken voices and alas, the result is disastrous for the exit polls and surveys. Members of this group imbibe all the opinions swirling around in their neighbourhood, on TV, in print media and elsewhere. They hold incisive, individual, internal debates in their own minds and get their fix unerringly, without so much as betraying a sign of being rebellious, inevitably subverting the grandiose plans of the chosen few!!
Other sheeple decide purely on the basis of their affiliations to those they consider their mentors, even if the latter have neither reasons nor pretensions to being that. Accordingly this group stays on the sidelines, indifferent to the end. Another section may just look at the alternatives and be influenced by the most strident voice -- be it the wife or father-in-law or an impudent friend, even the choice is diametrically opposite to the popular one. There are sheeple who make their picks and reject someone because that person stole his favourite marble during a game or she was hugely resented during childhood for her beautiful, long hair. In essence, sheeple come in all forms and shapes, the underlying and unifying factor being their unpredictability, which ends up thwarting popular choices.
As I was firming up the above thoughts, I decided to send a trial balloon up and asked my dear wife for her valued opinion on sheeple. She said she was in complete agreement (this indeed was alarming and I thought she was just getting my goat). She smugly continued that she intimately knew one prime specimen but this one, even when seemingly being led by the nose, was inherently rebellious and was capable of, nay, was almost always going to steer the leader the wrong way. She wanted to know whether my definition of sheeple covered this too. She would not elaborate and till this day I am looking to solve the riddle!!
