Entrepreneurs being tarred with a brush

Has anyone else noticed that the media portrayal of Steve Vizard has shifted from “Company Director” or “Former Entertainer/Lawyer” Steve Vizard to “Entreprenuer” Steve Vizard? Here’s a couple of recent examples …

from The Age …

The entrepreneur has to persuade a judge that his remorse is deep and sincere.

and The Australian …

DISGRACED entrepreneur Steve Vizard has made elaborate plans to sidestep sanctions imposed for improper business dealings, setting himself up with a consulting role in a media group.

Why is it that the media use the term Entreprenuer to portray failed or dodgy businessmen? If I’m not mistaken, the media did the same thing in the cases of Skafe, Bond, Rivkin, and Rich. Perhaps it has something to do with the creative nature of entreprenuers and the media are immediately leaping towards the negative connotations of “creative accounting”?

Yes, most people would indetify these individuals as being entrepreneurs, and in the strict sense of a definition of an entrepreneur as “someone who acts without regard to the resources currently under his control in relentless pursuit of opportunity “, I don’t have a problem with this.

But I do object to the media’s use of the term in this context, as there are many honest and decent people who chose the entreprenuerial path, and this portrayal does not serve them well. It does not give these people any credit for having the courage and conviction to put their career and financial security on the line for an idea, nor value their creativity and innovation which leads to new ideas and opportunities from which we all benefit.

[ 0 comments ] [ entrepreneurship - rants ]