Is this what it feels like to win the lottery? Was I different than I had been the day before? I wasn’t raised with great wealth in my family, so I had no coaching about how to react to this sudden change in affairs. Was I somehow supposed to be instantly happier? Would people now treat me differently? Did my newly inflated net worth now signify that I was a success?
This last question startled me. I remembered having read Forbes magazine’s profiles of millionaires. By dint of their vast wealth, these individuals were described as if they had attained the pinnacle of success, the American Dream. They were millionaires–some of them billionaires. Now I was among their ranks. And yes, I felt successful. But not for the reasons that Forbes identified.
Success to me has always been about what one does with one’s fortunes, not how many fortunes one has. Even before I became a millionaire, community building and charitable giving were important parts of my life, no matter how small the amount. Being able to contribute to the lives of others, not to my material possessions or bank account, had been my measuring stick for worth, value and happiness.
According to some of our most popular news media, however, now that I was a millionaire, the meaning of that measuring stick was rather different. Worth was now about money: how much and how quickly I could earn more. Value was about my contribution to a company’s bottom line, not to my family’s security or future. Happiness was the toys I bought for myself, not the joy I brought to other people’s lives.
All too often, today’s media glorify the accumulation of wealth instead of its application. Each year, leading business publications list those who have the most money and how much they accumulated, or lost, in the previous year. Recently NEWSWEEK dedicated six pages in its business section to highlight the toys the rich have bought, including islands off Seattle and houses that recognize us before we enter. Is this all that money is meant for? Are these the reasons I risked my home and financial future to start my own company? Are these rankings and toys the incentive I want my kids to associate with working hard? Not at all.
Position on the Forbes ladder is not the way we should be assigning worth to individuals. Michael Eisner, Bill Gates and Oprah Winfrey are role models for an entire generation of future business leaders. According to the media, however, to be like Bill is simply to be worth $36 billion. How many readers realize Bill Gates has given away more than $250 million so far this year? That he has already spent millions on art work (such as Da Vinci’s Codex Leicester) and then gone on to display it around the world? Now, that’s a news item worthy of some attention.
Think of the message the media could send by devoting their vast and powerful resources to reporting on what millionaires and billionaires are doing with their money instead of what they’re buying with it. Doesn’t the fact that Michael Bloomberg is much more passionate about giving his money away than about spending it warrant more attention than a single sentence buried in a magazine’s lengthy cover story? How unfortunate that it has been left to Slate, a relatively obscure online magazine, to be one of the few publications to print lists of America’s most generous individuals.
These misplaced values are not just the fault of the media. While many of the new rich devote time and energy to either giving away their money or investing in in- stitutions that help others, many more do not. With the public eye glaring down at America’s new rich, they, like the Rockefellers and Carnegies before them, have a chance to reshape our country’s landscape by using their wealth in such a way that it increases the well-being of generations to come, not just their public image.
In this effort the media can help. I challenge the media to put wealth into a context not merely of accumulation but of usage. Rethink how wealth, value and success are publicized in America today. By giving air time to how the rich constructively spend their wealth, by glorifying the giving away of wealth, the media will help to create an environment for others to do the same. Instead of a periodical’s list on America’s wealthiest, why not a list on America’s most generous? Where are the lists ranked by jobs created, medical research sponsored, symphonies commissioned or amount donated to charities of any ilk? As competitive as the lists detailing wealth accumulation are, I am convinced the rich will respond just as competitively in order to place high on lists that detail charitable giving.
Many in the media will state that they are simply reporting public perception, not influencing it. This is a chicken-and-egg argument that matters little. While the media may be a reflection of society, they are also a source of knowledge and perspective directed at individuals who want to learn more about their world. In the case of millionaires and their spending habits, a crucial perspective is being left out of the picture that is resulting in a distortion of how we view wealth and success. The media can do better.
I count myself extremely fortunate to be in the financial position I’m in. However, my financial worth has little to do with my success as a father, husband or member of my community. What my position as a multimillionaire does is put me in the media spotlight as someone with great resources at my disposal. Let history and society judge me, as they should all people, by what I did with my resources, not just their raw value.
