In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
I'm not convinced - I'd say you're confusing fame and accomplishment, or present fame with future and lasting fame. What's your definition of "fame"? I've got
- the state of being widely known or recognized; renown; celebrity (Collins)
- public estimation; popular acclaim (Mirriam-Webster)
- the state of being known or recognized by many people because of your achievements, skills, etc. (Cambridge)
- the state of being known or talked about by many people, especially on account of notable achievements (Oxford)
with all including celebrity as a synonym. I'd argue that in common usage they are essentially the same, i.e. how many people know who you are. If you're going to try to tell me that Kim Kardashian isn't famous you're trying to use the word differently to how it's typically used.
Fame varies by demographic, so some artists or composers had fame in their time but have fallen into obscurity, others are the other way around... Ste is far more famous that Molly amongst older outdoor climbers or the cognoscenti (although they would know both, and know that Molly was first female Brit to flash and onsight 8b, for example) but probably Molly is more famous amongst young climbers just getting into the sport. (again, if you dislike the use of "famous" there I think you're onto a losing battle against both common usage and dictionary definitions, although I did find at least one article from the LA Times from 1999 that sought to differentiate subtly in terms of renowned vs visibility).
Insta followers are not an ideal proxy for fame, since they're effectively a survey skewed towards a certain (young) demographic... but in the absence of anything better they are - like it or not - a datapoint on who is famous.
Post edited at 08:26