This article makes the least sense of any article I've read on Trump so far, and that's saying a lot. I was going to put it down to the author not being in the US(?), but I probably shouldn't put broad strokes on why it makes so little sense. It isn't like corporations pick people to become famous and push their products. It's that people who become famous are picked to become the face of their products. Intellectual prowess isn't always the prerequisite to becoming famous. I don't know anyone who believes that Trump is the face of social mobility.In Trump we see a perfect fusion of the two main uses of celebrity culture: corporate personification and mass distraction. His celebrity became a mask for his own chaotic, outsourced and unscrupulous business empire. His public image was the perfect inversion of everything he and his companies represent. As presenter of the US version of The Apprentice, this spoilt heir to humongous wealth became the face of enterprise and social mobility.
Ha. You have a point there. I don't know any Trump supporters who have revealed themselves to me. I can't imagine that they think Trump is the face of social mobility, but as you say, I guess I'd have to say it's possible. I think it's far more likely that they think that Trump has the possibility of creating jobs that would create some opportunity for their social mobility, but that's different than them thinking the he is the face of social mobility.