I guess the point is that looking at the .01% of successful people and ignoring all others who didn't succeed will give you a very biased view of what's necessary to succeed.
No one lives in a bubble.
NPR has this segment where they say there were only about 1000 people in the world who were in a position to start Microsoft like Gates was. He's very lucky in be in that 1000. But of those 1000 only 2 founded Microsoft. The rest didn't want or bother or care or see it.
Vacuous rhetoric is a waste of everyone's time.
Almost in the same way that I would imagine teenage girls are obsessed with why some girls are popular and they aren't.
If you don't examine the failures then you can't determine if this is the case, and you might fall foul to the logical error of survivorship bias, as has already been mentioned.
edit: changed "an important role" to "a role", given that lack of a "clean" distinction could be of any magnitude.