The Role of Celebrities in Promoting Awareness of Political Issues

[gimmepie]

So, partly inspired by this thread and also because I finally saw that documentary myself (10/10, I recommend it).

What do you think the role of people in the public eye is when it comes to political issues? Should they be able to use their unique position to speak about their own belief, or to raise awareness? Are the unfairly influencing fans with rhetoric?

Discuss anything related.

 

[Aliencommander1245]

I'd say it's near impossible for celebrities and major public figures to not have their beliefs be influential, they're people with opinions and beliefs like anyone else that aren't bound to any innate rules about conveying or talking about said things

On whether they should, I think most replies just come down to "Yes, as long as their values align with mine and they promote/raise awareness of causes that i personally deem worthy" which I guess i'd agree with.

A celebrity speaking about (And thus inately influencing the public) issues or beliefs that are opposed to mine- say something xenophobic, homophobic or racist as hyperbolic examples- my thought process is "Wow I wish you didn't use your star power to push your awful ideals" while "Wow what an inspiration, i'm glad they've done this" is my reaction to the opposite. I'm fairly confident most people realistically feel the same way

 

[Her]

To me, it's just a simple matter of whether you want to listen to said celebrity. Be rational. Do you think they are genuine in their beliefs? Do you think they are selling to you, or are they educating you? Are you agreeing because you like their latest piece of media/their public persona or because you genuinely relate to their impassioned speech? Celebrity & politics, for better or worse, have always gone hand in hand. Shirley Temple, Jane Fonda, Clint Eastwood, Sonny Bono, Roseanne Barr, Arnold Schwarzenegger. Hell, Reagan and Trump. Before I continue, I will note that while it is the conservative celebrities who tend to be more successful in their endeavours for public office, it is a far more common phenomena in the left due to the overwhelming liberalism in Celebrity Culture today. Anyway, it's the allure of fame/wealth and the perception that they're still more human, relatable, decent than the politicians (just for the point of the thread, politicians being a catch-all term for any & all representatives) that they're speaking for which makes celebrity so popular in the political field. That, of course, makes them very useful for those with all kinds of agendas to push.

I adore Eva Longoria - I think she's a lovely woman both on & off screen, yet I find it confusing how she has managed to speak at two successive Democratic National Conventions. By all means, I think she's an intelligent woman and has genuine belief in her words. Her public persona is fantastic. But was she asked to be there by the Powers That Be for any reason other than to use that public persona to appeal to certain demographics? She was not. This goes the exact same for Clint Eastwood - his presence at the RNC in 2012 was to sell his persona to a particular demographic. Though, to be fair, Clint Eastwood does have some measurable political experience compared to Eva Longoria.

Does that mean Ms Longoria or Mr Eastwood don't have a place on the political stage? That's up for the individual to decide. All I can say is be wary of what is being presented, do your research and as much as you may love what they've contributed to the world outside of politics, don't let it cloud your judgement.

 

[Somewhere_]

Having celebrities spread awareness of political/economic/social issues is just a giant appeal to false authority fallacy.

Celebrities are celebrities. They are good at what they do- whether it be acting, singing, fashion, etc. But celebrities are not economists, experts, scientists, sociologists, or anything.

Celebrities become famous by appealing to people in one way or another. In this way, celebrities also have an incentive to represent these people when spreading awareness, and so they will most likely be extremely biased.

So for those two reasons, celebrities should not have any role in politics. But they are extremely influential, and thus useful for spreading awareness.

 

[Lucid]

Just because you have the ability to be heard, doesn't mean you should use it. I don't think anyone should try and advocate or debate subjects that they have a lot of personal experience with or knowledge on, but hey, some people have the grace and eloquence of a clogged toilet. I think a lot of celebrities are no more qualified to speak out on certain subjects then anyone else who has access to the internet, and often times like a lot of people do, they'll read up a few articles and suddenly become an impassioned authority on the subject matter.

There's no doubt that there are plenty of intelligent people in the entertainment industry, but for all of the positive attention they can bring to certain causes, they can use their influence for negative impact and distract from the cause itself. Look at what Jenny McCarthy did for the anti-vaccination movement. I googled the Dakota access pipeline a while back and I just found a bunch of crap about Shailene Woodley getting arrested and Mark Ruffalo's opinions, and I don't care about either, I'd rather hear from the people actually involved. I think for the most part I think their opinions and influence should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[Esper]

Sometimes celebrities are rather experienced in certain areas (think of scientists like Neil deGrasse Tyson or Mayim Bialik today, or Hedy Lamarr from the olden days). I get that's the exception, but it's worth pointing out that sometimes a celebrity is experienced/knowledgeable about a certain area. Especially compared to politicians who are often speaking about thinks they don't know anything about at all. I'd much rather hear about environmental concerns of some proposed law from Bill Nye than I would from a politician who thinks that climate change was a hoax invented in China.

Practically speaking, most of the time celebrities aren't going to accomplish much. They're gonna get a lot of flack for not "staying in their place" as entertainers and it can lead to credibility issues for the side they're supporting because they'll get cherry picked as examples.

 

[Sektor]

I remember that bullshit add where they brought on a whole slew of celebrities to promote gun control after Sandy Hook. They didn't read the events leading up to that point, and stricter gun laws won't prevent someone stabbing someone to death and stealing their stuff afterwards. Celebrities are dullards by a vast majority with very few exceptions. They are heavily influenced by social media and trending opinions on what is popular or not. They take a stance and as a result, others follow suit, heedless of whether or not that celebrity has the right opinion.

Kolin Kaepernick? Amy Schumer? Miley Cyrus? I'm supposed to trust these people with my brain/opinions? Think of my views and opinion on celebrities trying to 'make a difference'; and then picture Tom Cruise knocking on your door trying to convert you to Scientology.

 

[Caaethil]

People should consider ideas, not the people endorsing ideas. If they'd do that this wouldn't be an issue. But alas, that isn't the case. I don't think it's my place to say that a celebrity should use their status to send a message, nor do I think it's my place to say that a celebrity should withhold a message out of fear of people following it too blindly. They have just as much a right to share or not share their ideas as I do. If their messages will reach more ears, lucky them.

Though when celebrities talk about letting in all those refugees I die a little inside. I really do want to see such rich and famous people practice what they preach and put their fortunes to good use.

 

[Lipstick Vogue]

Clinton floundering around on stage with Katy Perry, Beyonce, Jay Z and others would have put me off voting for her.

 

[gimmepie]

Though when celebrities talk about letting in all those refugees I die a little inside. I really do want to see such rich and famous people practice what they preach and put their fortunes to good use.

To be fair, a great number of celebrities/the rich actually do spend millions on various charities. That's why if you check wikipedia most notable celebrities have a section there titled "philanthropy".

 

[Caaethil]

To be fair, a great number of celebrities/the rich actually do spend millions on various charities. That's why if you check wikipedia most notable celebrities have a section there titled "philanthropy".

They probably do, but they're not opening their doors to refugees, which is what I'm talking about. I should have clarified - when I say they should put their riches to good use, I mean that they have big houses and lots of money to support those people. They're the most fit to take them in, and yet while they care so much about bringing in more refugees, they don't contribute themselves at all.

 

[RetroPokeman]

Celebrities are celebrities because they are exceptional in some talent, be it acting, singing, sports or whatever. While their words would hold more value when speaking about the field they are celebrities in, that doesn't mean they have any significant insights about political/economic matters. That said, I have no problem with celebrities promoting candidates of their choosing, as they have free speech just like anyone else. A critically thinking person is not going to accept a candidate or stance just because a famous person said to.

 

[Sektor]

Well, you can look forward to several celebrities moving because, you know, Trump managed to actually win the Presidency. Miley Cyrus and Amy Schumer along with Spike lee, Bryan Cranston, Samuel L. Jacson, Lena Dunham, Chelsea Handler, Whoopi Goldburg and others. Celebrities are typically a handful of jokes and you can't take anything they say very seriously. Why? In the next four years, I would put money down that only one, maybe two celebrities actually apply for citizenship in a foreign country. To bad, I was looking forward to waving good bye to Amy Schumer and her funny looking face.

In all honesty, they're not scientists and they don't hold doctorates, degrees and lack the credentials to give a well versed, accurate portrayal of nearly any serious political opinion. Some of them, are very sharp and extremely smart, but not all of them, unfortunately.

 

[gimmepie]

Celebrities are celebrities because they are exceptional in some talent, be it acting, singing, sports or whatever. While their words would hold more value when speaking about the field they are celebrities in, that doesn't mean they have any significant insights about political/economic matters. That said, I have no problem with celebrities promoting candidates of their choosing, as they have free speech just like anyone else. A critically thinking person is not going to accept a candidate or stance just because a famous person said to.

I'd say unfortunately though, that most people are not critical thinkers. The recent election pretty much proves this. That might well mean that celebrities hold much more political power than we'd like.

 

[RetroPokeman]

I'd say unfortunately though, that most people are not critical thinkers. The recent election pretty much proves this. That might well mean that celebrities hold much more political power than we'd like.

There were plenty of reasons to be critical of Hillary. The result of the election proves that a lot of people hold views and values different than your own, not that they are cognitively inferior. It wasn't Trump with Beyonce and Jay Z showing up at one of his rallies; he didn't have to resort to that and still drew far more people.

 

[gimmepie]

There were plenty of reasons to be critical of Hillary. The result of the election proves that a lot of people hold views and values different than your own, not that they are cognitively inferior. It wasn't Trump with Beyonce and Jay Z showing up at one of his rallies; he didn't have to resort to that and still drew far more people.

I didn't want to turn this into another Trump thread though, my point is just that the majority of people do not want to look at politics critically or in-depth. They take things at face value and get caught up in emotions and hype. It's for that reason that celebrity endorsements carry more power than we might like.

 

[Klippy]

Sorry, turning this into another Trump thread! /s

A huge facet of this election had to do with people being talked to or being told what to do. So many celebrities came out to push for Clinton and many responded that they simply didn't want to be told to vote for her because "she's a woman", "xyz celebrity told me to", "if you don't, you're sexist", etc. A really clever campaign ad that came out this year was in response to the IMPORTANT ad done by a bunch of celebrities. It's a pro-Trump ad, so trigger warning for anyone who might still be in tears about it, but I think it speaks to how many voters felt this year. A lot of famous pressure to pick Clinton and this ad captures what a lot of people felt with regards to celebrity endorsements.

 

[Sektor]

You guys do bounce some good points back and forth. Having a celebrity endorse something is a pretty big deal in certain instances, like Michael Jordan with Hanes or Nikes. I agree that celebrities wield too much pull within the community. I find that they're simply not well equipped enough to delve into serious matters that require a dedication that they might not be prepared to commit to. Miley Cyrus singing is not Miley Cyrus reading. To be knowledgeable about the current issues you need to do your own due diligence. I will admit that I've been duped a couple times but I always attempt to look past the face saying the words and try and peek behind the curtain.

 

[Kanzler]

I think celebrities should be political, but not partisan. Doesn't matter if they're conservative or liberal, they could use their position in society to promote political literacy and interest, but I think it goes too far if they make it all about this or that party.

 

[gimmepie]

I think celebrities should be political, but not partisan. Doesn't matter if they're conservative or liberal, they could use their position in society to promote political literacy and interest, but I think it goes too far if they make it all about this or that party.

Now this sounds ideal!