The Responsibility of Celebrity

In the 1930s, 40s, and 50s, also known as the golden age of Hollywood, a “studio system” was in place that involved actors signing on with studios to star in films made only by that specific studio. This system gave birth to the notion of “star power” or the ability for a signal actor to pull in audiences with their real world persona alone. As a result, actors of that era, such as Humphrey Bogart and James Stewart, were more or less mum on their political views, avoiding saying anything that would alienate, no doubt cultivated by the studio executives in private meetings with the actors. One New York Times article reflects on the persona of James Stewart and explains that it was only later, as he retired from the realm of acting, did he engage in politics openly and even avoided commercial attention when he could help it,

|“Mr. Stewart shunned publicity, but was invariably

good-humored with interviewers. In later years, he

was a leading spokesman for conservative political

and economic causes and a frequent campaigner for

Republican political friends.”|

The author’s recording of the apolitical nature of Stewart here, instantly helps to paint a stark contrast with the celebrities of today, for where Stewart waited until his limelight had more or less extinguished, to fully thrust himself into the political realm, the celebrities of today often use said celebrity to thrust themselves within that political realm and even sometimes use their influence to further advance those affiliations.

Starting in the 1960s, no doubt forming alongside the Civil Rights Movement and the breakdown of the exclusivity clauses within actors’ contracts, actors began to be more outspoken about their socio-political affiliations and agendas. Today, that trend has only magnified. Leonardo Dicaprio, for example, has created an entire foundation that revolves around international relations with the ultimate goal of slowing, stopping, and reversing the effects of climate change caused by human pollution. This initiative is, no doubt, largely evident in Dicaprio’s mention of the issue within his Oscar acceptance speech at the 2016 Oscars. While this effort by Dicaprio seems to be a bipartisan, global initiative, there are many celebrities that, arguably, take advantage of their fame in more subjective, arguably morally irresponsible ways. What variety of celebrity manipulation a star is engaging in depends on the answer to the following question, Is the star using a presently valid celebrity OR are they “dredging” up their past celebrity in order to thrust themselves into the limelight to bellow buzzwords and soundbites in order to plug their thoughts? If it turns out to be the latter option, then a certain suggestion of disingenuousness is immediately established, regardless of the star or the issue at hand. One prime example of this lies within the dealings of actress Alyssa Milano. Milano reached a high level of celebrity when she starred in the show Charmed, which aired between 1998 and 2006. Now, she’s most recognizable as the spokesperson within UNICEF commercials. However, Milano continues to ride the celebrity she gained from Charmed to constantly launch politically bias commentaries. Looking at Leonardo Dicaprio as an example in tandem with someone like Alyssa Milano is particularly interesting because it begins to build a spectrum of celebrity manipulation.

An article published by Huffington Post author David Sable entitled “The Power of Celebrity in Politics” explores this phenomenon through the lens of the 2016 presidential election cycle. In the article, Sable attempts to muffle the political power of celebrities by using the 2016 presidential race as an example of multiple hollywood stars coming out in support of Hillary Clinton with their efforts ultimately resulting in a Clinton defeat. Sable concludes by suggesting celebrity power is often exaggerated,

|A quick search and count will tell you that Clinton out celeb’d Trump

by an exponential factor. From Katy Perry to Jennifer Lopez. From the

Kardashians to Tyler Oakley. From Lady Gaga to Beyoncé. From LeBron

James to Alex Rodriguez... she had all bases covered...age, race, actors,

singers, athletes...all tweeting, posting, hashtagging...even doing thinly

veiled public service announcements across multiple platforms to ostensibly

turn out the younger vote. So what happened? Clearly the millions of views

garnered by the stars didn’t do the trick... it didn’t bring out the masses or

ignite any passion for action.|

While Sable’s suggestion seems valid at face value, he is oversimplifying a widespread occurrence by using one instance as the “end all be all.” Moreover, the last line of the excerpt is false, given that a passionate action was very much taken by masses, the country over.

To suggest that celebrities should not voice their political opinions is incontrovertible a suggestion of lunacy for as citizens of the United States, they can and should be vocal. However, when a celebrity clearly uses their celebrity without being fact checked, retorted, or rebutted in any official way, we run the risk of celebrities, and specifically celebrities that have exited the limelight only to return to spread an agenda, spreading misinformation quickly and widely. As a free nation that depends on an educated, misinformation at that scale should be public enemy number one.