Nancy Riley
When Nicki Minaj expressed support for the view that Christians were being persecuted in Nigeria, it ignited a heated online debate. It underscored the question of what role do (often politically uneducated) celebrities play in discussing delicate political matters? And, furthermore, should there be a crossover between celebrity and political culture?
Free speech is a right, not a guarantee of responsibility.
Many believe that celebrities should use their position of influence to bring attention to political matters and humanitarian issues, and I can certainly see the appeal of this viewpoint. Spreading awareness plays an undeniably integral part in beginning to solve global problems, something celebrities are able to do effectively. Yet, due to the imbalance of power that celebrities possess, I would argue that pressuring them to be politically vocal is naive.
For me, it comes down to principles of democracy. Celebrities should certainly have the same democratic rights to the freedom of speech, and beyond the confines of the law, there is little that can be done to prevent them from speaking openly. Instances such as Sabrina Carpenter speaking against ICE using her music in their video are completely within her rights, and I do not take issue with this. I am more concerned about the pressure put on celebrities to become politically vocal, as this is when you get into dangerous territory. Free speech is a right, not a guarantee of responsibility.
The people we follow should be good people, but the pressure often placed on celebrities to prove their ‘goodness’ through outspokenness on political issues comes with numerous issues. Not only does this create problems with authenticity, as the likelihood of celebrities expressing political views to improve their own credibility is highly possible. But it could furthermore be said that the power of the ‘celebrity’ is immoral in itself.
This dynamic, paired with an oftentimes lack of education on political topics, has huge implications in regards to democracy.
The level of celebrity influence is disproportionate to any level of ‘deservability’. This is not to say that all celebrities are inherently bad people, as there are certainly many celebrities moved by the humanitarian crisis of the world. Yet the grounds of their fame rely on an ultimately unstable premise.
I do not pass judgment on this, as I believe celebrities, regardless of how ‘deserving’ they are, still play an important societal role of creating entertainment and oftentimes lighthearted relief. But expecting profound and educated political thought from what is essentially a somewhat randomly selected group of overindulged individuals is likely just a parasocial desire.
This dynamic, paired with an oftentimes lack of education on political topics, has huge implications in regards to democracy. Philosopher Plato warned us of the demagogues – charismatic personalities that impact rational decision-making in democratic governments. Celebrities are an excellent example of this. They have the reach and the persuasive ability to impact the views and actions of the masses, yet they are not democratically elected.
Recent research from Harvard shows that celebrity endorsement sways around 12% of low information voters
As we can see with the Nicki Minaj case, her viewpoint is not only widely debated, but the factual basis of it is highly contested. Minaj’s social and cultural power makes potential misinformation dangerous and can have significant impacts, especially in creating a political culture that is based on reason and morality.
Recent research from Harvard shows that celebrity endorsement sways around 12% of low information voters; a politically significant number of people. This highlights the undeniable impact that potential misinformation from celebrities can lead to.
The other side of this is the growing celebritisation of politicians. Many politicians, from Green Party leader Zack Polanski to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, have active social media accounts. On one hand, this is arguably important to ensure engagement with younger generations and make sure the political culture stays up to date, but it can also lead politics to become a competition of charisma, rather than a rational vote for politicians who are most competent.
This creates a blurring between authentic democratic choice and popular culture.
A more egregious example of this is politicians going on reality TV. Politician Matt Hancock went on ‘I’m a Celeb’, and Jacob Rees-Mogg had his own reality TV show ‘Meet the Rees-Moggs’ profiling him and his family. This creates a blurring between authentic democratic choice and popular culture. A dangerous mix in the pursuit of rational democracy.
Overall, it’s certainly important for the people we idolise to be good people, and I sympathise with the view that their reach and influence are integral in the pursuit of global change. However, I believe that the threat to democracy ultimately outweighs the importance of pressuring celebrities into being politically vocal.
Nancy Riley
Featured image courtesy of Brian Wertheim via Unsplash. Image license found here. No changes were made to this image.
For more Impact content and information on how to get involved, follow us on Instagram and connect with our Facebook page.
If you can’t get enough of our Features, connect with our section’s contributor’s page and follow us on Instagram.
