In today’s age of interconnectedness and political crises, celebrities and influencers are put under a greater pressure to share and raise awareness in order to assuage their politically involved fans. This has raised controversy from various camps: those who believe celebrities and influencers should not be enforcing their opinions and views onto their fans, and those who argue that a celebrity not using their extensive platform to improve the state of the world is a waste.
To fully understand this dilemma, one must have a clear understanding of what a celebrity or an influencer is. Per the Oxford English Dictionary, a celebrity is defined simply as “a famous person” while an influencer is “a person who has become well known through regular social media posts and is able to promote a product or service by recommending or using it online.”
There is a clear difference here: a celebrity is simply a figure in the spotlight, whereas an influencer is perceived with the purpose of sharing their opinions or promoting goods. They are not the same. A political figure is another form of famous person who, similarly to influencers, aims to share their opinion, but professionally pertaining specifically to politics.
In today’s fraught political climate, many celebrities have become a blend of all three labels. Should we expect celebrities to share their political views? Or is doing their job as a performer, athlete, or artist enough?
According to an article in the Guardian, there has been a rising movement in the last decade attempting to keep politics out of culture. However, this seems rather impossible, as politics have
always been inextricably linked to arts and culture. For instance, Freddie Mercury, a queer man of
colour, was the frontman of the legendary rock group Queen before his untimely death in 1991. Years after Mercury’s death, the band’s legacy persists to be political, particularly by legally blocking the Trump Administration from using their music. However, contrary to their purported causes, UK anti-
immigration parties have used songs by Queen in their protests.
Music by a queer immigrant of colour will ultimately always be political as it stems from his experiences, especially in Queen’s song “One Vision.” It will always be impossible to separate people’s
associated politics from their art until all humans have equal opportunities, freedoms, and rights.
Can one choose to appreciate an artist’s art without considering politics? Stemming from the idea that no art deriving from a personal experience can be excluded from politics, the answer leans towards no. However, some art is more blatantly political than others. Chappell Roan is an artist well known for her strong conviction and political stances towards her values which she expresses in various ways. Yet, if one were to listen to her hit song “Pink Pony Club” without any analysis or knowledge about the artist, it would be fairly easy to be preoccupied by the song’s catchy melody and ignore the song’s underlying message about queerness and conservatism in the American south. Listeners who do not wish to know about celebrities’ political affiliations are able to do so by consuming their art superficially.
The issue with interpretation is that it is entirely subjective. This opens the door to hundreds of debates on online forums over whether an A-Lister actually voted for one party if they were seen liking the Instagram post of an alleged voter for another party. Speculation of this sort is a form of parasociality, which has only grown exponentially with the expansion of the internet and accessible personal information. Nonetheless, a celebrity who would rather lose an audience than have their views misinterpreted will make this information public.Notably, Jimmy Kimmel was taken off air after speaking about Charlie Kirk. A celebrity, like Billie Eilish, who truly cares about the environment, would donate enough of their world-tour revenue to prevent them from becoming a billionaire and actively call out the billionaires in the room. While we cannot force those with platforms to speak out, the general public builds this platform, and can inflict pressure and choose who gets to rise to fame.
The reason we have become so intrigued with celebrity politics is tied to our occupation with human rights issues, especially as we see an increasing amount of rights violations in global conflict. The aforementioned parasociality propagated by the internet means that some react to not sharing political views with celebrities the same way they would with a friend. One would not want to admire or support someone who does not share the same passion for human rights, especially if said fan is a minority and their favourite celebrity is not. The parasocial occupation with celebrity politics may also stem from a craving for community. When one does not have a community around them, they often, from a young age, turn to celebrities as role models. Thus, it is logical that a queer person would want to know if their favourite athlete believes in 2SLGBTQIA+ rights. The same applies to the Black Lives Matter movement, the genocide in Gaza, and so on. Finally, the curiosity with celebrities’ political stances may stem from a frustration at the general state of the world. When one puts effort into recycling, shopping locally, boycotting, or protesting, only for the world’s most influential people to take no action, it is natural to want to know the reason for their silence. We are in the midst of a polycrisis and celebrities could be doing so much more.
Celebrities and influencers have always had political opinions; they are just more accessible today without actively being shared due to the amount of information found online. A celebrity can choose to share their political opinion, but they must consider their audience. If you are famous among children, they may not have comprehensive knowledge about global or local politics. However, celebrities sharing their values could influence these children’s future beliefs. Respect, harmony, and acceptance are examples of values that celebrities should be promoting, and in this day and age not exclusively to adults.
This idolization of celebrities, assuming that they will view things the same way as you is unfair when you have not shared the same life. Yet, it is crucial to hold accountable those with billions in their bank account, or with a social media following the size of a country. We must remember that a celebrity reposting a fundraiser against a genocide on their story is more impactful than one person signing a petition. Remember that the average American’s $10 donation is a larger proportion of their income
than a billionaire’s $1000 donation. Those in power could be doing so much more, yet they are so consumed by the fear of losing what they have that many choose silence at the detriment of sustainability and human rights advocacy.
It is not a crime to appreciate one’s talent without accepting nor supporting their values, but it is equally as valid to not be able to separate them and demand more from those who rely on your support to maintain their fame. Celebrities have always had political views; today more than ever, we do not just want to hear them, we want them to turn their power into activism.