Celebrity Activism: Is It Beneficial?

By Clare Tweed

With the rapid growth of a digital age and many turning to online platforms for answers regarding topical issues, the idea of celebrity activism becomes increasingly prominent. Fans rush to discover the thoughts and opinions of their favourite celebrities and influencers surrounding conflicts and recent events. This brings forward the controversy as to whether celebrities commenting on these issues is truly beneficial, or if it would be better if they left activism to those more educated on these topics. 

Recent headline news stories, including the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement and the Israel-Palestine conflict, have prompted many celebrities to take to social media to exhibit their opinions regarding these issues. The BLM movement, reignited by the death of George Floyd, saw many celebrities give their platforms over to BLM activists, and flood their social media with ways to aid the situation. The current Israel-Palestine conflict, which has divided the opinions of celebrities and fans, has exposed the issues surrounding celebrity activism. Many celebrities have taken to social media without verifying their sources, making uneducated statements based on false information. One major example of this is actress, Jamie Lee Curtis, who posted a picture on her Instagram, which she claimed was an image of Israeli people being attacked by Hamas. However, the comments were quick to correct that the image was in fact an attack incited by Israeli forces on Palestinian people. One such commenter was photographer, Samar Abu Elouf. Instead of correcting herself, she disregarded the situation by deleting the photo, replacing it with the flag of Israel. Celebrity activism therefore has the potential to incite the spread of misinformation, potentially influencing an impressionable audience. 

However, in some cases, such as the murder of George Floyd, celebrity activism was incredibly beneficial, as voices of activists are amplified by celebrities with a larger platform and audience. **

The demand for celebrities to ‘pick sides’ regarding news topics and to use their platform and influence appropriately is one of the contributing factors to performative activism. Often, celebrities exploit this opportunity to better their own image. For example, celebrities visited impoverished countries in Africa to make promotional films for Comic Relief. They would showcase their emotional reactions to gain viewer attention. The filming of these promotional videos has since ceased, as they were criticised for being performative, exploiting starving, vulnerable children to serve their own agenda. 

Those celebrities who choose not to pick a side, instead remaining silent on certain matters of importance, often face increased speculation surrounding their stance on issues. However, it is important to note that engaging in activism that one does not truly believe in can be a regretful act, therefore perhaps it is unfair to critique celebrities who choose not to showcase their opinion on social media. As a result, there is an unwritten stigma surrounding celebrity activism, leaving fans questioning whether the act is genuine, or loaded with an alternative motive. This leaves us evaluating whether celebrity activism is necessary, or if activism is best left to those more aware of the situation at hand. 

The growing debate around celebrity activism is whether or not these celebrities are sufficiently educated on these issues to be influencing their fanbases. Selena Gomez was recently criticised for her ‘inauthentic’ statement regarding the Israel-Palestine conflict and faced backlash that she was not doing enough. This poses the question of whether people should look to celebrities in these situations, instead of targeting their government and other local organisations, who would be more capable of making a difference. The case of radio host, Alex Jones, spreading false information about the people involved in the Sandy Hook massacre in America, shows the danger of allowing celebrities to use their platform to spread dangerous rumours and influence their audience on the premise of falsehoods. These false facts can often distract from the issue at hand, and from the voices of victims and genuine activists simply because they do not have as big of a platform as celebrities. Unfortunately, there are cases of celebrities releasing comments disguised as activism, that contain dangerous information. For example, Kanye West, or Ye, has used his social media to promote antisemitic content, causing extremely dangerous repercussions surrounding hate crimes in America. His exhibition of hate speech shows the drawbacks of celebrities using their platforms to voice their opinions and has allowed other dangerously influential people, such Andrew Tate, to thrive from the controversy. 

Despite examples like Ye and Andrew Tate, there are numerous benefits to celebrity activism. Influencers can use their platform to bring attention to certain scenarios and can help many charities and causes. Actress, Nicola Coughlin, expressed on social media that celebrities using their platforms is “necessary” to aid humanitarian crisis such as that in Palestine. Public figures such as David Attenborough and Greta Thunberg also give celebrity activism a positive reputation as they continue to use multiple platforms to educate people on how they can become more sustainable and help the climate crisis. 

Overall, the idea of celebrity activism has both its benefits and drawbacks. Unfortunately, despite the benefits of those who use their platform to encourage positive change, there are inescapable downsides. Performative activism is a phenomenon of which fans should certainly be cautious, as it becomes more common as celebrities are badgered into share their stance on political issues. It is also important that fans educate themselves through other legitimate news sources, to make sure they can distinguish the performative activism from those who genuinely support contemporary issues!

Edited by Abbie Vauls