At the conclusion of the Democratic National Convention, we saw several celebrities support Hillary Clinton as the new Democratic nominee such as Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, Demi Lovato, Morgan Freeman, Chloë Grace Moretz. The RNC wasn’t short of celebrity guests, but with Hollywood arguably leaning left, I felt the DNC was a better example of the relationship between it and politics.
Fundamentally, the celebrities’ presence in part of the political process is helpful. Their roles as public figures come with a massive influence on younger audiences. These stars of film and music use their influence for a cause greater than themselves: the prospective future of the country. I appreciate their choice to enter into politics and use their influence to demand change for American social issues. Many celebrities steer away from any polarizing political stance to eliminate alienating half of their following, for the sake of everyone getting along, but also with business ideals at hand. With charting and sales, some celebrities won’t risk speaking out, which is what makes these star’s collective activism in politics admirable to an extent.
Ideally, the star’s influence acquires greater ratings and put more eyes on Hillary Clinton and her campaign if the viewers, tuning in to their favorite celeb, sticks around after the performance or speech.
Arguably, millennials are one of the greatest demographic struggles with the Clinton campaign. It’s a logical move for the campaign to harness the influence of Hollywood with Katy Perry and Lady Gaga‘s 153 million followers combined on twitter. Pop culture’s influence on young people is no secret, but I remain critical of the industry I follow closely.
I don’t want to accuse any of the celeb guests of solely seeking a promotional boost to sales and brand recognition, but from a business standpoint, being on a national broadcast with views of million people is massively beneficial. Hillary’s acceptance of the democratic nomination racked up an impressive 27.8 million views. Would this celebrity activism exist to this extent without the knowledge of benefit of viewers? I couldn’t tell you, but I hope so.
Complaining about the younger generation’s passion for pop culture is beating a dead horse and for someone who follows Hollywood, I refuse to be a hypocrite. If celebrities’ influence can be harnessed to inspire to get young people to the polls- by all means- let’s do it.
However, I wish common perception was different. I would rather celebrity-based influence to be more about candidate platforms, rather than registering to vote. Sending an uneducated voter to the polls is just as awful as refusing the right to vote. I wish that a performance from Katy Perry would just be icing on the cake for viewers who already planning on tuning into the Democratic National Convention. I wished tuning into the DNC wouldn’t be thought of as an adult’s duty.
If campaign managers are creative enough to tap into younger generation’s passions to involve them in politics, more power to them. If misconceptions on “boring” politics is to be reversed, shaming the means and efforts will not bring about the solution. While being critical of the political and Hollywood business industries, at the bottom line, more eyes are more opportunity. Let’s not shame the means in which we try to revitalize newer generations into politics.
