Evaluate the importance of celebrity advocacy in human rights
Paraic Sullivan (10349033)
Celebrities are people with a high public profile and can come from a variety of fields, though the most common field is entertainment. Celebrities are a branded commodity that is, in some cases, manufactured and professionally marketed. The worth of a celebrity depends on their ability to create and maintain distinctiveness and affective loyalty. Since the 1980s, celebrities have become actively involved in human rights missions, and their participation in advocacy has helped to reshape the western public engagement and international development. There have been divisive opinions about the role of celebrities in human rights advocacy with a group of people believing that their involvement in advocacy in some ways cheapens the efforts. Despite the opinions, celebrity advocacy has become mainstream, with more and more celebrities taking the call to arms and participating in neo-liberalism. However, the question remains if the celebrity involvement in advocacy serves to help the causes supported or not. This paper will attempt to analyse the growing importance of celebrity advocacy in human rights.
Is celebrity advocacy important to human rights?
On many occasions, celebrities have been used to draw attention and create awareness on important public and social issues, even on a global scale. The fact that celebrities have now assumed positions of moral authorities amongst their following, as opposed to charismatic leaders, facilitates the direction towards celebrity advocacy in issues that require global attention (Wheeler, 2018). More and more audiences around the world have demonstrated their preference toward authentic celebrities who are driven by moral and ethical standards. This facilitates the increase in celebrity involvement in campaigns geared towards human rights, among other major social issues.
Through the public interest in celebrities, they have drawn attention to many international activities undertaken by NGOs such as the UN. This is one of the ways that such organizations can garner interests on a global scale, especially with the rise of media coverage and social media. Therefore, celebrities have proved to be useful in the advocacy efforts of many organizations, mostly in places that may not gain so much media coverage and attention (Daley, 2013). The high coverage of celebrities grants them the capability to bring about changes in human rights agendas as well as advocate for global principles on liberal internationalism.
Celebrities have also been considered useful in forcing governments to take action in implementing policies beneficial to most people. The media attention and followings of celebrities make them a power source for change and awareness within the global societies (Daley, 2013). The matters celebrities bring into attention tend to garner more public interests and campaigns towards change in those areas. In the case of governments, as noted by Kofi Annan, celebrities are capable of generating widespread support for certain matters that governments are in control of and effecting change in those areas (Wheeler, 2018). Their unique voices in the spheres that they operate in allow many organizations to reach audiences that would typically not pay attention to campaigns led without the celebrities.
While many organizations have taken to using celebrity identities to propagate change even within political spheres, there have also been an increase of freelance humanitarian efforts by celebrities around the world (Wheeler, 2018). Several celebrities have individually chosen cases of mass violation of human rights and began online campaigns and raised funds towards the support of such causes. Using their popular celebrity status, these people have raised awareness on several causes that could have possibly gone unnoticed by the world audience and led to a change in those situations. A good example of such an effort within the UK would be the case of Michael Buerk, an English journalist, who reported on the starvation of Ethiopians at refugee camps in Korem. The resultant media spectacle resulted in 2 billion people across 160 countries getting information about the plight of the Ethiopian refugees and subsequently raising funds to help in resolving the situation (Wheeler, 2018).
Celebrities have become an important element in how organizations and individuals try to achieve social and political change. Several organizations have even taken to having celebrities under their full-time employ under titles such as high-profile celebrity liaison (Brockington & Henson, 2015). Celebrity advocacy has become so important because of its effectiveness in reaching many people as well as effecting change. This is a common belief for both the general public and organizations. However, there have been questions as to the effectiveness of these celebrity-led advocacy campaigns. The main aim of advocacy is to invoke a response or change in how things were before (Brockington & Henson, 2015). The question is if celebrities serve to invoke a response or they are merely an unfounded belief in the power and influence of mass following.
The current research conducted to justify the use of celebrity in advocacy has so far focused on marketing and has been done with college students as the source of data, particularly in the US (Brockington & Henson, 2015). This research may be inaccurate, as the sample may present a different view than that of the general population, particularly because college students tend to be highly receptive to celebrity endorsements. Besides, most people reported not being responsive to celebrity news/campaigns (Brockington & Henson, 2015). Though most of them admitted to thinking that celebrity presence would help political causes through the creation of awareness around a cause or subject matter, they had doubts in the effectiveness of celebrity advocacy in establishing the intended effects.
Another critique of celebrity activism is that it does not carry out its intended purpose, which is invoking a sustainable response by focusing on charitable events and donations (Brockington & Henson, 2015). The fundraising activities, while they have helped in many cases, may not be the answer to the numerous inequalities that exist in this world unless the use of those funds is towards the creation of personal changes amongst the people affected. Such actions are believed to be the long term and sustainable efforts that are needed n order to truly effect change in the world (Brockington & Henson, 2015). Therefore, fundraising activities, as commonly used in Britain, can turn to political lobbying efforts that institute policies and organizations with the capability to initiate the necessary change.
The authenticity of celebrity efforts in human rights has been called to question. Human rights advocacy by celebrities has been made mainstream, with more and more celebrities taking part in it alongside the organizations in-charge (Chouliaraki, 2012). The problem with this is that most of the ‘authenticity or sincerity’ of these celebrities is called to question. This is because previous abuse of these activities has led the public into considering them as a means for celebrities to gain popularity from global audiences. Celebrities are thought to use the advocacy campaigns to further their economic gains, which not only cheapens the campaigns but also creates mistrust amongst the public and the organizations that use celebrities in their campaigns (Chouliaraki, 2012). On the other hand, it is also seen as a non-factor with the responses to campaigns not being subject to the authenticity or lack thereof of the celebrities on their faces.
There have been several discussions on the capability of celebrities to be effective within humanitarian spheres especially given the fact that this is not their sphere. There is the possibility that while a celebrity may be effective and popular in their field of work, they may not be able to transfer that popularity and interest into the humanitarian field (Akosua, 2013). This is particularly true for celebrities within the entertainment sector, whose following may not necessarily be interested in their humanitarian efforts. Their influence on people may only lie within the scope of entertainment but not outside. This is means that, while a celebrity may be suitable for commercial ad campaigns for commercial brands, they may not be suitable for humanitarian campaigns (Akosua, 2013). Their audiences may not generally be interested in their advocacy, and hence, they may not generate the same public interest as a celebrity with legitimacy within the humanitarian fields.
For some, celebrity advocacy does the opposite of its intended effect of rallying the global efforts of people behind a common purpose and instead promotes elitism (Akosua, 2013). This is thought to be the case because the celebrity’s opinions and views in certain matters may not be he view of the public. In this way, the celebrities act like the elites themselves, not necessarily taking into account the thoughts, opinions, and views of the general public (Wheeler, 2018). Instead, they take their thoughts on certain subject matters to be the absolute truth and try to convince their audiences of the same.
Celebrity-led advocacy campaigns have also been associated with cheapening the efforts towards human rights. Some critics have gone as far as stating that these celebrity-led campaigns have propagated neo-colonialism, particularly in African states (Wheeler, 2018). This idea relates to the fact that most of these campaigns paint African countries to need saving and help from western countries, which re-enforces the neo-colonialist agenda (Akosua, 2013). By focusing solely on the needs of the indigenous people as opposed to bringing attention to the creativity and efforts of these people, the neo-colonialism view dominates the conversation.
Conclusion
The recent research into the roles that celebrities play in advocacy of human rights shows the lack of importance of celebrities in these campaigns. While they can generate public interest in many issues that violate human rights, and in some ways, they can even force governments to make changes, the response from celebrity campaigns is different from what is thought to be the main aim of using them in the advocacy. These campaigns, while they generate interests in some cases, the real effects they bring about to the audience, does not lead to any lobbying efforts by the general public or other actors. In other cases, they only cause a rise in charitable efforts that only buy the things thought necessary to the people affected, but this is not the answer to the social inequalities problem.
A celebrity’s legitimacy is also a contributing factor when it comes to the success or failure of a campaign. Therefore, a celebrity must show a commitment to the campaign and its subject matter. This show of commitment may serve to increase participation, particularly by the key stakeholders in the campaign. The commitment and active participation of celebrities in the campaign, which involves their active lobbying towards change, determine the legitimacy of their actions as well as the objectives of the campaign. In that case, celebrities must come up with strategies that place them as trustworthy humanitarians if their campaigns are to be of any effect.
In addition, using celebrities in human rights can be a way of generating interest in certain matters that cannot gain consideration through the use of traditional means of advocacy. However, the efforts of celebrities should be in ways that bring about long-term change in human rights. While the advocacy of celebrities is not currently thought to be effective in facilitating change, perhaps the answer lies in changing the way celebrities advocate for issues. The notion of celebrities’ importance to campaigns is well known, but to actualize their significance in these campaigns, then perhaps a different approach is necessary with regards to their involvement in advocacy.
References
Akosua, R. (2013). The celebrity burden: Celebrity campaigns in the pursuit of humanitarianism. Michigan Technological University.
Brockington, D., & Henson, S. (2015). Signifying the Public: Celebrity Advocacy and Post-Democratic Politics. International Journal of Cultural Studies (Volume 18), 431–448.
Chouliaraki, L. (2012). The Theatricality of Humanitarianism: A Critique of Celebrity Advocacy. Journal of Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies, 1–21.
Daley, P. (2013). Rescuing African Bodies: WesternCelebrities, Human Rights, and Protest in Africa. Review of African Political Economy, DOI: 10.1080/03056244.2013.816944.
Wheeler, M. (2018). Human Rights, Democracy, and Celebrities. In A. Elliott, Routledge Handbook of Celebrity Studies. London: Routledge.