« Theo Resigns | Main | Victory in Iraq »

November 21, 2005

But Stars Come Out

Stars Come Out

Sebastian Mallory has an essay up today in the Washington Post discussing Brad Pitt's introduction to the free trade debate. Pitt, to his credit, is using his fame to try and put some pressure on countries to liberalize international trade. Complete trade liberalization could provide some $135 billion a year to developing countries in increased trade and jobs, a massive sum that would have still-greater effects to the developing nations where a small sum buys a lot. While I am strongly in favor of trade liberalization, I point to this article not because I agree with its conclusions but because it touches on a pet peeve of mine: celebrities and politics.

Hollywood is a pretty liberal place, at least when it comes to their votes and causes. Stars like Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon often garner more headlines for their stands against the war in Iraq or President Bush than for their films (which is often unfortunate in their particular cases, as they are quite talented in their chosen field). And when they do speak out, one thing you can count on is a sizable fraction of the blogosphere landing on them like ugly on a mule, complaining that they need to stop saying such stupid things and lending their celebrity to such terrible causes. Yet something tells me that those same bloggers will be far kinder to Mr. Pitt if he continues to press the case for trade liberalization, because his cause dovetails more neatly with theirs.

I can sympathize with people getting annoyed with stars who push political causes because I often feel the same way. A lot of stars, like a lot of other people, say some pretty silly things. And I certainly would be pretty frustrated if I went to a concert to listen to a band only to have to put up with a political speech in lieu of music. But stars tend to get a lot of flak even when they're discussing their political beliefs outside of their films and songs. I suspect a large fraction of that flak comes about because people are frustrated that stars have a bully pulpit that average people lack, and that they can use that pulpit to push ideas that we disagree with. It is unfortunate that their ideas get a larger hearing because of their celebrity rather than due to the quality of their arguments, but nothing on Earth is fair. While I can sympathize with the frustration, I cannot endorse it, and I think no blogger can in good conscience.

With the exception of a very small fraction of bloggers, the blogosphere is made up of regular people trying to get their ideas into greater circulation. Some are successful, some are miserable failures, but the attempts are made nonetheless. How then can we justify complaints when a celebrity does the same thing? No, they're not starting a blog and putting their ideas online or in writing necessarily, but they are seeking the same end state as any blogger: to persuade people of their arguments. I may not agree with Tim Robbins' on whether or not the war in Iraq was a mistake or with George Clooney about how dangerous President Bush is to freedom, but they have just as much right to make their case to the public as I do. Certainly it can be frustrating that they get to make their case to a larger audience than I do simply because they're better looking than I am, but life is inherently unfair. "No two things on earth are equal or have an equal chance."

To be fair to the blogosphere, not everyone is arguing that celebrities shouldn't speak out at all. Some do address the arguments put forth and do a good job of refuting the arguments without denigrating the speaker. But celebrities seem to do a good job of bringing out the ad hominem in people. I think in large part that is because celebrities often do not seem to have thought through their arguments very well, although that may be an effect of our sound bite culture as much as celebrities actually not doing a good job of laying out their arguments. But regardless of how good or bad their arguments may be, it seems to me that celebrities tend to be castigated for the fact of their speaking their opinions as much as for their opinions themselves. For my money, that's a silly complaint in any circumstances, and it is particularly inappropriate for those of us who are in the business of trying to get our own opinions into public circulation. How many bloggers can honestly say they wouldn't use celebrity to further their own beliefs if given the same opportunity the stars have? I know that I would, and I suspect most bloggers who complain about the stars would as well.

Update: One of my oldest friends, Heather, wonders if Ronald Reagan was ever treated similarly to today's stars like Sarandon and Robbins. I do remember disparaging remarks about some of the movies he was in (Bedtime for Bonzo springs to mind) but I'm not sure if there was the same visceral reaction to Reagan's past as an actor as there seems to be for current stars. I'm also not sure if the two are necessarily comparable, since Reagan did stand for office numerous times, so while he was a former actor, he was clearly a politician, while most stars today (the Governator excepted) stick to commentary. Any older readers have some observations they'd like to share?