Celebrities: Concerned Activists or Attention Seekers?

[voice]

After spending some time on the Global Warming thread (It really ought to be titled Global
Climate Change) I got to thinking about how many celebrities blindly champion Global Climate Change Activism. Then i got to thinking about all of the other causes our TV and movie stars, musicians, and other celebs are constantly trying to champion.

When a band releases an album with songs scathing the current political administration, are they really trying to change society, or are they just counting on the fact that dissent sells in an effort to get another top album? When a star adopts a child from a third-world nation (technically, that's any nation not aligned with a communist or non-communist bloc), does is he or she really trying to change the world, or is the star just engaging in a more media-savvy and visible act of philanthropy than a donation to relief efforts would be?

Are celebrities with causes honestly trying to change the world, or are they prostituting themselves out to society's cause du jour to get more media attention?

(Note: Please ignore the chip on my shoulder as you read this, and try to ignore the blatant cynicism that might taint your opinion. Thank you!)

 

[GamingX]

I expect more than half of them do that for publicity. You would want to keep the public in your good books. It's like what you call prostituting themselves to society's cause for media attention. More often than not they end up committing mistakes. I read an article sometime back about how a star inspite of campaigning for animal rights cause ended up wearing a fur coat or something of that sort. They give themselves away at one point or the other.

 

[satbir]

Somehow I too get feeling it is more of publicity stunt in most cases.

 

[WoodsballJesse]

I have no doubt in my mind that the celebrities are just doing it for attention. GamingX said it perfectly; they are just playing to what the public likes.

 

[Archkronos]

I find that although some of them are legit, half of it is spoon-fed to them by their publicity agents. And to me, this is blantently obvious through the hypocrisy - for example, the incident that GamingX was talking about.

 

[spaceforce]

Personally I believe hardly any celebrities are sincere when it come to doing some good rather than hoarding money. Bono claims to be supportive of giving money to African people, yet he's moved his bank to somewhere else (I forget where) to pay less tax, and also he never gives money himself.

The only celebrity I see doing something because they believe in it is Heroes star Hayden Panettiere campaigning for saving dolphins in Japan.

 

[cointoss]

Well, I must admit that I believe it is possible that a famous person may lend his support to one group or another simply to improve his image. However, it should be noted that it doesn't matter WHY they do it, lending their support lends the support of their fan base to the cause. That is a LOT of good. Who cares what the person actually felt about doing it.

As for not donating money, you should note that ANYONE with vast amounts of money would certainly make donations. Most celebrities have accountants, and donations are quite beneficial to the individual for tax purposes. Again, it doesn't matter why the person gives the donation, money is money. It all spends the same.

I can see different sides. Like for instance, Celine Dion. I felt she was heartfelt and genuine when she donated vast amounts of cash to victims of the tsunami. I also felt she was genuine when she condemned the powers that be (most Bush and FEMA) during Katrina. On the flip side we have Paris Hilton attempting to redeem herself by going to Africa. Obviously, not so powerful. However, it is of no consequence. No matter her intentions, Paris will still bring attention to the cause.

 

[GamingX]

That is undoubted. Even the sponsors know that celebrities crave for attention. But as long as it helps their cause, it won't matter to them.