In a recent essay for Arena, Jon. D. Schaff wrote about “one of our many political pathologies, namely the dangerous conflation of politics and entertainment. In America 2024 we expect our entertainers to speak out on politics while our politicians are expected to act like entertainers.” While I agree that the situation is not ideal and I agree with Schaff on some points, I would like to offer some gentle pushback on the overall picture with regard to celebrities talking politics—I say, let them talk. (I’ll leave off discussing politicians as entertainers for now.)
As acknowledged even by those who wish celebrities would keep quiet, celebrities have the right to free speech. No one is debating that. But let’s go a step farther. Let’s remember that these celebrities are still civilians. They are private citizens. They are not members of the military. They are not public officials. Too often we forget that people who are in the public are not all public servants. We expect companies and celebrities to respond to our desires, but we neglect to turn out for elections when public officials are the ones we can actually hold accountable. Celebrities do not owe us anything with regard to their speech. They do not work for us.
Yes, celebrities are often ill-informed, but the real issue is how we respond to their statements. In an excellent passage in the book Max Havelaar, the narrator points out that if we have a friend who travels to some distant country for a couple weeks or months and returns, we ask him, “What is it like there? What are the people like?” Then we take his answers very seriously. Meanwhile, we dismiss the political views of our neighbors and associates who have spent their entire lives in our own country. These we consider hopelessly ill-informed. The problem is not with the traveler.
I agree that we often hold celebrities up too high and that they can have an influence that seems startling. That is our fault. In recent years, there seems to be a trend of trying to make public figures be more responsible because of the weaknesses of the public. Our weaknesses are our responsibility. If we cannot decide who to vote for on our own or if we cannot handle someone playing for a sports team and thinking differently from us—that is our problem. No one is getting paid enough to be responsible for accommodating all our weaknesses. Our reactions are our responsibility.
Some of the frustration with celebrity speech seems to be tied to their enviable platform. Well, everyone uses whatever platform they have. Those who are wealthy often use their wealth to weigh in on politics. Those who are in the pulpit not infrequently use that. Those who are in families seek to influence their fellow family members. Some bosses try to sway employee voting. All of us at Arena contribute pieces all the time, often on all kinds of political topics. All these things can be and are often annoying (and sometimes become inappropriate)—but, as long as people are operating within the bounds of the law, our envy of their platform is no reason for them to abandon it. Yes, it seems unfair that some voices can be so amplified, especially when those voices may not be the wisest. Life is unfair.
I agree with many people that celebrities talking politics is annoying. I agree that they often have limited knowledge of the situations they speak about. However, I think we are all underestimating how annoying we are to the people around us. The truth is, almost everyone speaks on things they do not know much about. For the last four years, we’ve all had to endure other people’s observations and commentary not just on politics but on contagious illnesses. Most of the people we have heard from (or we have been) have no qualifications for the statements we have been issuing. Most of the people around us are sick of hearing from us. I more regularly hear annoying things from friends and family (and say annoying things to them) than I do from any celebrities. Any reactions to celebrity speech should be tempered by this reality.
As much as celebrities seem to have an absurd platform, they also sometimes face more serious consequences for their speech. Letting them talk is also sometimes letting them cook. Celebrities can and do lose jobs, endorsements, fan bases, etc. They more often face actual financial consequences for foolish things said. They deal more with public disapproval. You might argue that many are still rich or still employed, but I would challenge you to find a co-worker who has taken as much heat for some of the same kinds of comments. Has anyone burned your jersey and cursed your name on live television?
We are also forgetting that we love to hear celebrities talk about certain things. We are sending celebrities mixed messages. When it comes to raising money for some kind of fund to fight illness, we beg them to speak up. When it comes to overseas politics, we sometimes criticize them for keeping quiet. And when it comes to a real crisis—we often want to hear from them. Marlene Dietrich is a legend not just for her acting or her legs, but for her public opposition to the Third Reich, from the start. Chaplin is still celebrated for The Great Dictator. Celebrities do not always get it right, but neither do the rest of us.
I am not in favor of more celebrity commentary on politics or on health or on much at all. It is not something I need or want in my life and I think we’d all be fine without it. But I am in favor of the public taking responsibility for how we respond to celebrities. Celebrities are in the public eye, but they are not public servants. The public has its own responsibilities and celebrities are not paid to accommodate our weaknesses. I don’t think that those who would like less celebrity speech necessarily disagree with that, but I think more of us need to keep it in mind.