Discuss the Advantages and Disadvantages of Celebrity Humanitarianism.

Over the years, celebrities have provided a large impact on diplomatic missions and political issues. They have used their fame and influence and redirect it towards a cause or charity and their usage of influence to the mass and multi-media effects to influence public opinion. Celebrity humanitarianism can be interpreted as one’s concern for human welfare and well-being, in this case the concern stems from celebrities. (Kapoor, I., 2013, p. 4) Celebrity humanitarianism has been, traditionally viewed by academics, as ‘manufactures process fabricated by media exposure’. The media has emphasised their status through media and communicators. However, it has been argued that the extensive influence of celebrities on policy-making processes have not been taken into account.

The most essential advantage of celebrity humanitarianism is the scope of attention the person can bring to a cause or event. Celebrities are encouraged to advertise on behalf of public relations enabling to up sell their beliefs and involvement in certain causes and charities. Celebrities thrive on the advantage of modern technology and use this form of communication to communicate with their fans and society. As Oxfam, a non-governmental organisation, has discusses: ‘What celebrities can do… is that they can hep you reach an audience which you would not otherwise get to, one which does not listen to institutions but responds to people.’ Furthermore, celebrities have accumulated a sufficient amount of funds which can advantage the organisation. When the organisation is in need of funds, there is always the option of celebrities to fund the costs. The United Nations adopts many celebrities to become either Goodwill Ambassadors or as Peace Messengers as they believe that celebrities could influence international public opinion to support the UN’s goals and bring more public awareness to important issues. Charities supported by celebrities have been able to bring acknowledgment to the public and are able to collect money for these charities. For example, Bob Geldof’s Live Aid campaign had the ability to raise over 100$ million.

Celebrity humanitarianism can also lead to disadvantages. In addition to bringing attention towards a cause, it also allows the charity to encourage social inequality, by adopting a celebrity to represent people in poverty. Furthermore, the celebrity can only reach a certain type of society, mostly western, as the other societies might not have the available resources, such as television, media, internet. Moreover, it is also important to question the celebrities motives, it is for self recognition? Also, what are the consequences for the organisation when the celebrities does not behaves as justly.   In particular, this is important in states with different cultures, or in war-zones. It is also important to question the celebrities’ knowledge of the charity, diplomacy and humanitarianism. The lack of diplomatic education can result the celebrity not knowing what he/she is doing within the platform of the charity.

The main difference between non-governmental organisations (NGO’s) and governmental organisations (GO’s) is that, governmental organisations have already obtained the power to communicate with the public as it is encouraged by the government and obviously the public is often interested in the government and their policies. Whereas with NGO’s the public is far less aware of them, in particular when they are first established, but with the aid of celebrities, attention can increasingly be brought to these charities and organisations. Therefore, it is important to note the dependence of governmental organisations they do not ‘need’ celebrities to bring attention to humanitarianism as they can achieve it through news media cycles.

The disadvantages and advantages of celebrity humanitarianism has caused a divided debate. However, the ability of celebrities bringing awareness to causes has proven to be successful as well as the ability to collect a lot of money for these causes and events. However, to the extent of war and relations between states it is believed that diplomats should be encouraged to pursue these issues as celebrities lack to education to successfully tackle such issues. Therefore, it is important to note what the cause is the celebrities are involved in.

References

• Cooper, A., F., Celebrity Diplomacy, 2008, Paradigm Publishers, Boulder, USA.
• Kapoor, I., Celebrity Humanitarianism: The Ideology of Global Charity, 2013, Routledge, London, UK.
• Wheeler, M., The Democratic Worth of Celebrity Politics, 31/05/2013, http://www.polity.co.uk/blog/post.aspx?id=190, accessed on 25/02/2015.
• Wheeler, M., & Kapoor, I., Should Celebrities Promote Charities?, 09/2012 http://newint.org/sections/argument/2012/09/01/should-celebrities-promote-charities/, accessed on 26/02/2015.

Single Post Navigation

← Older Entry

Newer Entry →