Is the involvement of the celebrity’s diplomacy in solving conflicts real or just for show?
There has been a recent trend of celebrities being involved in politics from making comments that trend worldwide to actually standing for a political position. However, is there popularity being used to resolve conflict or is that just how it seems to us as a result of what the media is showing us. Some worldwide celebrities such as Bradd Pitt and Angelina Jolie appear to be using their fame and the money form the celebrity status to set up funds and donate to charity. This would suggest therefore that the celebrity involvement is creating peace and aiding improvement in the conditions in conflicting states. However, is this money being donated by them at being received at a price for politics? Is Brad Pitt paying for political influence? He is for example known as an opponent of California’s proposition 8 which was a organisation against same sex marriage. This would make it seem that Celebrities cannot really just donate without actually being involved in the politics. Celebrities have also made controversial decisions which could be seen as slightly risky. For example famous Actor Arnold Schwarzenenger[1] now the governor of California signed legislation to end the states investment in Sudan to pressure the nation into stopping the genocidal violence in its Darfur Region in 2006. This move in itself shows that celebrity/politicians make decisions which might not necessarily be seen as correct by everyone.
Oprah Winfrey is also known for her support of Barack Obama in his campaign in 2008 and continuous to provide this support. This however makes you question is it fair that celebrities are involved in politics which some would argue they have little knowledge about. They are simply using their fame and personality to influence politics.
[2]Here is an image showing Talkshow Host Oprah Winfrey standing behind Barack Obama and giving him support in the election. Her role is questionable.
This example with Oprah shows that celebrities are often involved in politics by supporting a certain politician or a political party. They usually have more respect from the audience than the politicians they support. This is unfair on those politicians who are unable to get celebrity support since even though they may have suitable ways to resolve conflicts, the fact that they do not have celebrity support puts them in a weak position. [3]
This leads you to the question of is it right that this glamour is being added to the elections. Is this taking away the essence of seriousness that politics and the issues that are supposed to be dealt with in politics.
It would therefore seem that the involvement in celebrities in politics is aiding conflict rather than actually preventing it. However, there is no way to really prevent the involvement of celebrities in politics given their high status and the popularity and possibly power they exercise over people. We look up to these people for one reason or another therefore in recognition of this they will continue to be involved.
[1] When celebrities get involved (The Washington Post) available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/celebrities-in-politics/2012/04/26/gIQAZGiAjT_gallery.html
[2] Image at http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-cqcu3bpX8HU/TXPJAjw2XpI/AAAAAAAAB9c/7EctC-N1b0U/s1600/oprah_winfrey_obama.jpg last visited 20/03/2015.
Public Diplomacy and Global Communication 2014b 
interesting points I feel celebrity diplomacy does help to a certain extent. If we look at Drogba and his impact on the Ivory Coasts war but in most cases what they do is put pressure on governments and bodies to act. It also shines a light on the issue and a wider audience is able to understand and be more interested in the issues
LikeLike