Celebrity Politics: The Politics of the Late Modernity?
| Author | Paul ‘t Hart,Karen Tindall,David Marsh |
| Published date | 01 September 2010 |
| Date | 01 September 2010 |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2010.00215.x |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Celebrity Politics: The Politics of
the Late Modernity?psr_215 322..340
David Marsh, Paul ‘t Hart and Karen Tindall
Australian National University
The academic literature on celebrity politics is rarely systematic; more often it is superficial and anecdotal. In
addition, most of the literature focuses either upon classifying different types/categories of celebrity politicians and
their roles in politics, or upon the question of whether the growth of celebrity politics undermines or enhances
democracy.In this article we consider both of these issues more systematically and, in doing so,work towards a more
coherent understanding of the mechanisms that influence modern governance and the operation of contemporary
democracy.
As the spheres of the media, the entertainment industry and the political have begun to
intersect more visibly, the resulting phenomenon of ‘celebrity politics’ potentially affects
many facets of political life, for example campaigns and elections (Duvall, 2007), policy
agendas (Brockington, 2009) and international affairs (Clarke, 2009; Cooper, 2008).
Although systematic empirical research about its pervasiveness and impact is still lacking
(yet see Duvall, 2007), there is a noticeable rise in media as well as academic interest in
celebrity politics, reflecting the widespread belief that it is a growing phenomenon.
Celebrity politics is probably present to different degrees in different political systems
(Mukherjee, 2004; Street, 2004; West and Orman, 2003). Besides the avalanche of
commentary on ‘celebrity politics’ in tabloids, gossip magazines, blogs, fan sites and
occasionally business or news magazines, there are three strands of academic literature on
celebrity politics: first, general books on celebrity (Braudy, 1986; Cowen, 2000; Gamson,
1994; Giles, 2000; Holmes and Redmond, 2006; Monaco, 1978; Rojek, 2001; Turner,
2004), most although not all of which have chapters or sections on politics; second, books
and articles on the media and politics that to a greater or lesser extent touch on celebrity
(Boorstin, 1961; Hartley, 1996; Meyer, 2002; Perloff, 1998; Street, 2005); and, finally, a
limited number of books and articles specifically on celebrity politics (Cooper, 2008;
Marshall, 1997; Mukherjee, 2004; Street, 2004; Van Zoonen, 2006; Weiskel, 2005; West
and Or man, 2003).
Unfortunately,the academic literature on celebr ity politics is rarely systematic;more often
it is superficial and anecdotal. In addition, most of the literature focuses either upon
classifying different types/categories of celebrity politician and their roles in politics or
upon the question of whether the growth of celebrity politics undermines or enhances
democracy. Our aim in this article is to consider both of these issues more systematically
and in doing so work towards a more coherent understanding of the mechanisms that
influence modern governance and the operation of contemporary democracy.
POLITICAL STUDIES REVIEW: 2010 VOL 8, 322–340
doi: 10.1111/j.1478-9302.2010.00215.x
© 2010 TheAuthors. Journal compilation © 2010 Political Studies Association
Celebrity Politics in Various Shapes and Sizes
A number of authors have developed classifications of ‘types’ of relationship between
celebrity and politics. There are two broad approaches: the first focuses on the origins of
the celebrity and, thus, the resources the individual utilises in the political arena; the
second is more concerned with the type of political action in which the celebrity is
engaged.
Darrell West and John Orman (2003, pp. 3–4) exemplify the first approach, distinguishing
between: political newsworthies, whom they see as the classic celebrities ‘skilled at
appearing on television and communicating with the general public’; legacies, mainly
‘descendants of prominent political families’; famed non-politicos (elected officials), who
are ‘responsible for their own prominence’ but move into elected office; famed non-
politicos (lobbyists and spokespersons), who are also responsible for their own prominence
but move into politics to promote a policy or cause without seeking office; and event
celebrities, who are ‘overnight sensations who arise on the local or national scene due to
some tragedy or predicament’; they cite crime victims as an example.
Maxwell Boykoff and Michael Goodman’s (2009) approach is similar. They identify six
main categories of ‘climate change celebrity politicos’ (their examples in brackets):
celebrity actors (Leonardo DiCaprio); celebrity politicians (Arnold Schwarzenegger);
celebrity athletes/sports figures (David James, an England footballer); celebrity business-
people (Richard Branson); celebr ity musicians (Alanis Morrisette); and celebrity public
intellectuals (George Monbiot, a UK writer and journalist).
The second approach focuses mainly on the extent and type of involvement that
celebrities have in politics, regardless of the original source of their fame, although this
approach also recognises that politicians can become celebrities and use celebrity. John
Street’s (2004) straightforward classification distinguishes between the celebrity politician,
who is a traditional politician who engages ‘with the world of popular culture in order to
advance their pre-established political functions and goals’, and the celebrity politician, who
is an ‘entertainer who pronounces on politics and claims the right to represent people and
causes, but who does so without seeking or acquiring elected office’ (Street, 2004, p.437,
p. 439). Jaideep Mukherjee’s (2004, pp. 81–2) classification goes further, distinguishing
among celebrity politicians between celebrity endorsers, who promote certain policy
options, and celebrities who become politicians.
‘t Hart and Tindall (2009) attempt to capture this variety by distinguishing four categories
of celebrity involvement in politics: celebrity advocates; celebrity endorsers; celebrity
politicians; and the politician-turned-celebrity. In relation to each of these categories they
develop a series of propositions that could inform future work on celebrity politics.
Most celebrities attach themselves to a charity or a cause, but celebrity advocates tend to
be more active and more committed policy seekers. So Angelina Jolie, Bono and Bob
Geldof have been very active over an extensive period of time, in contrast to the
perception that some celebrities pay lip-service to a cause for publicity reasons. Celebrity
CELEBRITY POLITICS 323
© 2010 TheAuthors. Journal compilation © 2010 Political Studies Association
Political Studies Review: 2010, 8(3)
To continue reading
Request your trial