How celebrities are used for politics ?

 Chick-fil-A is a popular chicken sandwich company in the US.

In 2012, its CEO gave a public statement against same-sex marriage.

His statement sparked controversy.

Many boycotted his products.

Many celebrities joined the protest too.

But this protest led to something opposite.

The protest in turn sparked a counter-protest in favor of the CEO.

And what was the result of the counter-protest?

Chick-fil-A’s sales rose by 12% due to this controversy.

From Deepika Padukone’s JNU visit

to Amir Khan’s statement on intolerance.

From Rihanna’s tweet on the farmer’s protest

to the counter tweets by Indian celebrities.

These controversies evoke a question in our minds.

Should celebrities give statements on such issues?

As they’re not experts.

But it has benefits.

Their opinions give us a chance to talk and speculate about any issue.

Professor Lorraine York suggests that

celebrities allow us a foothold into a discussion.

In other words, the celebrities open up a door to an issue.

We might be thinking about the issue and hold some views about it too.

But a celebrity’s statement gives us an opportunity

to discuss the issue on social media or with our friends and families.

This can be done for several social issues.

Recently, Virat Kohli talked about paternity leave

and Deepika Padukone spoke about mental health.

Giving an opinion on social issues isn’t controversial.

The controversy is sparked when the celebs give an opinion on politics.

Should celebs give political statements?

 Yes, or no.

There’re arguments for both.

The arguments for ‘YES’ are:

as celebs have influence, they should use it to highlight crucial issues.

Secondly, celebs are also citizens

and thus they hold a right to talk about an issue.

The argument for ‘NO’ is:

Celebs aren’t political scientists, economists, or social scientists.

They’re not experts.

Many of the time they might give an opinion on an issue about which they might have a little understanding.

In this video, we’ll discuss these arguments.

Many celebs are using social media to highlight social issues.

One reason behind this is that social media has boosted celebs’ power.

Celebs can share glimpses of their lives on social media.

Apart from their photos and videos,

they can also share their opinions

forgoing the requirement of a news organization.

With social media, celebs can create a personal connection with their fan base.

That’s why when they react to a social or political issue,

the fans display a strong response.

The response can be both positive and negative.

For instance, Lady Gaga, an American pop-star,

used social media to raise awareness about

gay marriage and LGBTQI rights among her fans.

When the COVID-19 pandemic hit India,

several celebs raised awareness about the Janata Curfew through social media.

The second reason is that celebs are citizens too.

Thus they have a right to express their opinions on any issue

because we live in a democracy that allows free speech,

though with some restrictions.

When Deepika Padukone visited JNU,

many deemed it as a publicity stunt.

But she has a right to voice her opinion.

Similarly, Anupam Kher shared his views on Article 370

as he too has a right to express his opinion.

But these political opinions come with some dire consequences too.

For example, when actor Ali Fazal tweeted against CAA,

#boycottmirzapur2 started trending on Twitter.

Recently, Kangana Ranaut faced something similar

 for making a statement against the farmer’s protests.

She was threatened that her movies would be boycotted in Punjab.

The counter-argument against celebs voicing their opinions is that celebs aren’t experts.

They aren’t economists nor are they, political scientists.

So what do they know about the farmer’s protest or the CAA?

As they’re popular on social media platforms

they’ve proclivity to spread fake news due to the misinformation.

But before analyzing these arguments, we should address this question:

Why do people actually listen to celebs’ opinions?

We can simply ignore them.

We talked about this in a previous video.

We discussed why we’re so obsessed with the celebs.

Jamie Tehrani, a social anthropologist, argues that

the celebrity obsession culture in humans is rooted in evolution.

He suggests that human beings are social animals.

It’s crucial for us that we live with others

and shape their perceptions of us.

He states that centuries ago it was difficult to survive.

It was different from what we’ve nowadays,

where we can live for 80 years.

Our ancestors needed to hunt and gather food daily.

They even had to fight animals and beings of their own kind.

Some excelled at this while others couldn’t.

Those who excelled survived.

And those who couldn’t die.

Others copied those who survived.

It was difficult for our ancestors to decide what to copy and what not to.

It was easier to copy everything.

That’s why modern celebs endorse products of which they know only a little.

For example, Shah Rukh Khan talks about a fairness cream,

 while Katrina Kaif talks about jewelry.

As our ancestors copied successful individuals,

due to evolutionary reasons, we do the same.

But India has taken the fascination for a celebrity

to another level.

This isn’t a novice trend.

When in 1982, Amitabh Bachchan got injured on a movie set,

 many started praying for his recovery.

This makes it easier for celebs to enter politics.

Even a TikTok star entered into politics during an election in Haryana.

This obsession isn’t unique to India.

It can be observed in other countries like South Korea.

Fans are equally crazy about BTS, a Kpop group.

Celebrity obsession can turn controversial when politics blends into it

 or when the celebs start to talk about a political candidate.

We saw an example of it in 2014 when Salman Khan was seen with

ex-PM candidate Narendra Modi during Makarshankrati.

With the help of research, let’s try to understand

if celebs’ political statements have an impact or not.

Anthony Nownes showed in a study that when a celeb supports a political candidate,

 it can have an impact on the mindset of those who don’t regard the candidate well.

And how do celebs do it?

There’re two ways.

According to research, the first way is when a celeb changes the conversation

to distract others from crucial matters.

Does our PM eat mango?

The second way is by changing the mindset of those

who don’t have strong preferences or aren’t involved in politics.

This was used effectively by PM Modi before the

2014 elections.

There’s been a research paper regarding this.

Narendra Modi used social media and celebs before the 2014 elections.

He did so with three manners.

At first, he just mentioned celebs on Twitter without any direct benefits to them.

Secondly, he tagged several celebs

 and asked them to talk about a non-controversial issue.

For example, to encourage voter registration.

Third, Narendra Modi met several celebs,

clicked pictures with them,

 and posted them without mentioning whether the celebs are supporting him or not.

The research paper revealed that

political leaders can benefit significantly by using the celebs.

This doesn’t mean the celebs can influence others directly.

A study conducted in the US in 2018, suggested that

60% of the participants said they don’t want celebs to endorse politicians.

In India too, people aren't happy with the celebs talking on political issues.

A recent survey showed that

 69% of participants are against celebs tweeting on farmer’s protest.

We can draw three conclusions from all these.

First, people don’t want celebs to express their opinions about political issues.

But this doesn’t mean the celebs can’t influence a political issue.

We discussed the example of 2014

when Narendra Modi used the celebs effectively.

At the time, the celebs weren’t talking about any issue directly.

They were communicating indirectly.

Third, rather than political issues,

celebs can (should) influence social issues.

We saw that with the example of Lady Gaga.

The researchers from World Bank, Stanford University, and MIT

 conducted experiments where they asked celebs

 to promote vaccination through Twitter.

They discovered that when people got the information from the celebs,

chances were high that they would share the same information with others.

But due to the current polarized political environment,

the celebs often fall into controversies.

If they talk in the favor of one group, the other group is disappointed.

And if they talk in the favor of the other group,

the first group is disappointed.

The appeal and income of the celebs come from their followers.

But this isn’t possible with politics.

We shouldn’t forget that the celebs are citizens too

and thus they have every right to talk about any issue.

They should use the platforms responsibly.

And it’s our responsibility to fact-check

and reason on the information that they’re providing.

Whether it’s an endorsement of a candidate

or a statement on the farmer’s protest,

these issues are complex.

Our ancestors must’ve copied their leaders fully.

But we don’t need to do the same.