(Semi)-offtopic. Appeal to celebrity

[kiaa]

I think the political opinions of your regular hobo is often times more valid and worth your attention and respect than that of whichever showbiz celebrity you may randomly pick.

Just being a spoiled millionaire doesn't automatically make you politically and socially literate, let alone emotionally intelligent and capable of social empathy. If experience is any guide, it's actually more likely that it's just the opposite.*

All the Clooneys, Dicaprios, Madonnas etc gorgonnas and primadonas would do us all a great service if they acknowledge who they really are: a bunch of dancing monkeys, whose ONLY purpose and function is to entertain us, the common-folk.

Want a few examples? Fine, you asked for it.

Gwyneth Paltrow wins award for worst pseudoscience nonsense

Here's a short list of famous people who think the Earth is flat

Bobby Fischer was a creep and a Holocaust denier who kept boxes of Nazi propaganda

Chuck Norris said Evolution is not real, it's not the way we got here

Jenny McCarthy is the most outspoken anti-vaccine advocate, and has been directly blamed for the current rise in measles

Oraph Winfrey, who wields enormous influence over millions of people, regularly promotes the paranormal, psychic powers, new age spiritualism, conspiracy theories, quack celebrity diets, past life regression, angels, ghosts, alternative therapies like acupuncture and homeopathy, anti-vaccination, detoxification, vitamin megadosing, and virtually everything that will distract a human being from making useful progress and informed decisions in life.

When you have a giant audience, you have a giant responsibility. Maybe you don't want such a responsibility, in which case, fine, keep your mouth shut; or limit your performance to jokes or acting or whatever it is you do.

Comments

[garote]

So how do you feel about “an inconvenient truth”?

[kiaa]

What do feelings have to do with fact?

[garote]

Okay. So what do you think about “an inconvenient truth”?

[kiaa]

A relatively well made documentary, a pioneer in raising awareness about climate change. Anything else?

[garote]

You dont think it turned Al Gore into a “dancing monkey on a stick?

[asthfghl]

Wasn't he already that?

[garote]

Hah! Well, I admit I hadn't considered that angle. But after reading his book "The Assault On Reason" ~10 years ago I couldn't see him that way.

[kiaa]

Al Gore is a politician, someone directly involved in policy-making, and he's making a case about policies. And DiCaprio is an actor who plays in movies, and suddenly starts lecturing on policy-making. You don't notice the "subtle" difference here?

[garote]

It’s a distinction but not a difference. Commenting on policy making is not the exclusive domain of politicians. If Al Gore joined this forum and told you to shut the fuck up about global warming because you’re not a climate scientist, he’d be a hypocrite, because he is not one either.

Instead, you both spread the information you know, because you both feel that you have studied the issue enough to have an informed opinion. Which is exactly the way DiCaprio feels, regardless of whether other people clamor for him to shut up due to his lack of credentials or relevant work history.

You cannot make ignorance go away by ordering the ignorant to shut the fuck up and get back to work. They either cut you out of their dialogue and keep going, or, best case outcome, they stop talking and remain ignorant and the microphone passes to someone else - who may or may not be even more obstinately ignorant than the person who went silent.

Which is why the most effective strategy is to cajole the people with the big platforms to say the right thing. Every celebrity who’s been around longer than a week realizes the potential influence they have and obviously says whatever they think is right. That insight is not new, either, which is why there are lobbying groups and non-profits that aggressively target celebrities. I don’t think it makes sense to cede all discussions with celebrities to them, abdicating in favor of “shut up and dance”, like all we are is customers of their product. Do you?

[kiaa]

What's the distinction/difference between "distinction" and "difference"?

"Commenting on policy making is not the exclusive domain of politicians"

No, but politicians are competent on policy as they form said policy based on their expertise, whereas celebrities are in most cases laypeople in that domain, who've been taught (often by politicians) - read: indoctrinated - into certain positions on said policy.

Celebrities are vehicles, influential mouthpieces of a policy; politicians are the ones crafting it. I don't know if that's a difference or distinction in your book, and quite frankly, semantic definitions are irrelevant.

[garote]

Here's a brief explanation of the phrase.

Politicians "form policy based on their expertise" the same way a butcher forms sausage. They are not qualified to do research, or judge the outcome of policy -- the same way a butcher is not qualified to raise cattle, or run a restaurant.

Working relationships are what compensate, and make the difference between good and bad policy. (Too bad most politicians can't be arsed to form those kinds of relationships, which is why we get Steve Bannon and Paul Manafort instead, and snowballs in congress and boondoggles in Iraq.) It works the same way with being a celebrity mouthpiece: Having the platform doesn't qualify you to speak, but if you give a shit, and can claw past the lobbyists and starfuckers, you can form relationships to compensate.

So no, the fact that Al Gore was a politician before becoming a celebrity is not relevant. And the fact that DiCaprio was a celebrity before getting into politics is not relevant either. They've both ended up producing two good global warming documentaries apiece and raising awareness.

Ergo: Distinction without a difference. One is black with white stripes, the other is white with black stripes, but what matters is, they're both zebras.

What matters is, the working relationships they've each chosen to foster, before and/or during their rise as mouthpieces. That's what qualifies them to leverage their celebrity status. Taking an active role in the dialogue with all such mouthpieces willing to listen is a hell of a lot better of an idea than yelling for them all to shut up.

At the very least, because yelling at celebrities to shut up is like yelling at cattle to stop farting.

[kiaa]

"They are not qualified to do research, or judge the outcome of policy"

And a movie star is more qualified, eh?

You must have a very low confidence in your politicians. Apparently, entertainment celebrities are more credible than them - because... well, they're pretty and famous, I guess.

No one's yelling at anybody to shut up about anything. What I'm saying is that they deserve as much credibility on matters of expertise as your next layman.

[garote]

How odd. You appear to have responded to some other set of points. I just spent quite a few paragraphs arguing that any given celebrity is as qualified, not more qualified.

In other words, they deserve as much credibility as “your next layman”. And politicians are no better. So if you and I agree on that point, what’s all that stuff about preferring hobos to celebrities? If your declaration that all celebrities are ONLY dancing monkeys isn’t a call for them to stop talking politics, then perhaps you should choose a different declaration, because you gotta admit one pretty clearly implies the other.

Personally, I think dancing monkeys are very useful in politics. Hell, they fit right in...

[kiaa]

"You appear to have responded to some other set of points"

You first:

"yelling at celebrities to shut up"

Really? Where have *I* done that?

You don't get to criticize me for using a strawman after having done it yourself.

Odd, indeed.

[garote]

Yes, I do :)

[secrets_of_the_commotion]

You make a good overall point, even without the examples. None the less, I think at a couple of your examples scratch topics that are at least open topics. None the less, that requires far more discussion than I feel should occur here, distracting from what I think is a really good point overall.

The bottom line is that it doesn't take a particular education on any given subject to have an opinion, and while that's fine, people given big audiences for other reasons can receive a far louder voice than they are merited on any given subject. If Jim Carrey wanted to speak about acting, he's one of the foremost people I would listen to, when interested in the topic. But when he's providing his insight of solutions for violence, there's no reason for me to really give his thoughts particular attention.

I think one of the biggest problems regarding celebrity soap boxes is that when people find a celebrity agreeing with their opinion, they often laud it. But when a celebrity disagrees, we tell them to shut up and dance. There is a need for consistency, and that consistency falls somewhere between lauding their voices and sticking tape over their mouths. We just need to remember, they are only people, like us. One of 7 billion voices.

[garote]

Agreed.
Telling celebrities that they’re only ever monkeys on sticks and should shut up is only damaging: Those who have the sense to defer to authorities will do so, which only leaves more bandwidth for those without the sense. And at the same time it abeds the oppression of people like Colin Kaepernick who are not “authorities” but nevertheless qualified to speak.

The right attitude is: Don’t try to get celebrities to shut up. Try to get them to say what you believe is right.

[mahnmut]

Case in point: Gerard Butler, a movie celebrity heard from somewhere that bee venom helps against muscle inflammation. So he injected himself with bee venom... and it sent him into anaphylactic shock.
https://www.self.com/story/gerard-butler-bee-venom-therapy-anaphylactic-shock

Once he had recovered, he tried the therapy a second time.

The first time was because of ignorance. The second time, because of idiotism.

If he had gone to the public and promised them how beneficial the bee venom treatment is, hundreds if not thousands of people would have followed the example, possibly with several fatal outcomes.

With great popularity comes great responsibility.