Centerfield

You don't hear a whole lot about Ahh-nold, although he isn't your prototypical Republican. Ronald Reagan wasn't told to shut up because he was just an actor, either. But .. George Clooney? That LIBERAL?!

I've written before that I think it's a *good* thing to hear artists' opinions.

Posted by: JP at March 17, 2006 01:22 AM

I'm not a big fan of the whole "shut up and sing" thing that a lot of folks on the right have. I do think that if you have very strong beliefs, and occupy a place in the public eye, you have a right to use your stature to speak out; it's almost like an Opus Dei thing, that you're supposed to use our work to demonstrate to others what God means in our life - I think the same holds true of other beliefs. Of course, having said you have the right to speak out, that doesn't mean you have a right to be taken seriously, and it doesn't mean you have a right to do so without fear of repurcussion.

On being taken seriously: Bono, of course, has spent twenty years talking about his causes. He is taken seriously now because he has earned that much, over a long period, but if he'd started talking about debt relief when War came out, he couldn't have expected anyone to take him seriously.

On repurcussions: by repurcussions, I don't mean physical threats, of course. For example, Tom Scholtz of the band Boston is an outspoken fan of PETA; it's his right to do so, and it's my right to say that I will never buy a Boston record or ticket if there's the vaguest possibility that some of that money may find its way to Tom, and thus potentially to PETA. The Dixie Chicks have a right to criticize Bush (indeed, they may well have a right to continue making their poxy music), but they have no right to expect people to buy that music, and just as they have the right to criticize Bush, so the record buying public has a right to refuse to buy music made by artists who have criticized politicians they like.

If you support abortion, don't eat Pizza from Dominoes; if you don't like the Republican party...Well, this voting with your wallet thing might not work if you don't like the Republican party, since you'd have to give up money, pretty much anything that runs on oil, coffee, eating...You name it, really.

Posted by: Simon at March 17, 2006 08:56 AM

What I resent is celebrities using their stardom to get a forum that others don't have. Plus, there seems to be in implicit assumption that they deserve to be listened to. Obviously, they have the right to express their opinions like anyone else but when Richard Dreyfuss gets to make a speech at the National Press Club, I draw the line. Why don't I get to speak at the National Press Club? I probably know more about public policy than Richard Dreyfuss. What has Dreyfuss done to deserve that forum other than be a movie star?

I also resent when celebrities can dish it out but can't take it. Several years ago, Sinead O'Connor (remember her?) criticized the Pope at some concert and was reduced to tears apparently when the audience booed. If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen. (Ok, cliche for the day.)

Posted by: Marc at March 17, 2006 09:22 AM

*Everyone* has a right to speak their mind. And in turn, each of us has the right to respond to that opinion in the way we see fit.

For celebrities, it's pretty obvious that fame is a double-edged sword. They have every right to choose to use their visibility to speak their mind, but they certainly don't have the right to dictate how other people respond to their views.

When it comes to free speech and stating political opinions, America does not require licensing to certify that any given speaker knows what the f%^*k he or she is talking about. You can say what you think, even if you are ignorant, uninformed, or dumb as a rock.

And here's the thing when it comes to celebrities...99% of the time they are no more or less well informed than the average joker picked from the sidewalk. Average joker or glitterati, unless the topic is their profession, or some issue on which they have taken time to seriously inform themselves, they really have precious little insight to offer.

Celebrities speak out at their own risk. They don't deserve to be taken seriously if all they can do is express concern. They only deserve to be taken seriously if they can show us that they have worked seriously to understand an issue and can offer us some insight.

The easiest and most simplistic thing a celebrity can do is "raise awareness." It's not meritless, but it's a bit tiresome in general when all a celebrity does is say "____(pet issue)_____ is a bad problem. I'm here to make you feel sad and guilty about it so you'll give us some money."

I am actually pretty sympathetic to the "shut up and sing" sentiment nowadays, which is a virtual 180 from my college days. But then, with the acts I followed, it was in some sense part of the act to espouse college-age social consciousness. Nowadays i think that entertainers sometimes need to be reminded why they are getting paid. If someone pays $75 to see a rock star, I'm pretty sure no one did so thinking "boy I'm really looking forward to Axl's insights on the middle east."

Celebrities, your visibility is a tool that you are fortunate to have. Most of the rest of us don't. Use it wisely. If you are driven to, go ahead, open your mouths and tell us what you think. But if it's nothing more than "war is bad and mean people suck," don't expect a standing ovation. And if being pampered, patted on the back and continually told how wonderful you are has made you thin-skinned, think twice. Politics aint beanbag.

Posted by: bk at March 17, 2006 09:41 AM

BK, you hit the nail on the head. What I really resent is a "star" using their soapbox to promulgate complete and utterly uninformed crap. If you have some knowledge about a subject, then y all means state your opinion. Like an earlier poster mentioned about Bono, I may not agree with his sentiments, but he knows what he is talking about. On the other hand, folks like Clooney, Barbra and Penn, well, stick to what made you famous and shut up please...

Posted by: Rob at March 17, 2006 10:16 AM

Why do I care? Because it can be hilarious, and the world needs more laughter. See the entry above this one!

Posted by: Tully at March 17, 2006 10:19 AM

What I resent is celebrities using their stardom to get a forum that others don't have.

Why would that be objectionable? Why is that any different to, say, Jon Corzine being able to virtually buy himself a Senate seat and then a governorship, just because he uses the advantages his career afforded him to leverage a forum that others had less access to? This is precisely the "nobody should have a louder voice than anyone else" stuff that underlies campaign finance reform, and it's misguided, in my view. If you've worked hard and made a lot of money, it seems proverbially unfair to be denied the right to take out a full-page advert (saying that, I don't know, "Bush should be impeached" or whatever), in whatever paper will take it, just because you have the means to do so and someone else doesn't. This seems to my mind to be one of the defining differences between left and right: the right wants equal opportunity and doesn't mind if that leads to unequal outcomes, the left wants equal outcome, and doesn't mind squishing equal opportunity to get there. Posted by: Simon at March 17, 2006 10:59 AM

I also resent when celebrities can dish it out but can't take it. Several years ago, Sinead O'Connor (remember her?) criticized the Pope at some concert and was reduced to tears apparently when the audience booed.

This much I assuredly agree with. I just got done reading Bernard Goldberg's book "Bias", and he vividly explains how the media loves a whistleblower in every industry except one: their own. Posted by: Simon at March 17, 2006 11:01 AM

What I really resent is a "star" using their soapbox to promulgate complete and utterly uninformed crap.

Why? I resent anyone "promulgating complete and utterly uninformed crap," but you'll notice that it isn't just celebrities who do so. Everyone from Congressmen to Columnists has an opinion, it's often wrong, but they're not shy about expressing it. Posted by: Simon at March 17, 2006 11:21 AM