Site Title

I think that one of the first components in using a position of societal privilege to try and achieve meaningful social change is an awareness of one’s own status and position.  This is not necessarily possible however for every person that occupies super high upper class status and so this creates a debate over whether celebrity movement for change is something viable in the long term.  I think that community action in the real tangible world will always have more benefits than a simulated posturing on social media.  Actually volunteering and helping to organize local gardening groups, small farms and food systems for instance will create more actual systemic change than adopting a position on social media.  Creating action that people can emulate will also be more effective potentially. 

When celebrities use social media echo chambers to try and effect change they may end up propagating some of the corporate algorithmic influences that these tech companies rely upon to earn money and keep people hooked on their digital product.  Many times they may end up even receiving paid endorsements to appear on these social media platforms.  It could be possible for people to engage in mass mobilization but often the systems and technologies (and even consumer economic systems) that power and sustain the careers of these celebrities are themselves both socially and ecologically unsustainable. 

I think that the question of whether people can become effective catalysts as celebrities with a “superhero” power to accelerate change is something that is not really answerable.  In previous generations, people who were actually social and political activists themselves became celebrities by virtue of these positions (not the other way around).  However it is possible that the technological mediums themselves that people engage in prohibit certain kinds of systemic change from occurring.  If celebrities use these platforms to try and mobilize or affect people their are certain behaviors associated with these platforms that lend a kind of built in stasis to any message.  People are so addicted to these platforms that is has formed the basis of thinking and processing information for an entire generation of people and it is possible that they are just not capable of distancing themselves from it anymore.  For a celebrity to become a “superhero” they would have to bypass this but people face challenges in overcoming a digital addiction long enough to congregate and mobilize in the real physical world. 

I think that the nature of celebrityhood is limited by the nature of the digital platforms that spread and propagate the images of celebrities currently.  These platforms are controlled by rich powerful people who have vested interests in the status quo.  The shareholders of these companies are not themselves interested in activist platforms that go against corporate interests.  The platforms I am talking about include Facebook, X, Google, and others.  I have not seen an instance of a celebrity (in the entertainment industry) supersede these limitations and find a way to mobilize mass movement towards a certain direction.  This is not just about individual platforms but also a cultural mindset with the upper classes as well.  It is possible that celebrity status is again being conferred on people who actually are in positions of policy and power however (Zohran Mamdani is one example of this).  Obama is another example of a politician who cultivated a “celebrity” status in the media.  There has to be actual evidence that concrete change is taking place along with this celebrity status however.  The beginning of Mamdani’s tenure as mayor demonstrates some of this tangible progress. 

In regards to private jet usage, it is possible that proposals to tax them higher in countries (that are willing to implement this) will make a moderate difference in those specific countries although there is a culture in the wealthiest classes of simply relocating or spending more time away to get away from regulation.  Taxes regarding this are unlikely to happen in the world’s biggest polluters such as the USA, China, and India however as far as I can tell.  The climate change crisis is a global issue and action taken by the UK and EU alone will not create enough of a difference to curtail immediate ecological catastrophe in my opinion.  Supreme court decisions such as Citizen’s United have also created tipping points in the United States that make it extremely difficult to reign in corporate and private wealth and how this is spent.  I am not sure what the impact would be of these hypothetical taxes because I am not sure that they can be implemented in reality on a big enough scale to be measured. 

It is possible to look towards economic tipping points for altering climate change acceleration although the incentives for these put in place under Biden have been blocked by Trump’s return to office.  In an ideal world there would be some sort of private jet carbon non-proliferation treaty but in the modern international environment I do not think that this is possible.  The countries that are able to in my opinion should issue a tax on “overconsumption”.  This potentially includes the UK and the EU.  I do not think that the political structure in the United States would allow such a tax to happen.  The strategy employed in the US seems to have been to try to create economic tipping points for renewables and incentives through federal subsidies (such as in the Inflation Reduction Act passed during Biden’s term). 

Rewarding celebrities for aligning themselves with social causes means focusing attention, revenue, and consciousness around their brand based on them realizing the importance of socially pressing issues and incorporating this into their careers.  Increased attention to celebrities via social media platforms (which enhance their “brand” consciousness”) is also by itself limited, passive, and performative in my opinion.  It is very east to pretend to be environmentally conscious on the internet and social media using tools that may have some mild impact on social justice but which are also very performative.  It takes potentially stepping outside of the currently constructed system (or utilizing it in a way that is radically different) to actually impact things in the real world.     

A potential future generation of admired celebrities would possibly be known for incorporating positive action that side-steps the corporate cues that people are used to taking when engaging with digital media.  They would incorporate physical action in the real world in their influencing and social leadership.  A future celebrity’s bio would incorporate direct action and conscious consumption in the attention economy to help reshape how people interact with the environment and each other. 

A hypothetical imagined celebrity of the future: Ariel Pearl  

Ariel Pearl is a tv producer, writer and director in the future who began her creating directing ecologically minded drama adventure series on streaming services such as Disney Plus and gained a following of people in her audience during their formative childhood and adolescent years.  Over time fans of the series developed a relationship with the natural world in part spurred by the exploration of themes that included ecological connection, social justice and environmental restoration.  Over time, Ariel Pearl became active in the the political world as well as she moved beyond just her branded series and helped to cultivate the foundation of political PAC’s and real-world organizational movements to help cultivate a relationship with the natural world, re-wilding of the environment, renewable energy development, and sustainable farming.  Groups that grew out of fan communities of her series helped form trail-building and ecological repair organizations, litter cleanup, gardening and community support projects. 

Real world political PACS that grew out of the values and research espoused by the tv series helped to recognize and endorse politicians serious about advancing ecologically minded legislation and political action in the US.  Groups of voters that had become literate in renewable and ecological science by following Pearl and her values helped propel a new generation of people into congress that firmly rejected the fossil fuel lobby and adopted a pro-earth mentality in their politics (with a realization that humans must have a relationship with the natural world).  The brand of content showcased by this hypothetical celebrity helped to bridge the consciousness between the digital landscape in which many people grew up so heavily immersed and the real physical world around them.  This inspired a reconnection with environmental literacy and a shared sense of real world community.