Much has been said about actress Meryl Streeps speech against Donald Trump at the Golden Globe awards.
My question is though, do you think Hollywood stars make good spokespeople?
I mean to me, the people in Hollywood live in their own private bubble. They know nothing about life in ordinary America. Watching the old tv show “Politically Incorrect” with Bill Maher years ago, Maher would often make this point with celebrities who were spouting off on politics, environmental, social, and economic issues.
Granted, like everyone else, they are entitled to their opinions.
Your answer is right there in the word you used to describe these people.
They are CELEBRITIES. That means that lots of people are watching them, listening to them, and so on.
That’s why they are chosen as “spokespeople” for commercial interests. It’s why big time politicians invite them to large political functions: to gain their audience, and to use the positive feelings their audiences have for them, to “steal” support for their own agendas.
As for why famous people take advantage of their fame as entertainers or whatever, to promote their own political or other beliefs, that’s just people being people.
People who are OPPOSED to whatever a famous person advocates for, often suddenly want spokespeople to have expertise in the area under discussion, and when they feel threatened by a Celebrity spokesperson’s fans, exaggerate what the spokesperson is actually doing, and pretend that they are LYING by speaking at all.
Those same opponents, however, often fail to notice that a non-celebrity, self-proclaimed expert, ALSO has zero actual expertise. This especially includes the vast majority of our politicians.
Just be careful, as you work to choose who to listen to and who to disregard, that you actually personally identify each one, rather than accidentally doing as you accuse these other people of doing: it’s just as silly to DISCARD someone out of hand, as it is to BELIEVE them without checking anything about them.
How do you define “good” in this context? Do you mean, are they effective spokespeople, in that they generate attention and support for the causes they speak for? As igor noted, in many cases they are, which is why supporters of various causes routinely try to get celebrities to speak for them.
AIUI, a lot of Hollywood celebrities spend much of their lives in “ordinary America” before they made the big time. They certainly know as much about “ordinary America” as, say, the mega-rich NYC scion of a multimillionaire real estate developer.
None of this prevented movie star Ronald Reagan getting elected Governor of California and eventually POTUS. Same for Senator Al Franken.
The argument can be made that the current President-elect is little more than a Hollywood celebrity. Certainly a great deal of his fame and popularity is based on his career as a star of reality television. Whether one is happy with his election it’s clear he was an effective spokesperson for a large segment of the population.
And like her speech or not, Streep pointed out early in her speech how his skill as a public speaker helped him get to the White House.
I happen to share a LOT of the same opinions which she holds.
I don’t have any platform to make them known though… and after last last election, I have few representatives left willing or able to make how I feel known.
I don’t have the pulpit… but some people do. Some are afraid to use it because they worry they won’t get work.
Some are afraid because there may be backlash from the modern day “Jim Taylors” of the world.
Thats right… those guys who seem all well and fine as long as you know your place… and serve them cold drinks at their golf club (and don’t complain about their racist jokes). And you better laugh if you want a tip or to keep your job.
I’m GLAD she spoke up. I wish more people would. There’s a duty when you have that spot light… an obligation if you will… because not everybody gets that so-called 15 minutes of fame
to say their piece and to stand up for what they honestly feel is right… or to remind us of what they see (and we see) as going Wrong in this world.
I’m just some small town guy on a computer that doesn’t work half the time, operating on a weekly budget thats less than half of what some DC lobbyist spends on lunch on a Tuesday…
but I honestly try to make what difference I can… which usually isn’t any.
But Meryl Streep? She can.
And she Did.
And I’m Proud of her For It!!!
You won’t see that as a headline on any news outlet, but I am… and I KNOW I’m Not Alone…
People say rush limbaugh and alex jones are entertainment, especially when they are called out for not being news. Fox news is not news, but opinion. They said so in court. Are these people more qualified to opine on shit than actors? They are most certainly part of the entertainment industry. And they are certainly no scholars.
Some people want to have it both ways and then some.
How is anything in life fair? Far as I can tell random people care a lot more about Meryl Streep’s opinions than mine. I just try to not let it bother me :).
Celebrities can speak from of position of knowledge or ignorance like the rest of us. What makes them good spokesmen or not is how confident their presentation of a position is compared to their knowledge of the position. Jenny McCarthy, who clearly knows nothing about vaccines and how the scientific method works, is not a good spokesman for not getting vaccinated. A Hollywood celebrity who may have a degree in science or an interest in some area of science may be a good spokesman for the particular area they have knowledge about.
I sum up her speech to two main points: first, the hijack that denigrated football and mixed martial arts. I just rolled my eyes.
Second, the part about how disturbing it is that a president-elect has mocked a disabled reporter, and more generally is willing to use his power to denigrate individuals who have no power to fight back. That part is totally right on, and if anything, more people who get lots of public attention ought to be speaking out about it.
So I don’t particularly care for her grudge against the NFL, but absolutely people should listen and think about her comments on Trump’s temperament.
IIRC, most actors come from middle or upper middle class backgrounds in the first place. Streep, movie star, the daughter of a Big Pharma executive and married to a famous sculptor certainly would not have had much chance to interact with the Great Unwashed. Trump on the other hand, silver spoon and all, is a real estate developer, by the nature of his work would be more attuned to working class problem.
I doubt that.
But even if it were true. Streep in her now famous speech has not adressed “working class problems”. She has spoken about fundamental rules of social interaction. Why would she not be qualified to do that?
She didn’t denigrate the NFL or MMA, she just said they were not “the arts”, which is correct. Here’s the entirety of what she said about those two things.
[QUOTE=Meryl Streep]
Hollywood is crawling with outsiders and foreigners. If you kick 'em all out, you’ll have nothing to watch but football and mixed martial arts, which are not the arts.
[/QUOTE]
Meryl Streep is better equipped to form and voice opinions than most celebrities. She is educated, cultured, and thoughtful.
And as you said, her point about Trump bullying or mocking the reporter goes right to the heart of why our president-elect is not fit for any polite gathering, let alone the presidency. Leaving politics and any other considerations aside, the incident she delicately referred to proves that he is a mean, miserable, pusillanimous barbarian.