Correction appended
My governor is a former body builder and movie star. And he’s supporting Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.). So, for that matter, is Sylvester Stallone. Chuck Norris, on the other hand, is endorsing former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee. Oprah Winfrey and Scarlett Johansson have thrown their weight behind Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). So what?
All of these people are trading on nothing more than their celebrity, and yet the country seems to accept this as basis for political expertise. So if fame is all it takes, why not let West Wing president Jed Bartlett endorse a candidate? After all, he’s much more politically qualified than Oprah or Chuck Norris. Maybe Meredith Grey would support Obama because she’s so disenchanted with politics and likes the idea of a fresh face, not to mention that Hillary brings up her mommy issues. Rory Gilmore might be pro-Hillary for her work in support of Roe v. Wade and would engage in witty debates with her mother on the topic. Tony Soprano would have endorsed former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, a fellow Italian. And Homer Simpson, well, he’s too busy eating donuts.
Of course, given the Writers’ Guild strike, maybe we shouldn’t be relying on the endorsements of TV show characters. Reality TV might be a more stable source of guidance. We could poll the American Idol contestants to see whom they support. Better yet, we could just let the candidates get on stage themselves and belt out some tunes to see who’s going to be the next big star. We could pit the characters against each other on Survivor to see which one is inventive enough to survive on a desert island. Or put Hillary and Obama on “A Shot at Love,” and Tila Tequila could decide once and for all whether she likes men or women.
The point is, celebrity provides a platform from which to influence the world. We live in a country with an afternoon talk-show host whose book club can make or break a book. Could she also make or break a candidate by standing on stage and declaring that she thinks Obama is the man for the job?
But the larger question is: Why do we care? Does being a daytime talk show host translate into political expertise? Doubtful. Oprah is entitled to her own opinion, but why should we let her influence how we vote? She is nothing more than an image on a screen: carefully coiffed, often smiling, and giving money away like it grows on trees. And though she invades the living room of families everywhere each afternoon, most people don’t actually know her personally.
But maybe I’m being a little harsh. Though Oprah is a TV personality, it’s not fair to write her off with the actors and actresses who trade purely on looks. Oprah has gotten where she is because of an impressive ability to connect with people and give voice to what they’re feeling. So maybe she has she earned the right to play the political game.
Somehow, I doubt it. Democracy is based on the idea of people making their own informed decisions and expressing them. Using fame to influence people’s political opinions is an abuse of power. Though it is neither threat nor coercion, this soft power is just as influential in our celebrity-obsessed culture. Oprah may know a lot about books and losing weight, but who would term her a political expert?
I’m not categorically against endorsements. From politicians, for example, endorsements are somewhat more defensible, since they come from a more informed perspective. Even there, though, there’s something distasteful about turning the primaries into a competition to see who can rack up the most Kennedys.
The line between celebrities and politicians is fading, and we seem more than thrilled to push it in that direction. We’ve already had an actor as president; Arnold’s governor of California; so hey, why not throw more movie stars into the race? Let Scarlett Johansson stand up next to Carolyn Kennedy and tell the world that she supports Obama, and it’s guaranteed to help his cause, because to my generation, Scarlett Johansson’s hourglass figure has been a lot more inspiring than JFK. But turning politics into yet another Hollywood name-dropping party cheapens democracy and makes it into little more than a popularity contest.
Alexis Levinson is a sophomore from Los Angeles, Calif. She can be reached at arlevins@princeton.edu.
Want to become a ‘Prince’ columnist? E-mail opinion@dailyprincetonian.com by Feb. 15 for an application.
CORRECTION:
An earlier version of this column incorrectly stated that California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has endorsed Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.). He has endorsed Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), not Mr. Obama. The Daily Princetonian regrets the error.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
