It’s too easy nowadays to roll your eyes whenever Paris Hilton announces, “guys I am like totally sympathetic to the plight of tigers in the Indian subcontinent,” or One Direction ask for money for malaria nets for central Africa when we all know they could literally buy thousands with their vast personal fortunes. However, of late, the role of celebrity activism in South Sudan has come under severe criticism. The role of people such as George Clooney who has been dubbed ‘Mr Sudan’ in the media has come under attack for ignoring realities of the situation in the Sudan.
The story the celebrities cast is one of oppression of the Christians in the south by the Islamic government of the north. Critics have pointed toward celebrity oversight of complete dysfunction of government since 2011 and questioned false promotion by stars like Clooney of the supposed ethnic narrative of the war. Colouring all celebrity activism, though, by examples like this is hardly fair. It isn’t always a shallow publicity tool or misguided attempt to peddle a story the international community wants the world to believe.
Social justice, education and improved conditions for children are areas in which celebrity activism is hugely beneficial but also has, for many, come naturally.
Rather than seeking a publicity sticker to promote a new album or a photo opportunity to be prefixed with a reminder of a new album out, Shakira has instead (since her international breakout in the late 90s) advanced the cause of schools for poor children through The Barefoot Foundation. Even with increased recognition, the Colombian popstar has never stopped, travelling to Bangladesh to raise awareness of the impact of Cyclone Sidr and pursuing governments around the world for investment into developing regions.
Charities like UNICEF have also benefited hugely from partnerships formed with celebrities. Selena Gomez has, for example, in her time as a Goodwill Ambassador promoted mining of conflict minerals in the Congo and supermodel Elle MacPherson has raised awareness of child abandonment in Ukraine and supported initiatives to combat it. Celebrity involvement in humanitarian issues raises their profile, but involvement of younger stars especially like Gomez means that key issues and messages are disseminated far more rapidly through social media.
Perhaps most crucially, though, celebrities can promote issues that are either censored by the international community or forgotten in commercial interests. The Armenian genocide, which saw between 1-1.5 Million Ethnic Armenians killed by the Ottoman Turkish Government between 1915-23 is heavily disputed in the international community, with countries like Turkey and Azerbaijan denying its existence, whilst the French government recently passed a law making its denial illegal.
The supposedly shallowest celebrity family of all, the Kardashians, have consistently asserted the cause of Remembrance of the Genocide and pursued raising awareness of it in the wider community.
Kim Kardashian herself has multiple times spoken out on the issue, widely criticising the decision of Turkish Cosmopolitan for running a cover with her on it the same month as Armenian Remembrance and critising the Turkish government for attempting to cover up the genocide. In 2011 Kim even urged President Obama to move forward with formal recognition of the genocide in the United States.
Additionally she has spoken out on the current plight of the Syrian-Armenian Community, an issue that has received little press coverage in the Western media. The involvement of the Kardashians in promotion of Armenian Remembrance has put the issue back on the international agenda and made it a point of conversation when governments have been so willing to sweep it under the rug.
Ultimately there will always be celebrities using causes to promote themselves, but it’s unfair to condemn all celebrities by the same brush. There are many celebrities doing amazing work so we shouldn’t condemn celebrity activism as a whole.