Lessons in journalism
It's really cute that Lauren Wright, journalism and political science double-major extraordinaire, is letting us know her views on celebrities and their political opinions, but it's equally concerning she has such a poor understanding of free speech, journalism and politics in general.
I mean, President Carter is actually a politician, so criticizing him for speaking at Coretta Scott King's funeral because he's a celebrity is kinda off the mark. But, no matter.
I've never really comprehended the whole 'Celebrities shouldn't voice their opinions' argument. I mean, Lord knows I don't agree with Cameron Diaz's claim that the 2004 presidential election was about electing someone who would legalize rape, but at the same time, if she wants to spout such nonsense, then more power to her.
I just don't understand this notion that celebrities surrendered their ability to engage in free speech simply because they release a hit CD or a star in a big movie. We common folk get to write letters to the editor and participate in whatever protests or freedom rallies we like, but apparently if you achieve a modicum of success you're done airing your views.
Truth be told, there really are celebrities who have a firm grasp on the political climate of the day and can talk intelligently about the issues. James Woods is an example on the right, while George Clooney would be one on the left.
Perhaps I should call for all undergraduates to quit voicing their opinions because no one cares ... but I won't because they have the legitimate right to say whatever they want, no matter how silly it is.
I mean, President Carter is actually a politician, so criticizing him for speaking at Coretta Scott King's funeral because he's a celebrity is kinda off the mark. But, no matter.
I've never really comprehended the whole 'Celebrities shouldn't voice their opinions' argument. I mean, Lord knows I don't agree with Cameron Diaz's claim that the 2004 presidential election was about electing someone who would legalize rape, but at the same time, if she wants to spout such nonsense, then more power to her.
I just don't understand this notion that celebrities surrendered their ability to engage in free speech simply because they release a hit CD or a star in a big movie. We common folk get to write letters to the editor and participate in whatever protests or freedom rallies we like, but apparently if you achieve a modicum of success you're done airing your views.
Truth be told, there really are celebrities who have a firm grasp on the political climate of the day and can talk intelligently about the issues. James Woods is an example on the right, while George Clooney would be one on the left.
Perhaps I should call for all undergraduates to quit voicing their opinions because no one cares ... but I won't because they have the legitimate right to say whatever they want, no matter how silly it is.
posted by Jmac at 9:11 AM
7 Comments:
I'm not against celebs voicing their opinions, but I think any backlash and loss of income they incur is deserved.
Yeah, you have the right to do that, but I've never gotten that either. It just seems kind of silly to boycott something which you at one time really enjoyed, yet decide not to like now because Beyonce feels differently about NAFTA than you do.
If you can't separate the opinions of the artists from the product they put out, then what's to stop you from merely being friends with people who have different opinions than you do?
It's natural selection. The tigers and the gazelles don't go out for beers after a long day on the plain. Everyone just gravitates towards people of their own ilk. While you may have friends with beliefs that vary wildly, I would bet that your closest friends - the ones you spend the most time with and "hang out" with the most - are people that align similarly with your own point of view.
Anyway, if I go to a movie, buy a CD, watch a television show, etc., I want to be entertained.
If I normally enjoy Beyonce's music, but she comes out in favor of PETA, I instantly associate all the idiots I've encountered that support PETA with Beyonce. She ruined my perception of "Beyonce - the celebrity" by adding a dose of reality. Entertainment is about escaping reality. Therefore, when I am forced to relate reality to a celebrity, the entertainment value is typically lost.
I think that is one reason people don't want celebrities to speak out in the first place.
I think that's an interesting perspective realist, particularly with regard to separation from reality. Hadn't taken that into consideration. I suppose it would be how much one can divorce the opinions of an individual from their work. Typically, I can accept a lot of wackiness. I mean, James Woods is a fire-breaking Republican but, for some odd reason, I kinda like John Carpenter's Vampires (in a 'man this is awful' kind-of-way).
And while I do think you gravitate toward people who share similar beliefs, I think you may be overstating a bit. For instance, Xon is about as opposite from me ideologically as you can be, but I still consider him one of my closest friends, even if I don't see him as regularly as I used to. Same goes with Russ, who is liberal on some things, but doesn't see eye-to-eye with me on everything.
I do have plenty of friends who are very close to me ideologically and theologically, but I have a good mix of friends who think differently as well.
Friends who think exactly like you can be boring. I like a little debate in my life, and I've got folks who disagree with me on some things and agree on others. I think we set ourselves up to have a limited understanding of the world if we only attempt to associate with folks who share our opinions and worldviews.
I wanted to insert a caveat that would exclude life-long, blood-brother type friends with which you share a bond deeper than the superficial...but, alas, I did not.
It's natural selection. The tigers and the gazelles don't go out for beers after a long day on the plain. Everyone just gravitates towards people of their own ilk. While you may have friends with beliefs that vary wildly, I would bet that your closest friends - the ones you spend the most time with and "hang out" with the most - are people that align similarly with your own point of view.
I think that is probably true for most people as a general rule; I know it is w/ me. But I think one also has to be careful not to practice isolationism. If you only associate w/ people who share all or most of your views, you're limiting your experience of the world. Exposing yourself to ideas, opinions, and perspectives different from your own is a positive experience, because it helps you to re-examine what you believe and why, and either change those beliefs based on new information, or reinforce your existing beliefs.
Geez, I sound kind of like a Lifetime movie right now, don't I? Oops.
Anyway. Not to say that you were suggesting anything of the sort or to imply that you only associate w/ people like yourself. I'm just saying, taken to an extreme, this is what can happen.
It's early (for me).
Not to beat a dead horse...
One can "Expos[e] [him]self to ideas, opinions, and perspectives different from [his] own" without being friends with said individual. I don't consider cordial acquaintances to be friends. I can even have an in-depth, deep discussion with someone of my complete opposite, but that doesn't mean we are friends.
My original intent was a retort to this:
If you can't separate the opinions of the artists from the product they put out, then what's to stop you from [not] being friends with people who have different opinions than you do?
It's my opinion that we do this already...I'm not saying that we should do this, or even that there is benefit...I'm just sayin'...
Post a Comment
<< Home