Giving Tuesday, a movement started in 2012 to remind us of the power of doing good, is next week, and nonprofit leaders are preparing their annual pitches to convince you and me to donate to their organizations and causes. No doubt, some of these organizations will engage celebrities like Adriana Grande, Tim McGraw, and Beyonce in their efforts, and your friends will be urging you to “like” postings on their favorite causes.
The use of celebrities to raise money for causes is certainly not new. Film and television stars like Paul Newman, Danny Thomas, and Audrey Hepburn were well-known for their philanthropic causes, and many of them continue to be associated with these causes long after their deaths. Newman’s Own Foundation has raised millions of dollars through the sale of salad dressing and salsa while Danny Thomas remains forever linked to St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital.
But in the age of social media, the line between promoting a cause and promoting oneself can sometimes blur and become indistinguishable from plain vanilla marketing. While it’s true that some celebrities engage in philanthropy for purely altruistic reasons, others gain some level of notoriety or awareness through their involvement with causes. Celebrities like George Clooney, Matt Damon, Brad Pitt, and Michael J. Fox become deeply engaged in their foundations or causes, and many quietly make donations or volunteer in their communities without much fanfare. Others seem more driven by marketing concerns than philanthropic ones.
Angelina Jolie’s work with the United Nations Refugee Organization has received a significant amount of exposure for the plight of refugees. Harry Styles and Lizzo brought attention to Planned Parenthood at a time when many women were losing their right to abortion. And rapper Meek Mill highlighted the issue of bail reform when he paid for the release of incarcerated women in Philadelphia so they could return home for the holidays.
Critics of celebrity philanthropy argue that the involvement of famous people is often detrimental to these causes, and their efforts, which are often publicized on social media, promote consumption and capitalism, and turn complex issues into spectacle and theater. When celebrities like Taylor Swift or Bono bring attention to a cause, is the focus on the cause or the celebrity? Is a celebrity endorsing a cause any different than a celebrity endorsement for a product or service? When Ed Sheeran launches a limited-edition tee-shirt to support the Elton John AIDS Foundation, is he supporting AIDS research or just himself?
Likewise, if a friend asks you to “like” a posting about their cause, is the focus on the cause or the friend? Some call this kind of online activity “slacktivism,” which has been defined by the United Nations as supporting a cause by performing simple measures but not necessarily being engaged or devoted to making a change.
Social media can be helpful at bringing attention to a cause (witness the Ice Bucket Challenge for ALS), but critics of slacktivism contend that “liking” a cause on Facebook or Instagram does very little for the cause or one’s understanding of the issues and is mostly done for instant gratification or popularity. On the other hand, does one need to take to the streets to support a cause or is voicing one’s opinion enough in today’s online world?
Celebrities and slacktivism can help create awareness of important causes, and in rare instances, they can encourage real action and donations. Taylor Swift’s encouragement for young people to vote is credited with a significant increase in people doing so, and someone may reach for Paul Newman’s salad dressing on the grocery store shelf because their purchase supports charities. The Ice Bucket Challenge not only brought attention to the disease of ALS, but it also resulted in millions of dollars of donations to the cause.
If Taylor Swift can get more young people to vote or Lizzo can bring awareness to the importance of supporting Planned Parenthood or my friend asks me to “like” her statement in support of relief efforts in the Ukraine, does it matter that they might also benefit in some way from the transaction?
Celebrities can be respected — or derided — for supporting current causes, and social media can be helpful in raising awareness — or instrumental in desensitizing people to the real complex issues of our time. But right or wrong, celebrities and slacktivism are here to stay, and they are an important part of rallying communities to do good on Giving Tuesday.