Post-class, Week 13: What good are celebrities, anyway?

It seems that we got pretty down on celebrities during this week's discussion - I'd like to do something I'd usually never do and defend them to an extent.

But first, I must be cruel if only to be kind.  The comments by Sean Penn regarding the NGO he worked with must absolutely be condemned, especially as they appear to be separated from reality by some amount.  It's here that I do take issue with celebrity involvement with NGO activities.  It is fine, to me, for celebrities to use their public visibility to champion causes or to raise awareness, but I would prefer that when news organizations wish to interview those involved with the work, they go to the experts rather than the pretty mouthpieces that Hollywood has so graciously supplied.  Celebrities must never be allowed to speak for NGOs they are working with, as they're unlikely to be considerably more knowledgeable in the subject than those that have devoted years of their lives to studying the problems they seek to alleviate and implementing solutions.  In the chat-box, I mentioned Angelina Jolie and George Clooney's tendencies to enroll in classes at UCLA in order to inform themselves about issues they wish to advocate for, and although these two in particular have always been fairly beneficial to the causes they work with and haven't committed any offenses anywhere near the level of Sean Penn's damages, I still would prefer their contributions be limited to speaking engagements at fundraisers and photo ops to 'raise awareness,' even if they have taken the initiative to become educated on matters before chipping in.

To me, the perfect model of celebrity involvement in charity work looks a lot like Live/Farm Aid - simple usage of celebrity power to organize a massive fundraiser.  While I'm certainly no fan of Bono or his music, his contributions to the two concerts during the 80s shouldn't be discounted - as much as I hate the guy (I concur with Trey Parket and Matt Stone's opinion of the man), he was incredibly useful in raising funds and putting them to good use.  Both of those concerts were massively successful for their time, and that was during the 80s - long before Web 2.0, internet streaming, and the possibility of donating via the Internet.  Were such a concert to be attempted for some major cause today, I expect they'd find even greater success.

Moving forward, it may perhaps be best for celebrities to continue their involvement with NGO activity, but if I had my way, they wouldn't be allowed onto  the 'frontlines' of aid work - they are best used doing what they do best, being massively visible in the public spotlight.  The model of the massive fundraising concerts of decades past can likely be very successful, it's simply a matter of resurrecting the ideal.