Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
-
posts about #celebritycharities more → 
Emma Thompson: Celebrities + Charities = "Causeweariness"
New York, 5:28 AM
Fri Dec 11
66 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
| posts about #celebritycharities more → |
Emma Thompson: Celebrities + Charities = "Causeweariness" |
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
05/05/09
Exactly. And I have the same question about celebrity endorsements of political candidates. I would like to see some research on this. Do more people devote their charitable dollars to causes with celebrity names attached? Or vote for the candidate endorsed by, say, Leonardo diCaprio? I suspect not.
05/05/09
Than in more practical terms, how helpful those institutions can be, especially if you are part of one dealing with other countries, countries that suffered years and years under colonialism and/or have a fragile infra-structure due to wars, internal and external exploitation, corruption? How do you help a different culture without imposing your own culture on it? I am huge supporter of autonomy of nations and I believe countries/cultures should be left to their own devices to sort their problems with little to no interference, situation that can be changed when major violations of human rights are in course.
In most cases those kind of charitable feelings seem to be more linked to wanting to make the world conform to one point of view. And its finality, consciously and unconsciously, economical exploitation.
05/05/09
Acts of solidarity are possible and necessary, and more difficult. I think Emma actually makes this distinction in her interview though she uses different words. But she talks about the problematics of having a "favorite charity" like its an object to own, rather than sort of movements and people and interactions that are just part of engaging with the world, getting to know people who live differently than you do and working toward justice.
05/05/09
Dorothy Day was referencing her distaste for Catholic charitable institutions in the 30's, but the I believe the same sentiment rings true in your comment. The word Charity does seem to have a connotation that we are stooping from our high ground to help others below us. Instead we should be on the ground beside them, working together toward justice. Solidarity, exactly.
05/05/09
I know this is a judgmental comment, but I only know what I see. I'd like to think I could be proven wrong.
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
I think that it is admirable of them to take time out of their busy schedules to raise awareness for a just cause and let's be honest here, if it weren't for Dan Akroyd's involvement in "We are the World" there would still be tremendous poverty in Africa.
But another part of me looks at someone like Sean Penn and sees someone that never went hungry for a reason other than possible researching a role and I see someone with a sizable fortune and unrelenting desire to be recognized for something other than a crap movie role. Obviously well meaning, not necessarily misguided, but kind of annoying. Like an obnoxious distant relative who thinks that he knows what is good for you, tells you what you should be doing, but disappears on your birthday.
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
This said, I think people should be encouraged to do both.
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
Because then you make the cause look less serious.
05/05/09
See any famous person who bangs on about climate change and then drives to their private jet in a gas guzzling SUV. That makes me want to scream.
05/05/09
But if suddenly Heidi and Spencer were like "Oh we're funding this environmental charity!" I think you'd hear a collective UGHHHH because you'd believe they'd do it as part of their famewhoring mission.
05/05/09
05/05/09
[www.livingwithed.net]
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
He's branded U2 as a "moral band" like how cigarettes branded themselves as "sexy."
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
05/05/09
I don't see it as a celebrity problem, though. I think celebrities treat causes the way normal people do. Sometimes their hearts are really in it, sometimes they do it for show, sometimes it's merely a token gesture.
05/05/09
05/05/09
Back to the subject: I'd hazard that most celebrities -- not all -- embrace causes because other celebrities do or someone made a good pitch to their manager or publicist. You'd be surprised at how easy it is to rent-a-celeb.