It's easy to get cynical when you see a self-inflated celebrity rockstar like Bono get a little too cozy with world leaders. Sure, we sneer when Angelina Jolie is appointed goodwill ambassador to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. We know that these celebs fly in private jets and drink high-dollar wine on their way to visit development projects in Africa, or refugee camps in Cambodia. And I'm sure that their net worths are on par with the gross national products of many developing countries.
But I don't begrudge these celebrities their money, and my response to all this is that at least they're using their status for something other than showing us just how lucky they really are. I have a sneaking suspicion that I could probably find someone on my street who is at least cursorily acquainted with the trouble in Sudan because George Clooney and Al Sharpton spoke at a rally for Sudan's Darfur humanitarian crisis yesterday in Washington.
One could argue that it is their duty to give something back after winning the fame/fortune lottery in life. They should use their celebrity status for something positive. It's sad-but-true that the average American knows lots of things about our rock stars, sports stars and movie stars, but little to nothing about pressing global issues. Even if celebrities' efforts are merely exploiting the trivial nature of American public knowledge -- thereby raising awareness of global poverty or the need for debt relief in developing countries or some looming refugee crisis -- this is a step in the right direction.
Heck, Bono even has some quantifiable accomplishments under his designer belt. Of course, the fact remains that the situation in Darfur is disastrous and appalling, even though celebrities are marching on the Mall in Washington. And the multilateral lending institutions have yet to relieve many of the poorest nations of their debts. Bono hasn't saved the world, but he may have started a trend. With more celebrities getting on the humanitarian bandwagon, one can only hope for a growing level of the public's awareness of international humanitarian issues in the future. That public awareness alone doesn't always sway our policy makers, but it's a start. And sure, Bono wears silly, expensive sunglasses, and Pitt, Jolie and Clooney are annoyingly pretty. And they may be enjoying five-star meals while pushing the causes of people who live on less than $1 a day. But at least they have causes. Consider the alternatives: What has Britney Spears done for anyone lately?
Monday, May 01, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Thanks D. I agree wholeheartedly about the musical direction. Not my thing. A little too high-fi, and it takes itself too seriously. But you're right: Bono is the first and best in this celebrity/developing world cause marriage.
I read a good essay in the most recent Foreign Policy magazine about the little Irish bloke (I'd link it, but apparently they don't put the most recent issue on their website). It suggested that if celebs like Pitt and Jolie want to have more impact in their causes, they should model their efforts on what Bono has done. He's been good at focusing his attention. Lately, he's been on debt relief, and has some accomplishments beyond raising awareness.
The Helms thing is a tough pill to swallow. We've all had questionable friendships, but that's a doozie. - JK
Post a Comment