In class today when we got onto the topic of idolizing celebrities, I think my true point got lost. We were talking about the absolute extremes, people such as Lady Gaga and Justin Beiber who are so out of touch with their followers and have people tweeting for them. Then the other extreme was us. Who gives a shit what I tweet about right?
These are by no means the people that I was talking about idolizing. The people that I was mentioning caring about what they have to say are athletes who actually have a talent and care for their team and organization. REAL ROLE MODELS.
With that said I don't claim to know much about news, technology, or anything else, but I do know sports.
One example that I would like to give is a trade that happened at the trade deadline this year in the NBA. Kendrick Perkins a member of the Boston Celtics was traded to the Oklahoma City Thunder. The Celtics are a team that are known for the way they build a family, care for other players, and want to win. When Perkins found out that he was being traded, he tweeted that he was upset about having to leave his family, best friends, team members, and coworkers like this. A fellow member of the Celtics who was traded mentioned how upon learning the news of the trade they both cried, cried, and cried some more. People like this who a positive role models and truly care about what they do and how they do it are the people that I was talking about in class.
This example is a million times different than me giving a shit what Lady Gaga has to say on twitter. I do not follow her and never will. I care about people who care about what they do.
Yes I am envious of their life styles and would do anything to be a professional athlete. Some are spoiled little bitches and I do not look up to people like that (such as Terrell Owens). But there are middle of the road people who do the right things and just flat out care about winning. These are people that I was talking about in class.
This is thoughtful and interesting.
ReplyDeleteI think it also does important work refining the discussion we were having in class. Fans or "followers" are not mindless drones (as we sorta implied with the Lady Gaga meme). Rather, fans are people with interests, be those interests sports, music, news, technology, philosophy or whatever. Further, that someone "follows" someone else on Twitter is not (or doesn't have to be) some kind of intense statement about their basic psychology (although it could be). Rather, it's a way to explore/fufill/satisfy express one's interest (and that one has an interest in one thing--sports--doesn't entail one isn't interested in other things--music; the Twitter feed doesn't make us choose; it lets us keep up with all sorts of different things).
I think that refining the discussion the way you have helps us avoid making lame criticisms. It might also let us think more subtly about marketing. What is the difference between the information sharing example you give and marketing. I think that there is one, but I don't know how to describe it.
Ryan, the only thing I would have to pick at with this post is when you mentioned, "The people that I was mentioning caring about what they have to say are athletes who actually have a talent and care for their team and organization. REAL ROLE MODELS." Even if I sound biased, I would have to say that some stars like Lady Gaga and Justin Beiber actually possess talent and are seen as Role Models for achieving high levels of success and are not just famous solely on their fashion flair **ahem, Rihanna (cough, cough)...I would also like to add that some of these celebrities do interact with their fans, not just to make an effort in obtaining more fanbase and exposure, but to also have the voices of their fans heard and communicated...Just to add to Dean's comment, Twitter gives us the ability to explore different interests whether it be music, entertainment or sports, not just one particular interest...
ReplyDeleteYes well Lady Gaga does care what she does. In an article in Rolling Stones a while back she was interviewed. Gaga's goal is to create a fantasy character on stage that which viewers desire to consume visually. It's her act and she works it well. So we can not say she does not care about being a role model, because on stage she is goes as far as to making herself a model. Well Professor Dean could fill us in on what Gaga cares about doing. It may be along the lines of Moddonna's desires for freedom and breaking through inequality. But Gaga was on Times magazines 100 most influential people last year so maybe we should care more about her.
ReplyDeleteMaybe there are different questions that we need to ask. For example, we might think about differences between role models, people who are successful artists or athletes, and celebrities. Is it possible that the celebrity form collapses these differences? Or that the celebrity form is a particular market version of role models or success? I think that it makes sense to recall the discussion of powerlaws (Shirky) and of concentration in/of the mass (Terranova).
ReplyDeleteA possibility: the celebrity is a commercial form. It's not the same as talent, although using/manipulating/stretching the form takes a kind of talent.
And: maybe it's more important to think about why fans are fans, why there is a difference between, say, enjoying a song on the radio while driving and becoming actively invested in the lives of particular artists. What matters, I'm trying to suggest, is what the celebrity does for us and not why a particular celebrity does what she does.
Yep, celebrities can be a commercial form. In this regard those that came first have already generated a large pool of fans. Fans feel an attachment to the lives of particular celebrities because they see part of themselve in that celebrity. Instead appreciating the talent of an artists work or an athletes athletism, those who become celebraties become so through an appreciation for the impression they generate on us. Through idiolizing a celeb viewers see themselves, like looking at mirror. The celeb could be daring, original, humorous, smart, pretty, or dumb. They may be no recognizable talent yet people remain attrackes for various personal reasons. Once identified the celebs personal atributes are exploitable through marketing. For fans celebs represent an alternative ego for them to watch evolve. Therefore celebs can remain at the top of the power law even after they have past away and represent a concentration of the mass, through which the mass identifies more qualities in the celeb than anyone one person could have.
ReplyDelete