Do not take celebrities seriously! / Why are these people everywhere? Mehr News Agency Iran and world’s news
Mehr news agency, Culture and Thought Group – Sara Faraji: These days you turn your head everywhere you see celebrities; It is as if celebrities have come to be everywhere and life without them is not enough for us. It is enough to go to the street to buy something to better understand this siege with celebrities. Advertising and encouraging childbearing or selling carpets and insurance and almost anything you can think of is all tied to the presence of celebrities. As soon as you want to read this article, you will probably see an ad with a celebrity on your monitor or mobile phone screens.
The question that arises here is why? Why is life lacking for us without the presence of celebrities and they are everywhere. The answer is obvious: Celebrities came to make more money in a business’s financial cycle. Before the advent of social media, celebrities had something to offer, but with the advent of social media and the rise of cyberspace, you no longer need to have anything to become a celebrity, and anyone can be a celebrity. It was, but the possibility of public presence in cyberspace allows anyone to become a celebrity very soon and make money, and therefore it can be said that one of the characteristics of being a celebrity is “consumption”. Celebrities came to tell us to consume more, and in this cycle they themselves end up consuming somehow, and this consumerism is a hallmark of the twentieth century and the capitalist world.
Celebrities came for us to talk about and have fun with, and why everyone these days (a metaphor for most people, not the real meaning of everyone) wants to be a celebrity is also because we all like to be important and talked about everywhere. To do. Basically, being seen and attracting attention is attractive, and being a celebrity allows a person to always be the name of the speakers. In a survey of 16-year-olds in the UK, 54% of them wanted to become a celebrity.
The story, however, becomes thought-provoking when celebrities are where they should not be at all; Like appearing on a reality show. The Joker series, which is very popular these days, is an example of these reality shows, which in principle should not have any celebrities, because the basic principle of making such programs is the presence of ordinary people, as its name suggests. reality show. That is, a show that is based on reality, but celebrities today surround us in such a way that if they are not in a program, event, movie or theater, one thing is missing and we do not pay much attention to such works.
If a program is made with the presence of ordinary people, such as talent competitions, and there are many examples of Iranians and foreigners, the output of these non-celebrity programs will be to create a celebrity, because the person is known after being seen in the media and then It becomes more visible and begins to become a celebrity through its communication channels. For example, ordinary people who appeared in stand-up TV comedies or talent shows and, after being recognized, started working on their social media pages in cyberspace and now become a celebrity who does everything except what they were talented at.
According to Holly Groot, author and professor at the University of Alabama, the difference between a celebrity and other forms of public approval is that it revolves around an individual personality. Celebrities, with their seemingly eternal perfection, make us escape from everyday life, entertain us, give us pleasure, or help us to express our pain. And, with all their human imperfections, they soothe our shortcomings, give us a sense of belonging, and remind us that conflict is a necessity of human experience. Celebrities are a reflection of who we are, that is, they show us who we are. But at the same time, they fascinate us with their imagination, that is, they show us who we want to be.
According to him, fame is different from celebrity and fame needs a prominent person, but celebrity needs a judgmental audience.
George Monbeau, a columnist for the Guardian, wrote in an article he wrote for the Guardian five years ago that a major change in the United States took place between 1997 and 2007, according to a study in the journal Cyber Psychology. In 1997 (according to adult audiences) the dominant values in popular television programs for nine- to eleven-year-olds were a sense of social responsibility and philanthropy. This year, among the sixteen values surveyed, reputation was in 15th place. But fame rose to prominence in 2007 after the launch of programs such as Hannah Montana, followed by the following titles: publicity, popularity, and financial success. The sense of social responsibility dropped to 11th place this year, followed by charitable work to 12th place.
Of course, now, about 15 years after 2007, this issue has become even more prominent. Celebrities seem to have hacked our minds and we no longer have anything of our own. They determine our tastes and sometimes decide for us, which is why our values change in this cycle because they are the ones who guide our views.
According to Timothy Caulfield, a researcher and professor at the University of Alberta, Canada, we are trapped in an eternal cycle fueled by fame and notoriety. This cycle works like this: Reducing social mobility and eliminating life choices leads to growing dreams about the fortunes and fame of celebrities. This, in turn, increases the power and greed of fame, and this increase, perhaps with some sort of decision due to growing narcissism, leads to a focus on external motivations. This focus leads to less happiness and diverts our minds (and the minds of society in general) from activities such as education and advocacy for social change. However, such activities are likely to increase social mobility.
The bottom line is that today we are so surrounded by celebrities that there is no way out. But the fact is that celebrities give us the illusion of knowledge and have come to entertain us. So they should not be taken too seriously. It is better to put them in their proper place and trust our personal and individual tastes and views. We can decide and live without celebrities.