Wednesday, February 21, 2007
"Shut Up And Sing": Why Does It Only Apply To Politics?
Let me start by saying I'm not too wrapped up in the political opinions of celebrities.
I defended the Dixie Chicks because they were the victims of a hate-filled witch hunt over what can only be described as one of the most innocuous political barbs ever directed at a chief executive. Outside of that, I don't put a whole lot of stock in what celebrities say about politics.
I'm sick of Barbra Streisand, I can't stand the rantings of tough-guy assholes like Ted Nugent, and I'm really tired of opportunistic suck-ups like Dennis Miller.
That being said, I'm fascinated by people's impassioned reactions when celebrities on the right or left voice controversial (or not so controversial) political opinions. They might be better-known than most of us, but what is about fame that somehow de-legitimizes an American citizen's right to have an opinion regarding politics?
Which brings me to my point: Why are people almost NEVER so impassioned when a celebrity does a commercial or sells a product they have next to no knowledge of?
No one calls out Tiger Woods for shilling cars for Buick, even though he probably has ZERO knowledge about manufacturing cars. Could he disassemble and reassemble a carburetor by himself? Does he change his own oil? Hell, is he even from Detroit!
So why is there no public outcry against Tiger to just shut up and swing?
Take a look through this list of celebrity endorsements, and you'll see more bizarre pairings than an all-night wedding chapel in Vegas.
Where's the anger?
Why do people want celebrities to avoid political commentary for which they're receiving no compensation, but gladly welcome them to shill products for which they're being handsomely rewarded?
From that perspective, at least their motives are purer when they're not on somebody's payroll...
|
