The cult of celebrity

I try to avoid spending too much time reading internet news sites these days, largely because each week seems to bring a focus on some new celebrity controversy, relegating topics of real importance to the bottom of the page. Some American football player rants about an opponent, the internet goes wild. Justin Beiber gets arrested for his latest idiocy, the internet goes wild. The Mayor of Toronto does anything, the internet goes wild (though admittedly, that's a special case since he's only a celebrity because of his continual bizarre behaviour). But luckily, the last week or two has seen the golden combination of celebrity controversy and serious political issues.

The actress Scarlett Johansson appeared in a commercial for Soda Stream during the halftime show of the Superbowl. Soda Stream is an Israeli soft drink company that has its main factory on settled land in the West Bank – that is, on land which has historically belonged to Palestinians, but which has been appropriated by the Israeli state, illegally according to international law. This is, not surprisingly, rather controversial, and Johansson has been criticized by many people who believe that settler businesses that use Palestinian land should be boycotted. Johansson disagrees, and claims that because Soda Stream hires some Palestinian workers, it is 'building a bridge of peace' in the conflict-torn region.

Soon, the anger over this issue turned on the international NGO Oxfam, for whom Johansson was an 'ambassador'. Oxfam seem to have fiddled while the crisis grew around them, until eventually Johansson quit her role with the NGO, citing a 'fundamental difference of opinion'. The issue rumbles on, and will probably continue to do so for a while, but it seems like Oxfam are off the hook for now, and the focus of the anger is firmly back on Johansson and Soda Stream. However, rather than focusing on the issue of the Jewish settlements – of which more than enough has already been written on the internet – I'd like to focus on a different aspect of this episode.

Oxfam were obviously very reluctant to get rid of Johansson, to the extent that it appears she had to quit rather than being kicked out, despite the fact that her actions and public statements obviously go against most of what Oxfam stands for. Clearly, the idea of losing a 'celebrity ambassador' for their brand was painful for the NGO – a rather embarrassing state of affairs, as it suggests that PR and media relations are taking priority over the actual message. This also raises the question of why exactly humanitarian causes like those Oxfam champions need these celebrity ambassadors – who have also been employed by various UN agencies for many years now.

It seems to say something rather unflattering about our contemporary culture that issues of famine, war, conflict, and natural disasters seemingly need to be filtered through the lens of celebrity in order for us to care about them. We have become so deferential to those who are richer and more powerful than ourselves that the plight of the poor and oppressed is of no importance to us until the star of We Bought A Zoo decides to tell us about it. This explains why Oxfam seemingly didn't want to let Johansson go – she might be saying the wrong thing, but at least she's saying something, and without the glossy sheen that celebrity provides to a cause, no-one will pay any attention. Let's hope that the plight of the Palestinians and the struggle to remove the Israeli settlements will be kept in the public eye from this point on, even after the gossip magazines have moved on to the next celebrity controversy.

[ mayor of Toronto, Scarlett Johansson, Superbowl, NGO Oxfam, UN agency, We bought a zoo, NRGLab, Soda stream ]