We constantly hear all sorts of clichés about how celebrity culture is destroying the world, as if it were an endemic crisis akin to airborne nits or the melting of the ice caps. Apparently, the monster of celebrity is infiltrating young people’s minds and turning them into vegetative beings, capable of little more than worshipping and copying the people who’ve done nothing to get great rewards. Morally, young people are apparently doomed because they aspire to become the famous-for-nothing sorts who rose to fame off the back of a lot of hype and the right marketing team, lapped up without much display of credible talent.
We want to call bullshit on this. Yes, Google rankings would place reality stars like Harry Styles (made famous through*The X Factor), *Kim Kardashian (propelled to fame after appearing in a leaked sex tape) and Justin Bieber (who started out on YouTube) at the top of our click lists.
But whose to say a lot of these clicks aren’t hate-clicks? And also, just because young people want to read about so-called vacuous celebrities, who’s to say doing so makes them vacuous by proxy?
Finally, it seems, a report is here to back us up on this. According to a recent study done by Brunel and Manchester Universities, taken from interviews and discussions between 24 groups of children aged between 14 and 17, and sites such as Facebook and Twitter, young people have more of a fondness for celebrities who’ve shown work and dedication in their line of work. Emma Watson and Tom Daley were particularly praised for being hard-working, talented and ‘real’.
Dr Heather Mendick the lead researcher from Brunel University, told The Telegraph: ‘There is the idea that young people just want to get rich quick by going on reality TV or becoming a “wag”, but what they want to do is earn money in a way that is worthwhile so that they feel that they deserve the money.’
So why are Kim Kardashian and Justin Bieber, whom those interviewed wrote off as ‘famous for nothing’ so popular? Why do they top our Google rankings so consistently?
Celebrities are just the newest incarnation of the heroes and villains we’ve always followed; whether it be figures in Biblical stories or mythologies
Well, just because they’re popular doesn’t mean we’re necessarily interested in emulating them. Online popularity isn’t actual popularity; it’s not like we’re running up to these stars in the street and begging for their autograph. It can sometimes be a simple curiosity as to see what the fuss is about, or a simple hate-click because we’re trying to work out how a 20-year-old has the time, forearms or imagination to curate a personal collection of ill-informed tattoos.
And, even if we do like a celebrity, it might not be because we want to be like their best bits, but we recognise something of ourselves in their worst bits and they’re up there, on a pedestal, repping us for all our flaws.
Celebrities are just the newest incarnation of the heroes and villains we’ve always followed; whether it be figures in Biblical stories or mythologies. Or, as the report puts it, celebrities have a ‘social function’. The ones we’re most exposed to aren’t necessarily ones we want to copy, but ones we might even learn from through their mistakes.
Plus, let’s remember, there are nuances to even the most vapid of celebrity stories: Justin Bieber isn’t actually untalented when it comes to singing, and Kim Kardashian’s turned the indignity of having a sex tape leaked into a multi-million dollar career. So maybe instead of wondering if we’re destined to follow in their well-heeled footsteps, we could all do better to focus on the positive things celebrities – good and bad – can bring to our lives.
Follow Sophie on Twitter @sophwilkinson
Picture: Rex
This article originally appeared on The Debrief.