Published articles:

Lydia Palacios Looks Back on 33 Years with ASI

CSUF’s ASI Wins Best in Show at Annual ‘Steal This Idea’ Contest

Future Marketers Get Hands-On Experience at ASI’s Marketing, Communications, and Design Department

Op-Ed assignment from Communications 462 - PR Writing 2:

Celebrity Political Endorsements - Parasocial or Beneficial? 

Taylor Swift got over 300,000 American’s to register to vote with one Instagram post—should we be paying attention to this? For over a century, American celebrities have inserted themselves into the political sphere, aligning their power and influence with presidential candidates and social movements. From the 1920 front porch campaigns to today’s digital age of TikTok, politics and fame continue to intertwine. As much as celebrity endorsements can serve as a double-edged sword, their influence is undeniable. While it's true that these endorsements may contribute to unhealthy parasocial relationships, the positive impact they generate, particularly in mobilizing voters and raising awareness, makes the trade-off worth it.

Historically, celebrity endorsements have functioned as high-profile lobbying efforts. Back in the 1920 election, silent film star Mary Pickford was among the first to endorse a candidate. She did so for Warren G. Harding, attending campaign rallies and encouraging her fans to vote for him. This endorsement, and the many that have followed suit, tap into the powerful emotional bonds that fans form with their favorite public figures—bonds that can literally sway elections or public opinion. 

The reach of these celebrities can be hard to understand sometimes. Take Taylor Swift, for example. After she publicly endorsed Kamala Harris and posted a link for voter registration, more than 337,000 people clicked through to register. Swift's reach, magnified by her social media platforms, enabled her to mobilize a significant portion of her fanbase in just one day. These impressive numbers underscore a critical reality: celebrities have the ability to bring people into the political fold who may not otherwise participate. 

However, this influence raises important ethical questions. Do celebrities have an obligation to endorse a political candidate simply because they can sway opinions? Or does this sway render their endorsements inherently unethical, as it risks coercing their audience into following them blindly? It’s a tricky question. On one hand, celebrities have the platform and privilege to bring attention to critical issues. On the other, the possibility of creating an echo chamber, where fans adopt their political views uncritically, remains an ever-present risk.

Chappell Roan, a rising music star, recently entered the political conversation when she shared her voting plans, stating that she supports Kamala Harris. However, Roan emphasized that she didn't feel pressured to choose a particular side and encouraged people to do their own research, acknowledging that no candidate is perfect. Roan’s statement highlights a more nuanced approach to celebrity political endorsements—one that encourages personal accountability among fans rather than blind allegiance. Celebrities like Roan offer a model for how to approach political engagement without turning their influence into a vehicle for coercion.

Nevertheless, there’s no denying that celebrity involvement in politics can contribute to the rise of unhealthy parasocial relationships. Parasocial interactions—where fans feel a one-sided connection with public figures—can blur the lines between admiration and personal identification. This dynamic often extends to political endorsements, where fans may equate their favorite celebrity’s political beliefs with their own, regardless of whether those beliefs align with their personal values or political understanding.

Despite these risks, it’s difficult to argue that celebrity endorsements are inherently harmful. In fact, their impact on voter registration and political discourse is often a net positive. Celebrities provide a gateway to engagement, particularly for younger voters who might feel disconnected from the political process. For instance, Charlie XCX posting on X, 'Kamala is a brat,' caused Kamala Harris to trend in a new way, potentially reaching an audience that might not have cared much about politics before.

The key to managing this influence lies in promoting a culture of critical thinking and individual research, much like Chappell Roan suggests. It’s vital for fans to recognize that while their favorite celebrities may offer insight or raise awareness, they are not exempt from spreading misinformation, or potentially having a harmful opinion. 

Celebrity political endorsements are far from perfect, but they provide undeniable benefits in terms of voter mobilization and raising awareness on key issues. I believe that by encouraging critical thinking and the power of research as a society, celebrities can play a valuable and healthy role in shaping the political landscape for the better.