Celebrity for a Cause

This week, Bono spoke at the Tory or Conservative Party conference in the U.K. The opinion article, entitled, "Why do politicians--including sadly, the Tories this week--fawn over Bono, a smug hypocritical, whining, tax dodging mounteback?" is rather humorous as Quentin Letts questions Bono's record number of public appearances and his peculiar involvement in political life. Over the years, it seems as though Bono has mastered the ability to skillfully maneuver the complications of partisan politics and put himself into good graces of George W. Bush, Obama, Nelson Mandela, Tony Blair...

Aside from absolutely taunting Bono and his political activism, the article brings up an interesting point. Celebrity endorsements are usually constructed with the desire to sell something. However, do these powerful political figures really need Bono as a selling point? Does Bono put himself in the spotlight to promote himself and his own music? Two years ago, Bono was one of the stars who worked to promote the RED campaign.

This brings about another dimension of celebrity endorsements. Yes, celebrities offer a face to a cause, whether it be political or philanthropic, but does it bring a great deal of rewards to the celebrity as well? Many celebrities are well known for the causes they promote. According to a BRANDWEEK survey, individuals were able to most easily recall Lance Armstrong's battle with cancer and his LiveStrong campaign, while others were familiar with the works of Brangelina. Brad Pitt helped rebuild after Hurricane Katrina, while Angelina Jolie is well known for her work with UNICEF. Other top celebrity causes include: Tiger Woods (The Tiger Woods Learning Center/Foundation), Bill Gates (for various causes), Al Gore (global warming), George Clooney (Darfur), Michael J. Fox (Parkinson's disease) and Peyton Manning (PeyBack Foundation).

I think that celebrity associations with causes are almost as common as celebrity presence in ads. In fact, the other day, I just saw Gwyneth Paltrow in a public service announcement, in which she calls upon viewers to volunteer in their community. In the ad, Paltrow says, "The biggest blessing in life is to realise your personal power. Community work brings families closer together. Doing good for others, doing positive action always comes back around and enriches your life. It's the biggest gift you could give yourself. Please join us in volunteering."

What does this all mean? I think that if the celebrity is promoting a good cause, then they automatically reap the benefits of possessing an image as a philanthropist (ie. Brangelina), but this might backfire as this is a rather transparent approach (which may have evoked such criticism of Bono in the opinion piece). It seems as though most people agree with this: 68.8% would only commit to the cause if the celebrity had been personally affected by the cause they were promoting. This must mean that celebrities endorsements for causes certainly help their image, but only to a certain point. That's right celebrities, we know what you're up to!