When Two Worlds Collide

Though the two worlds of entertainment and politics orbit around different issues and are inhabited by people who are structured somewhat differently, they always tend to meet and intermingle one way or another. Politicians have long been fascinated by leading ladies of the silver screen that made for some great stories of what happens when these two worlds collide.

We escape into the world of entertainment when we have had enough of being lost in the twisted maze of politics, but where do we go when we find the two becoming one? Whilst in the past celebrity lives were mostly mysterious to those outside their world, nowadays all thanks to tabloids and social networks, that mystery has been laid to rest.

Contrary to what many celebrity publicists will have you believe, celebrities are indeed human beings. Some of them with political and social concerns have chosen to break their silence and take up activism to fight for what they believe is sacred. But this freedom of expression comes at a price.

When a celebrity rallies for a cause they are at risk of losing fans, for you might very well love the celebrity but loathe their political position. Here lies the great sacrifice famous people have to face, to forgo their social responsibility knowing full well that they have a great platform from which they can be heard, or forever hold their peace in fear of losing the fame and money they worked so hard to attain.

During the uprising in Egypt the then-famous Egyptian singer Tamer Hosny was ostracised from Tahrir Square by the revolutionaries because they recalled that at the onset of the rallies he was sent by the government to advise them to go home. Hosny’s political position reduced the voice of Egypt’s young generation, who packed stages across the country, to a YouTube clip of the young man crying after being humiliated by the people of the revolution.

Meanwhile, as the Libyan people fought to regain control of their destiny it was revealed that both American singers Nelly and Beyoncé have been paid millions of dollars to appear for one of Saif Al Islam Gaddafi’s birthday bashes. Knowing full well what kind of reaction this political connection might have on their image, both singers stated that they have nothing to do with the dictator’s money and gave it back to the Libyan people.

Recently, the Belgian singer Lara Fabian, who was scheduled to sing in Lebanon for this year’s Valentine’s Day concert, had to withdraw due to an outcry by the Campaign to Boycott Supporters of Israel in Lebanon, because of pro-Israeli comments she had made.

The American actor Mel Gibson and Christian Dior’s once token designer John Galliano have both felt the wrath of the fans when both were caught voicing anti-Jewish comments. The former has had a hard time getting any of his work produced in Hollywood and the latter was immediately fired from his prestigious position at the House of Dior.

This backlash by fans over celebrities’ political backgrounds is not reserved only for actors and singers but applies to sports figures as well. During the height of the protests in Bahrain football players, who chose to partake in the rallies, have been named and shamed on Bahrain’s local television station, some even withdrew from the league as a result.

A work of art should be judged independently from its artist. Would a painting be as magnificent if we judged the hands that held the brush? Would a love poem be as passionate if we had preconceived notions that its writer was in fact cold and distant?

Most of us fail to see this distinction.

We must realise that diverse worlds such as these exist in a grey universe, where the colours black and white are forever blended. The inhabitants of each must know that stepping out of their territories could bring with it risks they might not be willing to take.

In the political world your views and moral standings are aimed at propelling you into the heights of your cause, but in the world of entertainment they could form the noose that would wrap around your neck. The choice is theirs to make but they do not pay the price alone, it is also paid by the people who once appreciated the art within them and now can no longer see it.

This article was first published in The Gulf Today newspaper on 29th Jan. 2012

Too much Twitter

A few days ago I posted this statement on my Twitter account: 

“Most used term this year, social media. I’ve about had it! And yes I realise the irony of tweeting this statement so don’t even.” 

We have been reading about the social media ever since its inception but after it has somehow been given all credit for the revolutions happening in the Middle East, social media has become the subject of the year. Endless debates and analyses of websites such as Facebook and Twitter’s role in the Arab revolutions flooded the region drowning other important elements in its wake, hence my Twitter outburst.

Yes, the social media sites have aided in exposing parts of the revolution that governments tried relentlessly to keep hidden and a Facebook page might have set a revolution in motion, but those were nothing but tools used in the building of a national dream. 

Believe it or not revolutions did take place prior to Facebook. 

In 1952 Egypt there was no ‘Free Officer’s Movement’s’ Facebook page calling to overthrow the British backed monarchy. Gandhi’s non-cooperative movement did not ‘tweet’ about its struggle with ending the British rule in India. Neither Castro nor Guevara uploaded videos of their forest march to Cuba onto Youtube and although there was no live-stream of Martin Luther King Jr. from the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, the entire world still heard his dream. 

Throughout history revolutions did take place and ruthless governments have been overthrown. So before we go overboard in giving credit to the social media we should evaluate what it really did for today’s revolutions. 

Social media sites did not create these revolutions they merely advertised them, in the same way pamphlets and underground newsletters did in the past. They are a medium, granted they have a wider reach, but they are a medium nonetheless. Credit for the revolutions must always be given to the people and the people alone, they are whom we need to be debating and analysing in this case not Zuckerburg’s Facebook and Dorsey’s Twitter.

The exaggerated attention given to social media sites has resulted in an infatuation that has led users to believing that their existence on them is more important than their existence in the real world.

A social media site is designed to make you believe that the more followers you have the more important you ought to be. Therefore, the more followers you have the higher the need becomes to retain them. Every user is given the opportunity to become a critic and many have seized it.

Some users act like politicians running for the Twitter presidency, addressing certain sections of the world, hashtagging, re-tweeting and monitoring fluctuations in their followers’ numbers. Contrary to what our Twitter users/politicians believe the reality of social media remains that you gain followers and you lose them. You really do not need to be developing alter egos to better suit your cyber world persona. It’s not science, it’s Twitter.

To our social media addicts I pose a question: “If a tree falls outside of Twitter, does it make a sound?” 

If you took time mulling this question over then, in the immortal words of Tyra Banks, congratulations you are in the running to becoming Twitter’s next top user. 

Indeed the numbers might be pointing towards a life lived solely through the social media but statistics do not always reflect the ways of the world. There are indeed millions using these sites but there are billions of people walking this earth who are not. Of the many activists that have taken to Twitter and Facebook during the Middle Eastern revolutions hundreds have died on the streets with no social media account to their names. 

The question is are we being led to believe that if some people choose not to be on such websites that we should neglect their actual existence? 

If they are writers do we not read their works? If they are politicians do we not hear their views?  If they are activists do we not pay attention to their cause? Do we leave them behind while we set sail on our fancy boat of modernity, christened ‘Social Media’?

The term social media is in fact an oxymoron for there is nothing social about this media. There is nothing socially satisfying about tweeting to no one in particular. It is not a revolution, it is just a way for us to vent out and hope that someone in the cyber world is listening to what no one in our real world actually wants to.

This article was published in The Gulf Today newspaper on 12th June, 2011.