Sunday, April 7, 2013

Media's Effects on Sports


Media’s Effects on Sports

Sporting events generated approximately $10.9 billion in advertising in 2011, and the biggest advertisers made up an astounding 26% of the total spent. The total time sporting events were aired across national television reached 42,500 hours in 2011, a 5% increase from 2010. The increased coverage of sporting events is directly related to the increased amount of money spent on advertisement.

Whenever the financial relationship between two different industries, in this case sports and the media, there is going to exist some complex relationships that will not always be apparent to the viewers. Since sports as a whole are directly influenced by the income generated by the media, the media can, in response, have a very significant impact on the social perception of sports. Since the overall objective of the media is to generate the most income possible, there is some concern as to whether their representation of sports actually mirrors reality, or if the media’s coverage of sports is a construction of their alternative motives.

The media has obviously helped sporting organization in terms of improving their overall coverage, but sports have also lost a good amount of control over their destiny and activities. The tradeoff that sporting organization make is that they lose control of some of the details such as date, time, and the choosing of a venue. The media determines these details based on their economic interests and what will generate the most viewers. Even something as prominent and huge as the World Cup is influenced by media preferences. The tournament now involves more teams and covers a longer time span, which is a direct influence of the relationship between media and sport.

The increased control that the media has had on sports means that they are often in a position to manipulate and dictate the characteristics of sports. Some of the media’s influences include creating new competitions, leagues, and events that they believe with improve their bottom line. Even specific details of the sports itself are manipulated to increase coverage. Rules and playing conditions have often been modified in some way as a direct result of the media. Team uniforms and playing gear have also been adjusted in certain ways to increase popularity. Team equipment, such as baseball bats and the types of balls used for soccer, have also been played around with by the media to see what will generate the most exciting and high scoring games. Viewers are much more likely to watch a sporting event that is high scoring and exciting, and the media has found ways to change the dynamics of certain sports to appeal to the fans.

This is not a revolutionary discovery by the media. Viewers are much more likely to view material that they enjoy and that is consistent with what they enjoyed watching in the past. Arthur Raney, in his article Why We Watch and Enjoy Mediated Sports, opens with an explanation of how viewers seek to avoid material that is not consistent with their beliefs, a phenomenon known as selective exposure. Sporting events are not different in that many viewers are seeking to reconfirm something they have seen in the past that they have enjoyed viewing. It is the media’s belief that it is up to them, and not the sporting organizations themselves, to control the coverage and presentation of sports in a way that appeals to the viewers and fans. One of the main satisfactions that fans get by viewing mediated sporting event is through their support for one team or another. Even if fans may feel negative feelings if they view the team they support lose, they still gain the initial satisfaction of engaging in the excitement and thrill of the game.

Since fans have such an emotional attachment to the thrill of the game, the media has taken it upon them to continue to deliver a spectacle that will have fans returning for chance to replicate the same feelings they experienced in the past. Even the colors and designs of the uniforms can add to the spectacle and drama of the event. New stadiums have been built to involve extensive advertising opportunities. Sports have pretty much evolved into a product that can be manufactured and sold. Sport organizations are on board with this relationship with the media and often make the changes that are requested. English soccer, for example, was once strictly a Saturday afternoon ritual, but a request from television companies for more games to fill their schedules has now made it an almost daily event.

Changes are also often made to improve interest when a sport has been struggling in terms of viewership.  A number of female sports now have the athletes wearing tighter fitting clothing. Rules changes to hockey have been made to speed up the play of the game. Lots of times the schedule of the games are much more fitting for the media than the athletes themselves. It is an interesting dynamic that the very athletes that fans expect to perform at world class levels are compromised in their performance because the fans needs are put before the athlete. 

So the biggest concern is whether or not the media should have such a claim to the fate of sporting events. Overall, the media is attempting to create a spectacle that is more exciting and engaging for the viewer, but whether or not this compromise is good for the sports themselves seem to be questionable. Athletes are some of the most effected by the media’s influence since their needs are often the ones compromised when making these decisions.

Sources

Stead, David. "Chapter 10." Sport and Society: A Student Introduction. London: Sage Publications, 2003. N. pag. Print.

State of the Media: 2011 Year in Sports. N.p.: Nielson, 2012. Print.

Raney, Arthur A., and Jennings Bryant. "Why We Watch and Enjoy Mediated Sports." Handbook of Sports and Media. Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum Associates, 2006. N. pag. Print.

Jim, Whiskey. "The Media and Sports." CBS Sports. N.p., 17th Feb. 2009. Web.

Sexuality in Women's Sports


When we look at sports coverage anymore, we can see a marked difference in the way that men and women are portrayed onscreen. The most significant difference is the overt sexuality that the media tries to plaster on all forms of advertising for women’s sports. This was clearly seen in the coverage of the 2012 London Olympics this past summer. While some people were looking forward to watching the extreme sports spectacle, there were many who were mainly looking forward to the revealing women’s sports outfits and uniforms. In an article from the Daily News, Christina Boyle writes of beach volleyball, “Even the Mayor of London Boris Johnson has embraced the sport, writing in a newspaper editorial that the sight of "semi-naked women" who are "glistening like wet otters" is one of the top 20 reasons the Games are already a resounding success.”
Throughout the games there were a variety of references to sexuality and appearances that competed with actual sports reporting. The Hollywood Reporter even posted a photo gallery called the Superficial Person’s Guide to the Olympics that highlighted the nails on the women in the games as well as their “sexy posteriors” and even went on to objectify the men in the games as well stating, “As statuesque male chests got the once-overs (exhibit A: U.S. swim-team hotties) and female bottoms usurped the attention from their tops, it seems the tables have upended.” It is this kind of reporting that begs the question, what are we really watching sports for? And are people tuning into women’s sports for the game or for the bodies? I think it is safe to say that most of us who do watch women’s sports actually have some interest in the actual game but do advertisers play to that interest?
            When we look at sports advertising we never see women in anything but revealing outfits. An article by the Pittsburgh Post, Sex Sells Sex: Not Women's Sports, highlights one of the most blatant uses of women athletes as sex objects by one of the worst offenders, Sports Illustrated. After Lindsay Vonn won gold in alpine skiing at the Vancouver Winter Olympics, Vonn was given the cover that “Rather than emphasize her singular athletic talent, the magazine depicted Ms. Vonn in a posed phallic photograph, smiling at the camera in her ski regalia backside arched at a 45-degree angle while superimposed over a mountain peak.” The article also goes on to say that marketers and sports journalists “believe that reaffirming traditional notions of femininity and sexuality is a critical sales strategy. This approach, the argument goes, reassures (especially male) fans, corporate sponsors and TV audiences that females can engage in highly competitive sports while retaining a nonthreatening femininity.” The author of this article, Mary Jo Kane, actually went on to conduct a series of focus groups at the University of Minnesota based on gender and age where there were several age groups and both genders represented. They were show photos of female athletes wearing all sorts of clothing ranging from wholesome to soft-core pornography. The results were very straight forward, all audiences were not fans of the sexy pictures of the athletes and were more interested in the ones that showed athletic competence, “both younger and older females, as well as older males, were offended by hypersexualized images. One older male said: "If she [Serena Williams in a sexually provocative pose] were my sister I'd come in, slap the photographer, grab her and leave."
            So does what makes women’s sports attractive, sex or athleticism? Most studies point out sex as the number one reason for women’s sports viewership. This also moves into endorsements as well as the Nielson, “State of the Media: 2011 Year in Sports” reveals when they state that Danica Patrick is among the top five Nascar endorsers, who is most known for her ultra sexy Go Daddy commercials. (9) These commercials are notorious for being barely suitable for broadcast networks when it comes to provocative advertising. When looking at not only the uniforms for women’s sports but the way they are advertised it is clear the type of audience they are looking to bring in. So my last question to you would be is this an ethical way to advertise women’s sports, or should they be more focused on the sport itself? 

Works Cited:

Kane, Mary J. "Sex Sells Sex, Not Women's Sports Yet Sports Coverage Systematically Focuses on the Athletic Exploits of Men and the Sexiness of Women." Pittsburgh Post - GazetteAug 28 2011. ProQuest. Web. 7 Apr. 2013 .

Boyle, Christina. "Olympics 2012: Beach Volleyball Players ‘glistening like Wet Otters’ Says Mayor of London as They Blast Benny Hill Music in Skimpy Uniforms."The Daily News [New York] 21 July 2012: n. pag. Print.

Ginsberh, Merie. "The Superficial Person's Guide to the Olympics." The Hollywood Reporter. N.p., 6 Aug. 2012. Web. 07 Apr. 2013.

"State of the Media: 2011 Year in Sports." Nielson, n.d. Web. 6 Apr. 2013.





Sunday, March 31, 2013

Celebrity Endorsements


Celebrities are always faced with a camera whether it be the paparazzi, a camera crew on a movie set or shooting their next celebrity endorsement deal. Celebrity endorsements have been used by almost any brand you can think of or any brand that you may use on a day-to-day basis. This type of endorsement is unique because it provides consumers with the powerful association of the celebrity to the product or the brand. According to Brand Communications in Fashion Categories Using Celebrity Endorsement by Angela Carroll “For the consumer, the brand functions as a means of identification, reduces search costs, effort and perceived risk, thereby facilitating a shortcut in decision making, and represents a guarantee of quality and reliability”. When a brand takes on a celebrity they generally are looking to use his or her fame and fan base to generate popularity for the brand or the new product of promotion. In addition to generating popularity celebrities also can help create particular images for a brand. These images can help market the product and will stick in the heads of the consumers and become memorable.
Just as the brand benefits from using a celebrity to serve as a positive image and spokesperson for a new product, celebrities also reap the benefits of the endorsement. Carroll writes in Brand Communications in Fashion Categories Using Celebrity Endorsement, “Celebrities can command large fees for celebrity endorsement contracts, making this an attractive and lucrative career dimension. The benefits of using celebrity endorsement to support a brand strategy can include increased attention, image polishing, brand introduction, brand repositioning and the potential to underpin global campaigns”. Celebrities may look to endorse a brand for an additional revenue stream and opportunity to make money beyond their traditional talent avenue. Endorsements are also a good idea for those celebrities struggling after a negative publicity stunt or bad performances. Endorsements strive to put the celebrity in a positive light, which is exactly what a celebrity may need if they are struggling with their image or stuck in a rut or some sort.
Two celebrities who have recently had success landing endorsement deals are Justin Timberlake, and Katie Holmes. Justin is an example of a celebrity who has taken control of his brand and Katie is the first celebrity endorser for a specific brand. Both are memorable celebrities who have positively impacted the brands and products that they represent.
As we have all seen Justin Timberlake has made the ultimate comeback with his newest album, “The 20/20 Experience”. The album according to Nielsen SoundScan sold 968,000 copies in its first week in stores. To promote his new album Timberlake partnered with Target to release an exclusive version of his CD featuring bonus tracks. According to an article, The Timberlake Brand, Carried Along on a Media Storm, in the New York Times,Mr. Timberlake was in commercials for Bud Light Platinum and Target, and made a breathlessly promoted appearance at the Grammy Awards. ITunes streamed the album before its release, stoking huge advance sales. Then there were his performances around the Super Bowl and South by Southwest, his fifth time hosting “Saturday Night Live” and a full week as a guest on “Late Night With Jimmy Fallon” (New York Times). As an entertainer who has been in the industry for many years Timberlake really knows what he is doing when it comes to his brand and promoting others.
In his partnership with Target he released an exclusive version of his CD with two bonus tracks. Not only did this draw the attention of his loyal fans to buy his CD at Target but it brought in much revenue for him as well. By encouraging people to buy his CD from target he is bringing in more revenue than those entertainers primarily selling music on iTunes and online. 
What is truly unique about Timberlake and his recent promotions is that he was appointed creative director at Bud Light Platinum to direct a new, classy black and white advertisement. According to Mashable, “The ad, which broke during the Grammys Sunday night, is the first to feature J.T. in his new role as Bud Light Platinum's creative director. That appointment came about a week after BlackBerry made Alicia Keys its creative director. Apparently, you can't be in with the kids these days unless you have a pop star calling the shots for your marketing” (Mashable). Although not all celebrities have the luxury of controlling their brand as Timberlake does, they certainly strive to be as successful as him.
A second celebrity who has become a familiar face for a brand is Katie Holmes partnering with Bobbi Brown cosmetics. According to multiple sources he actress signed a deal back in September 2012 with the cosmetic brand and will be the first celebrity face for Bobbi Brown Cosmetics. According to the New York Daily News, “Holmes, who’s been in the media’s spotlight since her high-profile split from actor Tom Cruise this summer, says she’s excited to work with the 21-year-old brand”. The actress must be excited to do something that makes new headlines and gets the attention off her recent headline-making divorce. As the first celebrity face for Bobbi Brown Cosmetics Katie Holmes will not be compared to any past celebrity endorsements for the brand, which is favorable for her. Her past fan base from Dawson’s Creek is sure to look into purchasing the cosmetics Holmes models in recent advertisements, which is always a plus for the brand. “The actress looks so effortlessly flawless that she definitely has us considering reaching for the Long-Wear Even Finish Compact Foundation she wears in the campaign”, E-Online writes about how easily the actress can persuade any to buy Bobbi Brown cosmetic products.
            Holmes made a smart business move by accepting a partnership with Bobbi Brown cosmetics in a new industry she has never been involved with before. Her timeless beauty helps the cosmetic company as well as markets herself as a happily divorced celebrity not afraid to take risks and take on new projects.
Both Justin Timberlake and Katie Holmes have used their fame and fortune to bring them even more fortune for their careers. Bud Light Platinum, Target and Bobbi Brown Cosmetics utilized the popularity of these two celebrities to increase the reputation of their own brand. Consumers will now associate the brand with the celebrity and continue to make that association for quite some time. We have gotten so used to viewing celebrities in the headlines for their entertainment success and now for endorsement deals. I don’t think there will ever come a time that we, as consumers, will encounter an advertisement or product that is celebrity free. What do you think? 

Works Cited
Carroll, Angela. "Brand Communications in Fashion Categories Using Celebrity Endorsement." Journal of Brand Management. N.p., 12 Sept. 2008. Web. 25 Mar. 2013.
Curiel, Rosie. "Katie Holmes' First Bobbi Brown Ad Revealed—See the Pretty Pic!" E! Online. E! Online, 19 Feb. 2013. Web. 27 Mar. 2013.
Murray, Rheana. "Katie Holmes Signs on to Be Face of Bobbi Brown Cosmetics, Makes First Public Appearance since Tom Cruise Split." NY Daily News. NY Daily News, 6 Sept. 2012. Web. 27 Mar. 2013.
Sisario, Ben. "Justin Timberlake’s ‘20/20 Experience’ Album." The New York Times. The New York Times, 28 Mar. 2013. Web. 29 Mar. 2013.
Wasserman, Todd. "Watch Justin Timberlake's First Ad for Bud Light." Mashable. Mashable, 11 Feb. 2013. Web. 26 Mar. 2013.

Paparazzi and Privacy

Raquel Doering



Celebrities are in the public eye and subject to gossip.  As a society, we enjoy learning about this gossip, thus creating an industry for the paparazzi and tabloid media.  While celebrities choose to put themselves in the public eye much more than the average person, sometimes the actions of the paparazzi are overwhelming and may invade the decreased amount of privacy a celebrity enjoys.  As a result, anti-paparazzi statutes are being created to offer celebrities more privacy and safety.

According to P. David Marshall’s “The Promotion and Presentation of the Self,” celebrity gossip functions as an “explanation of personality that went beyond [celebrities’] onscreen personae” because celebrities were revealing part of their private lives “to heighten the connection to an audience” (Marshall 428).  In other words, through celebrity gossip, celebrities became more relatable to the general public.  Also, celebrity gossip produces social order “through its representations of the problems and unhappiness of the rich and famous” (428) and can actually be considered “an extension of the uses of gossip in a community as a form of social control” (429).  Do you feel celebrity gossip makes celebrities more relatable?  Does society need this gossip?

Because of our societies interest in and dependence on celebrity gossip, “celebrities are under constant and regular surveillance” and thus their more mundane and personal activities are “the subject of a gaze” (Marshall 430).  The “gaze” that is provided by the paparazzi and distributed to various tabloid media “makes [celebrities’] often everyday activities a performance” (430).

The paparazzi have become extremely competitive and hence, can be overly invasive in their competition for the best footage or photograph of a celebrity.  According Lauren Effron’s “9 Memorable Celeb vs. Paparazzi Clashes,” we have witnessed nine recent “memorable clashes” between the paparazzi and celebrities.  Some incidents, such as the shaving of Britney Spear’s head, are unavoidable by the paparazzi (Effron).  However, there are incidents in which celebrities truly felt that their right to privacy was invaded and even felt threatened by the paparazzi. For incidence, when Kate Middleton’s topless pictures appeared in a French magazine, the royal family referred to the incident as "reminiscent of the worst excesses of the press and paparazzi” since the death of Princess Diana (Effron).  Furthermore, Justin Bieber made a 911 call for help and protection from the paparazzi after engaging in a car chase with the paparazzi to try to escape their intrusion (Effron).  What is your opinion of such incidents?

According to William J Seiter’s “A Celebrity’s Map to Right of Privacy, Publicity, and Trademark in the United States,” California was the first state to enact an anti-paparazzi statute in response to Princess Diana’s death and celebrity anger “over the reckless and obnoxious tactics of overaggressive photojournalists” (Seiter).  The statue specifically exempted a publisher from being held liable for “publishing an image it obtained from a paparazzi, as long as the publisher did not direct the violation” (Seiter).  However, the new anti-paparazzi law, signed by Arnold Schwarzenegger and effective as of 2010 (Seiter), allows celebrities to “sue tabloids, televisions, and other media outlets who pay for and use material they know was improperly obtained in violation of a person’s right of privacy” (Seiter).

Paul Raef, the paparazzo involved with Justin Bieber’s car chase, was the first to be charged under the 2010 California anti-paparazzi statue, according to Julie Hilden’s “Can California’s Anti-Paparazzi Statue Survive a First Amendment Challenge?” (Hilden).  The statute attempts to stop the paparazzi from dangerous car chases in which they follow celebrities (Hilden).  The statue makes it a misdemeanor for a paparazzo to interfere with a drive, to follow a car too closely, and to drive recklessly “with the intent to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of another person for a commercial purpose….” (Hilden).  If a paparazzo is found guilty of this misdemeanor s/he can be sentenced to six months in jail and fined up to $2,500 (Hilden).

A trial court, asserting that the statute violated the first Amendment, dismissed the charges against Raef.  The California appellate court directed the trial judge to reconsider his ruling; however, the trial judge stood by his ruling.  The issue will now return to the appellate court for a full appeal (Hilden).  Do you think such anti-paparazzi statues are in accordance with or in violation of the First Amendment?

Thus, our society’s need for celebrity gossip has allowed the paparazzi and tabloid industries to flourish.  Because paparazzi are always in competition for the best footage or photographs of celebrities, their methods of collection can be slightly over-invasive to celebrities’ rights to privacy.  Some areas, such as California, are attempting to offer celebrities more protection against paparazzi with anti-paparazzi statues.  However, such statues are still in debate as to whether they are in accordance with or in violation of the First Amendment.


Works Cited

Effron, Lauren. “9 Memorable Celeb vs. Paparazzi Clashes.” abcNEWS. ABC News Internet Ventures, 18 Sept. 2012. Web 30 Mar. 2013.

Hilden, Julie. “Can California’s Anti-Paparazzi Statue Survive a First Amendment Challenge?” Verdict. Justia, 4 Mar. 2013. Web. 30 Mar. 2013.

Marshall, David P. “The Promotion and Presentation of the Self: Celebrity as Marker of Presentational Media.” Celebrity Studies. Routledge, Jan. 2010. Web. 30 Mar. 2013.

Seiter, William J. “A Celebrity’s Map to Rights of Privacy, Publicity, and Trademark in the United States.” The IP Litigaor, 16.6 (Nov/Dec 2010): 14-22. ProQuest. 30 Mar. 2013.

Reality TV Relationships with the Paparazzi


The celebrity-paparazzi relationship has always been questionable. Yes, it must be difficult to live your life under a public microscope and have millions of cameras zooming in on you at all times, however, I question if some celebrities expose too much of their personal life, inviting this constant scrutiny and attention? 
Celebrity reality TV shows have become extremely popular over the last few years. Celebrities claim they want to have an open relationship with their fans and allow them to see all aspects of their lives. Some of the most recent celebrity reality TV shows include: The Real Housewives, and all of their many seasons, Snooki and Jwow, Jon and Kate plus 8, later known as Kate plus 8, and of course, the infamous, Keeping Up with the Kardashians. The “celebrities” in these shows aim to act as they do in their everyday lives, pretending the camera is not even there. However, one of the first problems P. David Marshall discusses in his chapter, The Promotion and Presentation of the Self,” regarding the celebrity lifestyle, is the fact that they strive to lead a normal life, but often do not succeed. David states, “The gaze provided by the paparazzi and distributed to magazines, television programmes and on-line sites makes their often everyday activities a kind of performance to be read further” (Marshall, 430). He then dissects a study done by Erving Goffman, that examined the presentation of the self in a social setting. Goffman claims, “performance of the self is a conscious act of the individual and requires careful staging to maintain the self - a composed and norm-driven construction of character and performance” (Goffman 1959, cited in Marshall, 431). What do you think? Can you see the truth behind this “staging” in current celebrity reality TV shows?
One A-lister who is stepping forward to defend the claim that her families reality TV show is fake and scripted, is Kris Jenner, the matriarch of the Kardashian clan. Chloe Melas reflects on Kris Jenner’s appearance on The View, where she repeatedly denied any accusations of her families show being staged. In Chloe’s article,“Kris Jenner On ‘The View’: ‘Keeping Up With The Kardashians’ Isn’t Fake,” she recalls that anytime Kris was asked about certain scenes being staged or scripted, she firmly stated, “No Way!” (Melas). Kris also stated, “there is no chance any of this is scripted because there’s too much going on all the time to make this all up!” (Melas).  
So, if their show isnt’t fake, and all of the crazy and dramatic antics that happen inside of the Kardashian household aren’t all grand performances, then why all of the cries for help when the paparazzi come running to continue the exclusive look into their personal lives? Kim Kardashian has frequently blamed the fame and the paparazzi for her failed relationships. In an article, “Kim Kardashian blames paparazzi for ruining relationship with ex-boyfriend Reggie Bush,” the author, Samantha Greaves, remembers one particular episode of KUWTK, when Kim explained to her friend that the paparazzi constantly snapping photos of her and Reggie together and always following her around proved to be too much for Reggie who was much more reserved (Greaves).
Another celebrity who has suffered severe attention from the paparazzi, is Kate Gosselin, the mother of the famous twins and sextuplets. Kate has also been quoted standing up for her reality TV show, stating it is as real as it gets. Then why, if she is so willing to allow cameras to follow her and her family on a day to day basis, does she get so irritated when the paparazzi come to do the same thing? In a recent article by The Huffington Post, Kate is quoted, stating, “If I could minus that part it would be the best thing ever. And I will tell you why -- they are only harmful” (The Huffington Post). She continued to say, “They never post the truth so how is that helpful to me?” (The Huffington Post).
How do you feel when celebrities that have their own reality TV shows, claim the paparazzi is too invasive? Do you feel sympathetic for them having to deal with cameras that they haven’t signed up for, following them around all of the time, or do you feel that in some way, by creating and allowing their lives to be open to the public via a TV show, they know paparazzi are part of this deal?

Goffman, E., 1959. The presentation of self in everyday life. New York, Doubleday.

Greaves, Samantha. “Kim Kardashian blames paparazzi for ruining relationship with ex-

boyfriend Reggie Bush.” Examiner.com. 2 August 2010. Web. http://



Marshall, David P., “The Promotion and Presentation of Self: Celebrity as Marker of 

Presentational Media,” in The Media Studies Reader, Laurie Ouelette, ed. (New 

York: Routledge, 2012), 427 - 438. 

Melas, Chloe. “Kris Jenner On ‘The View’: Keeping Up With The Kardashians’ Isn’t 

Fake.“ Hollywood Life. 7 February 2013. Web. http://hollywoodlife.com/



Unknown. “Kate Gosselin Won’t Miss ‘Kate Plus 8’ Fame.” The Huffington Post. 19 


Saturday, March 30, 2013

What Do Celebrities Promote through Social Media?



Celebrities and media have always had a love-hate relationship. Since 2004, there have been various social media sites that have become the channel where social and friendship circles have flourished (Marshall, 430). Facebook has made connections to all demographic groups and Twitter has made a different type of connection through short messaging and linking to other sites, becoming much more mobile (Marshall, 430). These social networking sites are a form of media and communication (Marshall, 430). Self-production is at the very core of celebrity activity (Marshall, 430). How one presents themselves online now is very important.
            Performance is a critical part to a celebrities’ identity and reputation. How they perform, depending on what type of artist they are, is what gets watched every day.  Celebrities have to make their real life image on-line so fans can connect with them. Many celebrities go on Facebook and Twitter to reveal parts of their private life and professional life. These celebrities realize they have to put on a certain performance when they make these online profiles, they have to make sure they are appealing to the fans. Once fans see celebrities who are sharing more intimate parts of their lives they will gain more respect for these celebrities and become loyal followers. Most celebrities realize they need to be smart about how they portray themselves in the on-line world. Do you think most celebrities represent themselves well on social media or do they need to work on their online image?
            Famous people mention fans on Twitter to perform connection and availability, give back to loyal followers and manage their popularity (Marwick, 145). Fans gravitate towards stars that are authentic (Markovitz, 1). Why do you think this is so important? Once celebrities gain the fans trust then they know they can rely on the fans for support when they need to promote himself or herself or a special cause.
            Alice Marwick and Danah Boyd discuss in “Celebrity Practice on Twitter”, that independent self-promotion is not done by real superstars (155). They said the ones who turn to social media to create and maintain a fan base are up-and-coming bands, fans organizing renewal campaigns for TV programs, and publishing houses urging authors to reach out (Marwick, 155). I don’t know if I agree with them completely but I do agree that musicians seem to dominate on social media. In the article I  found, "A Look at How Celebrities Are Using Social Media”, it talked about how social media has opened a gateway for music lovers and bands. The top celebrity list in social media is ruled by singers (1). Social media has given smaller bands a larger potential audience than they would have had, as well as given well-known bands more control over their music and content (1).
            I found it very interesting that musicians and TV stars are much more likely to self promote then movie actors (Markovitz, 1). Apparently this is because often movie actors are bound to secrecy by a contract, which makes perfect sense. Markovitz also said movie actors don’t like to post too much about their work because they don’t want to be known for just that one role, which again makes complete sense, because as an actor you would like to be playing multiple roles and various parts. Tom Hanks, is however one actor that does have a Twitter and he stated, “ I am more active when I have something to promote” (Markovitz, 1). This is a great example that shows celebrities use social media for self-promotion.
            Another reason why celebrities are on social media is to promote social causes to their audience. Celebrities who are passionate about their cause are often highly successful in spreading awareness. I personally think this is a positive way for celebrities to take advantage of their fame. Their high status will allow their voices to be heard over ordinary people. The New York Times published an article this month that was specifically about celebrities helping Unicef. The Unicef Tap Project is using social media to raise funds for clean water for children worldwide. Once celebrities started to join the cause, the campaign began expanding quite rapidly. This year’s campaign, which only started last week, will be heavily promoted through March until the end of April.
            The numerous celebrities who are promoting this campaign are; Unicef ambassadors, Angie Harmon, Alyssa Milano and Marcus Samuelsson, as well as Heidi Klum, Nas, Judd Apatow, Kristen Bell, Jeff Bridges, Common, Kat Graham, Bridgit Mendler, Seth Rogen, Emmy Rossum, Kevin Spacey, Sting and Kate Walsh all are starting their own water networks or posting on Twitter about the campaign (Levere). Their efforts will be visible on the campaign’s Facebook page through a graphic that illustrates the web of their activity; these also will be promoted on the celebrities’ own Facebook pages or Twitter feeds (Levere). Caryl Stern, president and chief executive of the U.S. Fund for Unicef, said “each celebrity will open up a tap on his or her social media site and encourage friends, followers and fans to keep the water flowing by making a $5 contribution” (Levere). Celebrities are so important for this campaign because they have an influence over millions of followers and friends on their social media sites.
            Social media has allowed celebrities to promote not only their movies, music, books, and TV shows but also their social causes. Platforms such as Facebook and Twitter are a great way to reach out to as many people as possible. These platforms are the best way for celebrities to self promote and promote their causes. I think many celebrities realize how powerful social media and the followers are to the success of their careers. I feel celebrities will continue to use these platforms where most of their fans are or bring fans to their own websites where they can form a whole new idea of social interaction.


Works Cited


"A Look at How Celebrities Are Using Social Media." NextBigWhat.com. N.p., 2012. Web. 30 Mar. 2013. <http://www.nextbigwhat.com/how-celebrities-are-using-social-media-297/>.

Levere, Jane. "Celebrities Help Unicef Turn On "Taps" for Clean Water." NYT.com. New York Times, 11 Mar. 2013. Web. <http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/business/media/celebrities-help-unicef-turn-on-taps-for-clean-water.html?_r=0>.

Markovitz, Adam. "Hollywood's Twitter Jitters." EW.com. N.p., 07 Dec. 2012. Web. 30 Mar. 2013. <http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20471622_20654357,00.html>.

Marshall, David P., “The Promotion and Presentation of Self: Celebrity as Marker of Presentational Media,” in The Media Studies Reader, Laurie Ouelette, ed. (New York: Routledge, 2012), 427 - 438. 

Marwick, Alice and Danah Boyd, “To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter,” Convergence 17.2 (2011): 139 – 158.