Tuesday, December 24, 2024

Latest Posts

The Psychology of Celebrity Endorsements for President

Check out the Focus on Marriage Podcast for great insights on building a strong and healthy marriage.

3 Steps You Shouldn’t Ignore For Plump, Jello Skin

I’ve asked my fair share of experts about how to maintain youthful, plump, Jello skin, and these three tips above almost always make...

Always Have Disrupted Sleep? You Could Be Deficient In This Mineral

Don't sleep on this new study. Source link

This All-Too-Common Habit Is Making Your Anxiety Way Worse, Study Says

And messing with your sleep, too. Source link


Unite for America Rally with Vice President Kamala Harris and Oprah Winfrey

Unite for America Rally with Vice President Kamala Harris and Oprah Winfrey

Source: Unite for America Rally with Vice President Kamala Harris and Oprah Winfrey

One of the many psychological puzzles around the final result of the U.S. presidential election, was why, with all the supposed persuasive advantages of celebrity endorsement, this didn’t appear to work effectively for the Democrats.

Kamala Harris’ campaign has been criticised on many fronts, but surely her strategists couldn’t be critiqued for the sheer number of enduringly popular celebrities they managed to get to back her.

Harris appeared to beat Donald Trump roundly on the competition for superstar endorsements. If only celebrities voted, she might have won by a landslide. Stars who endorsed Kamala Harris included Oprah Winfrey, Harrison Ford, Aubrey Plaza, Beyonce, Jennifer Lopez, Julia Roberts, George Clooney, Jon Bon Jovi, Jimmy Kimmel, Will Ferrell, Taylor Swift, Bruce Springsteen, LeBron James, Katy Perry, Will.I.Am, Alec Baldwin, and the list goes on.

Many of these have millions of followers on social media. In contrast, Trump managed to rustle up approvals from a much smaller group including Joe Rogan, the popular podcaster, billionaire Elon Musk, and former wrestler Hulk Hogan.

Traditionally, celebrities endorse all sorts of commercial products in multi-million-dollar advertising campaigns, involving goods as diverse as breakfast cereals to perfumes, fashion houses and jewellery.

One study, published in the Journal of Advertising Research, found that the publicized return of Michael Jordan from retirement added over $1 billion to the market value of the companies whose products were endorsed by the basketball star at the time. Another study, from the Economics Department of the University of Maryland, reported that after Oprah Winfrey selected a particular sorbet, that company’s website received 3 million hits in one week, compared to an average of 175,000 in previous weeks.

Public health campaigners have highlighted how significant it can be for public awareness if a celebrity gets diagnosed with a medical disorder, and then draws attention to it in the press. For example, Betty Ford, the wife of President Gerald Ford, significantly raised breast cancer awareness following her 1974 mastectomy.

In a study published by academic economists at the University of Maryland, statistical analysis allowed the researchers to estimate that Oprah Winfrey’s endorsement of Barack Obama during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary was responsible for approximately 1,000,000 additional votes.

The authors of the study calculate that this suggests that Winfrey’s endorsement was responsible for the difference in the popular vote between Obama and Hillary Clinton. In other words, the additional support that Obama received from Winfrey’s approval explained the gap between him and Clinton. To put it another way, Oprah Winfrey won it for Obama. You could almost say that one person, Winfrey, through sheer force of fame, determined who became the next president.

That study, ‘The Role of Celebrity Endorsements in Politics: Oprah, Obama, and the 2008 Democratic Primary’, pointed out that given the long history of celebrity endorsement in U.S. politics, one might expect it to have a powerful effect. For example, the researchers pointed out that the 1920 presidential campaign of Warren Harding benefited from the endorsement of film stars including Al Jolson, Douglas Fairbanks, and Mary Pickford. In 1960, John F. Kennedy received backing from the famous “Rat Pack” of stars including Sammy Davis Jr and Dean Martin. Warren Beatty was a prominent supporter, and even became a campaign strategist for, George McGovern. And Ronald Reagan enjoyed the patronage of a host of celebrities, including Frank Sinatra.

But while luminary endorsements may reliably help sell products, should politicians bank on the idea that stars can also sell political campaigns? After all, Harris didn’t seem to benefit as much as might have been expected, given how Hollywood came out for her.

In a study due to be published in 2025, researchers examined whether Taylor Swift (who endorsed Harris), and one of the world’s most popular singers, could influence young people’s views on a public policy issue. The study found that when Swift’s name was associated with a policy, respondents were significantly less likely to disagree with it, although the endorsement had minimal impact on increasing outright agreement with the policy. “We expected Swift to show a greater impact,” the researchers are quoted as concluding, suggesting that, as Harris has discovered, celebrity endorsement may not be such a straightforward vote-winner.

Perhaps one way to resolve the conundrum of the varying impact of celebrities on politics is to revisit the key deep truth that Machiavelli (1497-1527) first observed in his foundational guide to power, The Prince: “The answer is, of course, it would be best to be loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved.”

Machiavelli’s timeless advice to a leader 500 years ago was perhaps ignored by Harris, yet apparently embraced by Donald Trump. Voters, particularly at times of crisis, may want a strong leader whom enemies presumably fear. And wjile celebrities may be good at attracting love and affection, they may not be as effective at inspiring fear.

Trump may not have needed as much celebrity endorsemen as, unlike Harris, he was already an extremely famous personality himself. He even built a reputation as a leader who engendered terror in the boardroom through his TV catch phrase, ‘You’re Fired!’

Throughout history populist leaders have enjoyed mass support because they have understood that the electorate often want someone else to be punished for the failures in a society. By supporting an apparent strong man who others seem to fear, the previously weak-feeling voter now begins to feel powerful themselves. This idea is even embedded in a new blockbuster film about to be released. In Wicked, the wizard, played by Jeff Goldblum (who has made anti-Trump and pro-Harris statements offscreen), states lines so important they are heard in the film’s trailer: “The best way to bring folks together is to give them a real good enemy.”



Source link

Latest Posts

Don't Miss