RESEARCHARTICLE - PDF document

RESEARCHARTICLE‘‘Ifeelyourpain’’:cosmopolitancharityandthepublicfashioningofthecelebritysoulJoLittler*MediaandCulturalStudies,MiddlesexUniversity,London,UK(Received1November2007;Þnalversionreceived5January2008)Offeringsupportforglobalcharitieshasbecomepracticallypartofthe Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 Theseven-pagespreadintheOctober2007UKissueofwomen’smagazineClaire,fromwhichtheabovequoteistaken,openswithaclose-upofAngelinaJolie’sfacelookingatus,lifesizeandinglossycolour.Itisalookofquasi-flirtatiousintimacy,oneyoumightgivethoseyouwanttobeclosetoyouwhich,inJolie’scase,is.TheconfessionalandintimatenatureoftheinterviewwiththeHollywoodactressisemphasisedbythearticle’stitle,‘‘Angelinafromtheheart’’.Throughlookandlanguage,themagazineispromisingthatthedistancebetweenusandthestarwillshrinkthroughsheeremotionalaccess.Itclaimsthatthedistancebetweenusandthesuperstarcanbeforeshortenedthroughthemagazine’smediationofconfessionalcelebrityintimacy.WhatpartlysignifiesAngelinaJolie’s‘‘heartfelt’’intimacyinthisarticle,alongsideherattitudetohercareerandfeelingsforherpartner,isherrelationshiptoherhumanitarianandcharitywork,ortowhatmightbecalled‘‘celebritydo-gooding’’.Therolesofcharity-giverandhumanitarianarenotjustpresentedasseparateoradd-onroles,butasprofoundlyinterwovenwiththerolesofmother,carer,actressandcelebrity,asimbricatedintothestoryofherlife.Humanitarianactsarealsoassociatedwithanewmaturityofcharacter,andherinvestmentinthemismadepartofherstoryofextremes:ofher‘‘journeysofar’’from‘‘Hollywoodhellraisertohumanitarianaidworkeranddotingmotheroffour’’.‘‘Do-gooding’’becomesbothafacetofherimageoneofarangeofAngelinaJolie’s‘‘real-liferoles’’thatcanbediscussed.Thespecifictypeofcharityandhumanitarianworkissignificantheretoo.Itstransnationalismindicatesaglobalisedsensibilityandacosmopolitancaring,aneffectaugmentedbyJolie’shigh-profileBenetton-styleadoptionofarangeofdifferentlyshadedchildrenfromavarietyofcountries.Andherengagementwithpoliticallysensitivesubjectssuchasrefugees,environmentalismandDarfurmarksherasaverymodernbreedofAmericanliberal.JolieisnottheonlycelebritytotalkaboutcharityinthisissueofMarieClairemagazinewellknownforitsglossyliberalcosmopolitanismandforitsmixtureofhigh-endfashionandbeautyalongsideeducationalarticlesaboutglobalfemaleempowermentand‘‘other’’cultures(seeGough-Yates2003,118131).TheOctoberissueofthemagazinealsofeaturesanarticleaboutactressScarlettJohanssen’stripwiththecharityOxfamtoIndiaandSriLanka(Johanssencanalsobeseen,earlierinthemagazine,reclininginanorangemini-dressadvertisingLouisVuittonbags).TheJohanssenarticleispresentedastravelogue:alargepartisdevotedtotheactress’sreactionstoseeingOxfam’spost-tsunamicommunityworkwithwomeninSriLankaandeducationalprojectsinIndianslumsandanequallylargepartisdevotedtocoveringhowthestar‘‘looksamazingthroughoutthetripherpale,clearskinglowingasiflitfromwithin’’(Garrett2007,205).Theseexamplesinthemselvesindicatesomethingofthedifferentformsofconnectionthatcanexistbetweencelebritymediacoverageandcharitablecauses.WhereastheJoliearticleisaninstanceinwhichcharityworkisbutacomponentofanarrativeabouttheactress’s‘‘real’’and‘‘intimate’’life,theJohanssenarticleisanexampleofacelebritybeingdeployedtopromoteaspecificcampaignforacharity(here,Oxfam)inaplacewhere,arguably,thecharity’sactivitieswouldotherwisenotfeaturesoprominently(atconsiderablelengthinaglossywomen’smagazine).WhilstspecifictothemagazinegenrethatisMarieClaire,thesearticlesalsogesturetowardshowofferingsupportforglobalcharitieshasbecomebothpracticallypartofthecontemporarycelebrityjobdescriptionandahallmarkoftheestablishedJ.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 star.Forcelebrityinvolvementincharitycanbeclearlyseenacrossabroadrangeofcontexts.OntheBeckhams’recentmovetotheUnitedStates,forexample,theywereadvisedbyoneBritishnewspaperthat,iftheywantedtobeA-listersinLosAngeles,theyshouldpullbackonpromotingconsumergoodslikejeansandsunglasses,andinstead‘‘trytoconfinetheirpublicappearancestoawardshowsand‘diseaseparties’(charityfundraisers)’’(YoungandMcLean2006).Insuchterms,publicdisplaysofsupportfor‘‘theafflicted’’areawayforcelebritiestoappeartoraisetheirprofileabovethezoneofthecrudelycommercialintothesanctified,quasi-religiousrealmofaltruismandcharity,whilstrevealingorconstructinganaddeddimensionofpersonality:ofcompassionandcaring.Suchconfessionsofcaringfrequentlytakeplaceonatransnationalterrain.Fromstar-studdedpopconcertsaimingtohealthewoundsofglobalpoverty,totheobligatorycharityphoto-shoot,fromtheadoptionof‘‘deprived’’AfricanchildrentotheadoptionoftheroleofUnitedNations‘‘ambassador’’,contemporarycelebritiestodayuseavarietyofdifferentroutesandrolesandemotionstoconfessthattheydo,really,trulyandintimatelycareaboutglobalsocialinjustice.Ifsuchactionsarealmostobligatoryandparforthecelebritycourse,theyarealsoroutinelyandpubliclymocked.Itiscommonplace,asIdiscussbelow,forfuntobepokedtowardssuch‘‘charidee’’stunts;andsuchpublicormediasatireactsinpartasakindofcriticalrecognitionoftheexplicitlyimplicitpromotionalrolesuchcharityworkprovidesforthecelebrity.Yetdespite(orindeed,perhapsbecauseof)thecommonplacenatureofsuchpublicdiscourse,therehasbeenrelativelylittleacademicexplorationofsuchconfessionsofcelebritycaring.Inthisarticle,Icontendthatthesubjectofcosmopolitancelebritycaringisitselfworthyoffurtherexploration.Whilstthesubjectmightbeapproachedinanumberofdifferentways,thispaperattemptstoopenitupalittlefurtherbyconsideringsomeofthebroadercontextsfor,andmediatednegotiationswith,celebrityconfessionsandprotestationsofcharitablecaring.Todoso,itbeginsbylinkingtogether,ininterdisciplinaryfashion,theoriesofthesocialpowerofcelebrity(Couldry2000;HolmesandRedmond2006;Rojek2001)withthoseofthepost-Fordistculturalturn(Hall1997;Harvey1989;SlaterandTonkiss2000)toprovideacontextfortheperceivedexploitationsandbenefitsofcelebritycharity.Nextitconsiderspopularnegotiationswiththesubject,andconnectingthesethemestoemergentworkonthemediationofdistantsuffering(Boltanski1999;Chouliarki2006)andrecentdebatesaroundcosmopolitanism(Beck2006;CheahandRobbins1998).Bydiscussingthehistoricalriseofcelebritycharity,publicmediaparodiesofthephenomenonandargumentsastoitsvalidityandworth,thepaperattemptstoexplorewhatwemighttermasthepublicfashioningoftheglobalised‘‘celebritysoul’’.Thehistoricalriseofcelebritycharity‘‘ItistruethatthetotalamountraisedbyLiveAidandBandAidwaslessthanfivepercentofthegovernmentoverseasaidbudgetforthatyear,’’saidEamonnSalt.Everyonestaredathim,takingitallin.‘‘ButLiveAiddidalotofgood,didn’tit?’’saidJulian,lookinghurt.‘‘Yeah,’’saidDaveRuffordexpansively.‘‘Ofcourse,LiveAidwasatremendoushelp,’’saidEdwinaRoper.‘‘Itcompletelychangedthefaceofgiving.Itwastremendousfun.Itopenedupanewsectorofyoungdonorswhichdidn’texistbefore.Itdidtremendousthingsforalltheagencies.’’SocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 ‘‘Yeah.Itwaslikethisrebellion.WeweretellingtheTories,‘‘Look,cunts,we’renot‘avinthis,’’saidDave.‘‘Ohyes,ithaditsmoment.’’Corinnawasyawningthroughhernose,‘‘butthemomenthaspassed.Noweverytwo-bitmodelinthebusinessisgushingaroundtheworlddoingphoto-shootswiththestarving.It’sgross.’’(Fielding1994)Whilsttheyhavealonghistory(oneoften-citedexamplebeingAudreyHepburn’sworkforUNICEF),celebrityinvolvementswithcharitableand‘‘humanitarian’’causeshavebecomemorewidespreadoverthepasttwodecadesintheWest.HelenFielding’s(pre-BridgetJones)novelCauseCelebdramatisesthismomentofexpansionandtransition.Asoneofitscharacterstellstheheroine,‘‘CelebritieshavebeenpromotingcausessincetheFirstWorldWar,butyouwatch:thiswillbecomehuge.Infiveyear’stimenocausewillbecompletewithoutanaccompanyingstartopromoteit’’(Fielding1994,29).Thenovel,whosedramatictensionhingesonthediscrepanciesbetweenlifeinfamine-strewnareasofAfricaandchampagne-strewnzonesofcelebrityLondon,voicesanumberofsentimentsaboutcelebrityandcharitythathaveamuchwidercurrencyascanbeseeninthesceneabove,inwhichcelebritiesdebatethepurposeandmeritofworkingforcharitablecauses.Herewehavetheconceptthatcelebritydo-goodinggeneratesalotofhypeandPRbutisrelativelyinsignificantinrelationtointernationalandgovernmentalpolicy.Wehavetheideathatcelebritycampaignshavethepotentialtochangepublicdiscourseonhumanitarianissues;thattheyhavethecapacitytorefreshthepartsofthebodypoliticthat‘‘conventional’’politicssimplycannotreach.Andwehavethesensethatcelebritycharityendorsementshavebecomeonlytoocommon:thattheyarealreadysowidespreadandconventionalintheiruseastoundercuttheirpromotionalandsocialpotential.Theexpansionofcelebritycharityinvolvementinthe1990scanpartlybeunderstoodintermsofboththechangingnaturesofthedomainofcelebritycultureandofthosehappeningtothe‘‘third’’(orvoluntary,orcharity)sector.Fromthe1980sinparticular,thethirdsectorbegantoexpendmuchmoretime,moneyandenergyonmarketingandbranding(KotlerandAndreasan1991).Thisofteninvolved,fornon-governmentalorganisationsandcharities,theoutsourcingofbrandidentityandmarketingcampaignstoseparateagencies,arisinggeneralinterestinmore‘‘sophisticated’’andcalibratedmarketingtechniques,andanengagementwiththefieldthatcametobeknownas‘‘socialmarketing’’.Itwaspossibletoviewsocialmarketinginavarietyofwaysasthevoluntarysectoratlastwakinguptotheneedtomoreeffectivelycommunicateandpromoteitsagendas,astheopportunisticexpansionofbusinessmarketingintocolonisingnewareas,orsomethird-waymarriageofthetwo.Whicheverinterpretation,astheexpandingrangeofbooksonthesubjectmadeclear(Bruce2005;Landryetal.1985;Sergeant1999),theengagementwithmarketing,brandingandPRtechniquesinordertosellsocialcauseshadbecome,forthissector,aseriouslysignificantpractice,augmentedintheUnitedKingdombytheshake-upofcharitylegislationthatmadecharitiesmorecompetitive(seeMoor2007,7782).Itisagainstthisbackdropoftheexpansionofmarketingpracticeinthevoluntaryandthirdsectorthattheexpandingandmoredivergentuseofcelebrityinvolvementincharitycan,inoneimportantway,beunderstood.J.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 Fromanotherangle,theshiftingsandsofcelebrityculturehavealsocontributedtoshapingthecontemporarycharacterofcelebritycharityinvolvement.Theexpansionofcelebrity-basedmediaentertainmentinthe1990s,inparticularthroughformssuchascelebrityrealitytelevision(Andrejevic2004;BiressiandNunn2005)andthegrowthincelebrity-orientedmagazines(Feasey2006;Holmes2005),providedmoreoutletsforthepublicfashioningofstarsandwannabestars.Forthecelebrity,acloseassociationwithcharityacts,inmarketingterms,asakindof‘‘brandextension’’.AsGrantMcCrackensaysofcelebrityendorsementsmoregenerally,theyworkthroughaprocessof‘‘imagemeaningtransfer’’(McCracken1983,310321),throughwhichthebrandisassociatedwiththeattributesofthecelebrity,andviceversa.Charityendorsementcanclearlyemphasisefacetsofacelebrity’spersonaorcharacter:ScarlettJohanssen’simageasanempoweredactressisstrengthenedbybeingseentobeinvolvedwithglobalfeminism,andAngelinaJolie’schosencharitiesimbueherwithacontemporarykindoftransnationalconcern(theirtopicalandmildlycontroversialnatureaddingtoherimageofamainstreamactresswitharisk-takingedge).Inaddition,viacharityendorsements,celebritiesgetwiderexposurethroughanarrayofdifferentmediaplatforms,ascelebritycharityinvolvementusuallygenerates‘‘through-the-line’’formsofpromotion(i.e.associatedmediacoverageviaincrementalratherthanpaid-forpromotion;seeBrierley1995),suchasthefeaturearticleaboutScarlettJohansseninIndia.Putcrudely,then,ifthecelebrityisabrandthatrequireswideexposurethroughanumberofdifferentmediainordertomaintainitsprofileandtopicalcurrency,thenoneextremelycost-effectivewayistoprovideendorsementsforahumanitariancause.Bothofthesethemestheexpansionofsocialmarketingandtheexpansionofthepublicfashioningofcelebritiescanclearlybeviewedinthecontextofpost-Fordismandthe‘‘culturalturn’’.Thewideningdisparitiesbetweenrichandpoor;theexpandingpowerofcorporationsinrelationtothatofthepublicsector;theincreasinglymarketing-ledagendasofallorganisations;andtheemphasisonsellingthroughsynergisticcommunicationstrategiescharacteristicofthepost-Fordisteconomiesandthe‘‘culturalturn’’(Hesmondhalgh2007;Hall1997;Harvey1989;SlaterandTonkiss2000)allclearlycreateaveryfertileclimateforcelebritycharityendorsement.Anunderstandingoftheemphasisonsellingthroughculturalformsandthe‘‘need’’forcelebritiestoarticulatetheirintimateemotionsmightalsobethoughtwithreferencetoEvaIllouz’srecentsuggestivetwistontheoriesoftheculturalturn:that,throughoutthetwentiethcentury,‘‘communication’’itselfbecame(inFoucault’sterms)anew‘‘episteme’’,ashiftindicatedbysuchfactorsastheriseintheperceivedimportanceofemotionalliteracyandtheincreasingprimacygivento‘‘corporatecommunications’’(Illouz2007,18).Together,thesecontextscanbeusedasexplanatoryframeworksagainstwhichtheriseofcelebritycharityinvolvementcanbeunderstood.ForandagainstWhataretheproblemsandpossibilitiesofthefruitsofthisalliancebetweencharityandcelebrity?Thepluspointsareperhapseasiesttosee,asthesetendtobeloudlychampioned.Perhapsthemostobviousisthatcelebrityinvolvementcanraisetheprofileofacampaign,bringingextramediacoverageandattractingnewaudiences.TheinvolvementofarashofcelebritiesintheMakePovertyHistorycampaigninSocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 2005(acoalitionlaunchedtochangeglobaltraderules,reducethedebtofso-called‘‘developing’’countriesandtherebynarrowthegapbetweenglobalrichandpoor),suchasChrisMartin,MinnieDriver,Jamelia,ColinFirth,BonoandBobGeldof,waswidelyperceivedtohavehelpedgalvanisethecampaign’spopularityandattractedwideraudiencestotheissue.SimilarargumentsweremadeaboutandusedasarationaleforLiveAidLiveEarthandBandAidForsmallercampaigns,theinvolvementofasinglecelebritycanworktoensurethattheydonotbecomesoinsularthattheysimplypreachtotheconverted,orparticipateinanarrowformofwhatLaclauandMouffeterm‘‘enclavepolitics’’(LaclauandMouffe1985).Celebrityinvolvementcanalsoworkby‘‘demystifyingcampaignissues,raisingfundsbyencouragingsponsorshipandcontributions,mobilisingpublicopinionandinvolvement,contributingtotherepositioninganorganisationinthepublic’sperception,[and]reinvigoratingalongrunningcampaign’’,inthewordsofMediatrust,aUKorganisationthatworksoncommunicationskillsforthethirdsector(Mediatrust2007).Intheseterms,themarriagebetweencelebrityandcharityisahappyone.Theproblemswithcelebritycharityare,however,lesscommonlydiscussedatlength,andsoitisworthspendingsometimeexcavatingtheminalittlemoredetail.Onekeyproblemistheinequalityoffinancialbenefit.Suchalliancesdonotnecessarilyresult,relativelyspeaking,insignificantlymoremoneyfortheneedybeneficiaries,particularlyincontrasttothemoneygainedbycelebritiesandcorporations,andconcernsaresometimesraisedthattheamountofcharitybudgetdevotedtocelebrity-relatedpromotionssiphonsoffmoneyfromtheworkofaid.Thisproblemoftheinequalityoffinancialbenefitisperhapsparticularlyapparentincause-relatedmarketing,astrategythroughwhichcorporatebrandidentitieslinkwithnon-profitorganisationsfor‘‘goodcauses’’onaparticularcampaignandoftentoproduceaspecificproduct.Oneexamplehere(othersincludethepinkSonyWalkmansmarketedinaidofBreastCancerResearch,ortheTesco‘‘BooksforSchools’’campaign)isProductRED,aninitiativesetupbyU2’sBonoandbusinessmanBobbyShriver,throughwhichcompaniessuchasArmani,Apple,theGAPandAmericanExpressproduce‘‘red’’versionsoftheirwaresfromwhichaproportionofthesaleisdonatedtoTheGlobalFund,acharitytocombatAIDSinAfrica.TheAmericanExpressREDcardcampaign,totakeonesubsetofthecampaign,ispromotedbysupermodelsElleMcPhersonandGiseleBundchen(aswellasBono).Oneofthe30corporationsthatisusedtocomprisetheDowJonesIndustrialAverage,AmericanExpressisrankedbyInterbrandasthe14thmostvaluablebrandintheworld(andbybusinessmagazineFortuneasthe174thlargestcorporation).Againstthis,its1%donationthroughProductREDlooksparticularlypaltrygiventheamountofaddedvalueitreapsthroughrelatedkudosandmediapublicity.Indeed,itcouldbesaidthatbothAmericanExpressanditsassociatedcelebrityendorsersgainoutofallproportionthroughbrandassociationtowhatthey‘‘giveback’’.Second,celebritycharityendorsementcanalsoimpactonagenda-setting.Forinstance,in2005theHollywoodactressSharonStoneattendedtheWorldEconomicForumatDavosand,onhearingtheTanzanianpresidentexplainhowpeopleweredyingfrommalariabecausetheylackedbasicamenities,stoodupandpledged$10,000andthenchallengedbusinessleadersintheroomtomatchher.Veryquicklywithin10minutes$1millionhadbeenpledged;butonlyaminorityofthepledgesJ.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 werehonoured,andtheUnitedNationssteppedintomakeuptheshortfall.Asmanyaskedatthetime:isSharonStonereallythepersontodecidewhattheUnitedNationsshouldbespendingitsmoneyon?(Weber2006;Sala-i-Martin2006).Theproblemhereisthatthepowerofcelebrityinterestcanpullaidtowardsaparticularcausethatappealstothemandawayfromothers.Thisissimilartotheproblemswithcause-relatedmarketing,orcorporateinvolvementincharitycampaigns;asIngerStoleputsit,causesareselectedintermsofhowtheywillprovideaddedvaluetothebrand,whichmeansthatnon-profitcausesthatdonotappealtothecorporation’stargetmarket‘‘areignored,eveniftheydovitalwork,whilegroupsthatprovidegoodmarketingvehiclesreceiveadisproportionalamountofinterest’’(Stole2006).Celebrityandcorporatecleavingtoareasthataredeemedtobe‘‘safe’’topicsfortheirfanbaseorconsumerconstituenciesmeanthatcrucialissuesarenottackledearlyenough,andtheiraidusuallytendstofocusonsymptomsratherthancoreproblems,providing,forexample,toolsforilliteracyratherthanaddressingtheproblemofcorefundinginschoolsoreconomicinequality(Stole2006;seealsoAmbramson2007).Third,celebritycharitycanbecomepartoftheproblemratherthanthesolutionorcanelidethewaysinwhichtheyarepartoftheprobleminthefirstplace.Forinstance,manyaidworkersarguedattheendof2005thatcelebritieshadhijackedtheMakePovertyHistorycampaign.BobGeldof,forexample,glowinglypraisedtheworkoftheUK’sNewLabourGovernmentattheG8summitinJuly(givingBlair‘‘10outof10’’ondebtreliefprogress).Butthenon-governmentalorganisationtheWorldDevelopmentMovementarguedthat,astheUKGovernment’stargetwasreachedbyothercountriessometimeago,andithadonlybroughtitslevelofspendingbacktowhatitwasinthe1960s,suchcelebrityapprovalactivelyworkedtoobscurehowlittleprogresshadbeenmade.AsspokesmanDaveTimmsputit,‘‘BobGeldof’scommentsaftertheG8wereveryunhelpful,becausetheymadepeoplethinkeverythinghadbeenachieved’’(Frith2005).Thekeennessofcelebritiestomakeitappearthattheircampaignhasworkedtonosmalldegreesothattheycanreapthebenefitsof‘‘success’’canbackfireforthecause.Evenmorefundamentally,charitycausesareoftenabout,ortheproductof,grindingpoverty,whereascelebritiesaretheembodimentsofpersonalisedwealth:acontradictionthatmakesthisrelationship,tosaytheleast,problematic.OneparticularlygraphicexampleherewastheoutcrybyseniorUNICEFstaffinSouthAsiaovertheorganisation’sinvolvementincelebritycampaignsandcorporatetie-ins.In2006,UNICEFlaunchedan‘‘exclusive’’ChristmasgiftcollectiontogetherwithGucci,aninitiativeforwhichHollywoodactressJenniferConnellysuppliedthe‘‘face’’.FuriousUNICEFstaffinPakistanandIndiapointedoutthattheownersofGuccihavestronglinkswithsweatshopsinMumbaiandKarachi.Theanti-sweatshoppressuregroupLookBehindtheLabelarguedthat,therefore,theassociationbetweenUNICEFandGucciwas‘‘likeasoldiershootingsomeone,thengivingthemabandageandtakingcreditfortheirsurvival’’(seeMcDougall2006).UNICEF’sNewDelhiemployeestookthisopportunitytoarguethatsuchcelebrityandcorporateinvolvementwasdivertingtheirorganisationfromthejobinhand,damagingUNICEF’sintegrity,aswellasre-shapingthediscursivemeaningandpublicunderstandingoftheorganisationanditswork.Astheyputit:SocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 [i]t’sbadenoughhavingtoaccommodatecelebritiesandtheirentourageintheaftermathofeverymajorhumanitariandisaster.ButwhenmostpeoplethinkoftheUNnowtheythinkofAngelinaJolieonacrusade,nottheworkthatgoesoninthefieldafterhumanitariandisastersoronalong-termpreventativelevel.CelebrityisattheheartofeveryUNICEFcampaignthesedaysandtheassociationisbeingsoldincrediblycheaply.(McDougall2006,227)Interestingly,theassociationbetweencelebrityandcorporateendorsementisherereadasofapiece:botharesitesoffabulouswealththatappearto‘‘aid’’humanitarianandcharitablework,butbyusingsuchactivityandworkingtoaccruemorepowerfortheirownintereststheyareunderstoodasdistortingtheagendatowardstheirownends.DoingitforthemselvesHowever,theideathatcelebritiesmightbeinvolvedincharitycausesasameansofstrengtheningtheirownimageandfurtheringtheirowncareersisinmanywayscommonknowledge.‘‘SmashieandNicey’’,forinstance,PaulWhitehouseandHarryEnfield’s1990scomicparodyofwashed-upRadio1DJs,featuredtheblandandself-importantstarsconstantlydroppingtheir‘‘manyworksofcharidee’’intoconversationwhileloudlyprotestingthatthey‘‘don’tliketotalkaboutit’’(BBC1994).Thesketchlampoonedthedoublestandard,orhypocrisy,aroundcelebritycharity:thatitispresentedasaselfless,modestactbutisobviouslybeingusedtohelpthecelebritypersonaand,inSmashieandNicey’scase,ispartoftheirwidercontinualattempttoboosttheirflaggingcareers.Inthiscase,however,itisclearlyanunsuccessfulattempt:inonesketch,NiceybegstheBBCtobeallowedtoworkonanyshoworstation,eventhefictitious‘‘digitalRadio8’’.Insomeways,howeverandthisofcoursefitswellwiththejokeEnfieldandWhitehouse’scharacterslooklikeaversionofcelebritycharityinvolvementfromanearlierera.ForSmashieandNiceydonottalkaboutwhattypeofcharityitis,orhowitrelatestotheirpersonallivestoanysignificantdegree.TheydonotdothecharitycelebrityconfessionalinthesameintricatelydetailedwayascelebritieslikeAngelinaJolie.WhatwasbeinglampoonedbytheSmashieandNiceysketchwastheperformanceoffalsemodestyandtheunspokenmotivesofcelebrityinconductingcharitywork.Morerecently,thespecificitiesofwhatcelebritiesgain,andtheintertwinedpromotionalcomplexthatcelebritycharityispartof,hasalsobecomeroundlymocked.ThesecondseriesofRickyGervaisandStephenMerchant’sBBCExtras,forexample,featuredacameoappearancebyChrisMartinfromthebandColdplayplayinghimself.(Outsidetheprogramme,Martinhasbeeninvolvedwithawidevarietyofcharities,includingWaronWant,Amnesty,OxfamandWar)Intheepisode,Martinbreezesontothesetofacharityadvert,withouthavingacluewhatparticularcharityitisfor:ChrisMartin:Whatisittoday?TVproducer:It’sforpeopleintheThirdWorldwhodon’thavecleandrinkingwater.ChrisMartin:Thisscreen:areyougoingtoputanythingonit?Producer:Wedon’tknowyet.ChrisMartin:Becausewehaveanalbumcomingout.GreatestHits.Youcouldjustputapictureofthealbumcoveronit.Simple.J.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 Producer:Ithinkifweshowanythingwe’llshowpicturesofpeopledyingbecauseofalackofcleanwater.ChrisMartin:Couldtheybeholdingthealbum?(BBC2006,episode4)Clearly,thejokehererevolvesaroundMartin’sinappropriateself-absorptionandaboveallhisuseofanyavailablepromotionalmediumtoincreasethevisibilityofhimselfascelebrityandthealbumheisselling.Thisjokeisextendedthroughouthiscameoappearance.Asthescenecontinues,heopenshisjackettorevealaColdplay:GreatestHitst-shirt.Sizingupcharityadco-starAndyMillmanasamid-rangecelebrityfromatelevisionsitcomwithfivemillionorsoviewers,Martinannouncesoff-handthathecoulddoastarturnontheshow,tothegleeoftheproducerandtheincredulityofMillman(whocannotseehowonearthChrisMartincouldappearonasitcomsetinWiganaboutfactorywork).ExtraspresentsChrisMartinthecelebrityasasingle-mindedpromotionalmachine,usinganyavailablesourcetoextendhimselfinthepubliceyeandimagination;andastarforwhomcharityisjustanotherinterchangeablespringboardorlever(andisnotofanyparticularinterestorimportanceotherthanthat).Thesceneplaysonthisnotionofcelebrityself-promotion’srelationshiptoaninsularnarcissismbyshowingMartinasalmostautisticallyunworldlyinhisconsciousnessofanythingoutsidethemechanicsofself-promotion:‘‘canwegetonwiththis?I’vegotAIDSandAlzheimersandlandminesthisafternoonandIwannagetbacktoDealorNoDeal.PlusGwyneth’smakingdrumsticks’’.LikeTheOffice,whichmightbethoughtofasdramatisingthepotentialfailureofpost-FordistdiscoursesofbusinessempowermentthroughthesheerembarrassingawfulnessofDavidBrent(Gilroy2004,150;CouldryandLittler2008),Extrasupanotherseminalcontemporarydiscoursecelebrityandfindsittobebothludicrousandproblematic.Ithonesinonthespaceswherecelebritycultures,inthebroadestsenseoftheterm(fortheytargetbothachievedandwannabecelebrity),canbeenseennotasemancipatoryculturestoaspireto,butratheras,upclose,distinctivelyunglamorousandfairlypathetic.ByappearinginExtrasashimself,inperformingGervaisandMerchant’spasticheofhiscelebrityselfandhiscelebrityinvolvementincharity,ChrisMartinalsodemonstrateshisreflexivityandhisself-depreciatingsenseofhumour.FromDavidBowietoOrlandoBloomtoKeithChegwin,celebritieshavekeenlysigneduptoappearonthisshowthatmoreoftenthannotpokesfunattheirownimageandzonesinontheirweakspots.AsAdrienneLaiargues(whilstdiscussinghowWinonaRyderminedher‘‘flaws’’bybecominginvolvedinfashionadvertsthatmadejokesabouthershoplifting),celebrities’opennessandwillingnesstoappearvulnerablecanbeinterpretedashonestyorbravery.Thepositiveeffectsofgainingthepublic’ssympathyandestimationmaywellmorethancompensateforthenegativeeffectsofanembarrassingorunattractivedepiction[]alongwiththedictum‘‘thereisnosuchthingasbadpublicity’’.(Lai2006,225)WhilstExtrasundeniablyusesandparticipatesincelebritycultures,itisnoteworthyfortheextenttowhichitcritiquestheseculturesfromanumberofdifferentangles.Theprogrammedwellsonthegapsbetweenhot-shotcelebritiesand‘‘unknowns’’,andindoingsohonesinontheboundariesandfaultlinesofwhatNickCouldryhascalled‘‘theplaceofmediapower’’(Couldry2000).Inmanyrespects,thecelebritySocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 willingnesstoengageinself-depreciationthatitdepictsandproducesinvolvesareturntotheroleof‘‘celebritymodesty’’sobelovedofSmashieandNicey.Butitisalsoadifferentkindofcritiqueinthatitdetailsthesheerofcelebritycharityactivity(representedbyMartinflittingbetweencauses)andinthatitmoreastringentlysatirisesthetighterweaveofcross-promotionalsynergiesbeingfashionedthaninthepast.Thesatireismorecutting,andsothedegreetowhichthecelebrityinvolvesthemselvesentailsbothgreater‘‘debasements’’andgreaterrewardsforbeingagoodsport.Inotherwords:thestakeshavebecomehigher.Thiszoneofcelebritydo-goodingisheightened;itbecomesafaultline,anareadrawntobothintermsofincreasedactivitywithinitandcommentaryaboutit.Eventothosewhodisparageit,itmatters.ZonesofcontestationandthecelebritysoulAsbothExtrasandtheMarieClaireinterviewsalsoindicate,conversationsordiscoursesaboutcelebritycharityareimportantbecausetheydealwithsomeofthemostharshlydiscrepantzonesofglobalpowerandtendtoexpressdominantcurrenciesofthoughtaboutsuchglobalinequalitiesandabouthowtheyareandmightbereproducedandcombated.Threekeyfiguresareoftenpresentindiscussionaroundthisissue:thecelebrity(mainlybelongingtotheglobalWest/North);theirimpoverishedOthers(oftenbelongingtoeither‘‘therest’’oftheworld,ortothezonesManuelCastellsterms‘‘fourthworlds’’);andthe‘‘neutral’’positionofthenon-destitute,non-celebrity‘‘ordinary’’subject(Castells1998,164165).Thecommunicativeculturalflowscirculatingbetweenthemtellussomethingofhowtheserelationshipsofpoweraremaintainedandhowthepossibilitiesofchangetoglobalinjusticesarebothimaginedanddisavowed.Inaglobalcontext,theriseofthephenomenonofcelebritycharitycanbesituatedinabroader,andpredominantlyWestern,neoliberalcultureofindividua-lisation(Bauman2000;BeckandBeck-Gernsheim2001).The‘‘hyperindividualism’’ofcelebrityingeneral,asanumberofcommentatorshavemadeclear,isstructurallyantitheticaltodemocracy(Dyer1998,2004;Gilbert2004),andcelebritycharity’spositioningasapotentialsolutiontosocialinequalitiestendstobothexacerbateandhighlightthisdivision.Forexample,inanextremelyinsightfularticlecomparingMotherTheresaandPrincessDiana(oneofthefewpiecesofexistingcriticalacademicworktodiscusscelebrityandcharity)ArvindRajagopalnotesthatDiana’ssuccessfulpublicprofilewasenabledbythecontextofanentrepreneurialneoliberalcultureinwhichtheindividualwasincreasinglybeingpositionedasthesolutiontosocialillswhilststatewelfarewasbeingscaledback.Fascinatingly,hearguesthatMotherTheresaneverachievedanythinglikethelevelsofcelebrityinIndiathatshedidinEuropeandtheUSA,andthatshemainlyfunctionedasaneo-colonialfigureofcompassionandcaringfortheWest:asanexportedmodelofindividualisedsolutionstosocialproblems,asafigurethroughwhichIndiacouldbepatronisedandimperialdynamicsnegated(Rajagopal1999,126141).Suchexampleshighlightcelebritycharity’sparticipationinaneconomyofhyperindividualisedsolutionstobroadersocialandculturalproblems.Interestingly,Rajagopal’sargumentalsoraisesthequestionofhowthesecelebritypositionsaregendered.Forthelongstandinghistoricalassociationsbetweenfemininity,empathyandemotionsisclearlymobilisedinAngelinaJolie’s,MotherTheresa’sandPrincessDiana’sperformancesJ.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 ofbenevolence,andshapestheforceandimpactoftheirconfessionsofcaring.Ifsuchanassociationbetweenfemininity,celebrityandcompassioncanalsoworktobepittedagainstamorecoercive,masculineandpublicconceptionofstatepower,asRajagopalpointsout(1999,127),itcanalsobeusedtopilloryfemalestarsforinterveninginglobalaffairsorleadthemtonotbetakenasseriouslyasmalecelebrities(aswiththeopprobriumheapedonGeriHalliwellforhercharitywork,forexample).Atthesametimeasitheightensprocessesofneo-liberalindividualisation,however,celebritydo-goodingisaresponsetosuffering,andthisshouldnotbeunderestimated.Itsaffectiveresonancecanbestrongandpalpable.AsSeanRedmondhasdiscussed,thedamagedstarorcelebrityoftenmirrorsorresonateswiththesociallyandculturallyimpoverished,andsodifferentendsoftheequationoftheanomieoflatecapitalismcancreatestoriesthatenduprelatingtooneanother(Redmond2006,41).Similarly,theempatheticsufferingperformedbythecelebritystarwho‘‘feelsthepain’’ofthepersoninneedcanspreadthisfeelingwithanynumberofconsequences,fromsarcasmtothejoltthatmakessomeoneengagemorethoroughlywiththepossibilitiesforjustice.ButasLucBoltanskiputsit,tocreatethegroundforamoreprogressivecosmopolitanism,mediaformsneedtoshowpeople‘‘notonlyinthepassivityofsuffering,butalsointheactiontheytaketoconfrontandescapeit’’(Boltanski1999,190).DistantSuffering,drawingonandextendingtheoriesdevelopedbyHannahArendt,Boltanskisuggeststhatweliveinaculturethatisprimarilydominatedbyapoliticsofpityratherthanapoliticsofjustice.Boltanskiiskeennottodismissthepoliticsofpityentirely,astherearestrandsofithethinksmayactaspotentialconduitsforsocialchange,andbecauseapoliticsofpityisbetterthanignoringsuffering(Boltanski1999,180181),butheisnonethelessfairlyelegantlyscathingofitshistoricalineffectivity.ForBoltanski,apoliticsofpityhascharacterisedEuropeanculturesincethetimeoftheFrenchRevolution,buildingonstrainsofthoughtforgedintheEnlightenment.Apoliticsofpity,Boltanskiwrites,isguidedbythesensethatinequalitiesareprimarilyaboutluck,anditsresponsesarepredicatedontheurgencyofaction,withquestionsofsocialjusticeprimarilybeingleftoutsideoftheequation(Boltanski1999).Thisideaofcharitybeingprimarilyaboutluckandfortune,ratherthansocialpoliticsandjustice,isaveryusefulone.Boltanskiisnotdiscussingcelebrities,butratherthewidersitesofculturalresponseto‘‘distantsuffering’’.Butifweapplyhisanalysistocelebritycharityitresonatesasafamiliarregister.Pityisoftenusedasadiscursivemodetomediatebetweencelebrityandsuffering:theextremitiesinvolvedforegroundthestarknessoftheoppositionbetweenfabulouscelebritywealthandgrindingpoverty.Thefantasythatthesethingsarenotconnected,sustainedbythewishnottohavetowishawayprivilege,oftenworksthroughtheregisterofpityratherthanengagementwithpoliticalquestionsofcause,effectandsocialjustice.However,someformsofrecentcelebrityinvolvementincharitymightseemtoquestiontheideathatapoliticsofpityispredominant.ThelanguageofjusticeisverymuchtotheforeofcampaignssuchasMakePovertyHistory,forexample(justasitwaswithLiveAid),wherepassionatedemandstochangethesystemandarecurrenceoftheword‘‘justice’’isunmistakable.PhilipDrakeandMichaelHigginspointoutintheiranalysisofBono’scelebritypoliticsthatjusticeisoftenforegroundedinhisspeechesaboutchangingthesystem(DrakeandHiggins2006,SocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 92);and,toreturntotheMarieClaireinterviewwithAngelinaJolie,thearticleincludesareportthatshe‘‘can’thideherannoyance’’whentalkingaboutthoseinchargeoftheclean-upinNewOrleansandarguesthat‘‘bigdecisionsaren’tbeingmadeonahigherlevel’’(Connelly2007,131).ButasPriyamvadaGopalpointsoutinherinsightfularticleonMakePovertyHistory,narrativesof‘‘justice’’canbeatoneandthesametimebothaconstructivestepanddestructivelyshallowintheiruse.(Notably,thisalsochimeswiththeopennessofBoltanski’sanalysisofthetwistedcontortionsofjusticeandpityincontemporaryculture.)AsGopalargues,whilstMakePovertyHistorybroughttensofthousandsofyoungpeopletoatleastaminimalawarenessof‘‘ThirdWorlddebt’’andso-calledfreetradeasissues[]thereisalsonodoubtthattheverysuccessofth[e]mobilizationhasreliedonadiscursiveenactmentofconcernaccompaniedbyainsistentandcomfortingdisavowalofmaterialimplication.(Gopal2006,97)MakePovertyHistoryutilisedthemythofeconomicgrowthasasolutiontogrindingpoverty,shewrites,whichwasimaginedasbeingabletobeaccessedonceafewreformswereoutoftheway.Indoingso,thecampaignoften,althoughnotuniformly,deployedadiscourseofcorporateglobalisationandneoimperalism(Gopal2006,91Wemightextendanddrawsomeconclusionsfromthesepointsbyunderstandingcelebrityconfessionsofcaring,asmanifestthroughmediaarticlesaboutcharityworkorinterviewsinwhichthestardiscloseshowtheyreallycaredeeplyforglobalinjustice,withrecoursetoNietzsche’sconceptionofthesoul.ForNietzsche,‘‘thesoul’’wasadogma,ameansbywhichtheweakdeceivethemselvesintopowerbyturningtheirdeficienciesinwards,andinterpretingthisasmerit(Nietszche1887,26).Ifwereadthearistocracy-lovingNietzscheagainstthegrainofhimself,asitwere,theconstructionofthecelebrityashavingacaring,compassionatesoulmightsimilarlybereadasameanstocompensateforandlegitimateweakness:aweaknessinawidersystem.Forwhilstthehyperindividualismofcelebrityisstructurallyantitheticaltodemocracy,thenthereisalso,toanextent,aswehaveseeninthepasticheofcelebritycaring,widespreadunderstandingofthissocialweakness.Intheseterms,theperformanceofcelebritysoul,ortheperformanceoftheinternalisationofsocialanguish,becomesanecessarypartofcontemporarycelebrity,actingasanattempttogesturallyredresstheinsecuritiesofthesystemitispartof.Suchaperformancecanbeenacted,ashere,intermsoffortuneandpityratherthanactingtoconfrontasystemofwealthandpowertheyarepartof.Butitcanalsobedone,asGopalshows,intermsthatmobilisethelanguageofwhichcanacknowledgethestructuralinequalitiesinglobalsocialsystemswhilstsimultaneouslydenyingthematerialimplicationsofthewealthofthestarandhowtheycontributetothespaceswheresufferingtakesplace.Ineitherway,theintimacy,theconfessionoftrulycaring,theperformanceofacelebrity‘‘soul’’,attemptstopresentitselfaspluggingthegap.1.Thearticlealsodiscusseshow,‘‘[r]eectingthedegreetowhichthepersonalandpoliticalare,forthem,inextricable,JolieandPittpurchasedahomeatyetanothersiteofJ.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 unimaginabledevastation,NewOrleans,wherePitthasbeenlabouringtoputhisloveofgreenarchitectureandconstructiontogooduse’’(Connelly2007,131).2.See,forexample,http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4234811.stm3.‘‘TheMostPowerfulBrands2006’’,BusinessWeek/Interbrand.http://bwnt.businessweek.com/brand/2006/(accessedMarch2007).4.Stolepointsoutthatthismeanscausesthatmightfrightenthetargetmarketcanbeignored:forexample,intheearly1990s,AIDs-relatedcharitieswerecompletelyignoredbecausethelinktohomosexualitywasthoughttofrightentoomanyconsumers.5.ThereisalsoagoodsummaryoftheshowonWikipedia.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smashie_and_Niceyhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smashie_and_Nicey(accessedNovember6.SmashieandNiceyarekindofoppositionalbloodbrotherstoanotherseminalHarryEneldcharacterfromthattime,Loadsamoney!theshell-suitwearing,wads-of-cashwavingbeneciaryofThatcheritederegulation.Loadsamoney!waskilledoffwhilstpresentingComicReliefwiththeir‘‘largestchequeofthenight’’aphysicallyenormousoversizedchequefor10p.7.Anearlyexampleofthisistheanarcho-punkbandChumbawumba’s1986singlePicturesofStarvingChildrenSellRecords,apasticheandrejoindertothecollectionofpopstarsonBandAidÕssingle.8.Seehttp://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/486-chris-martin.‘‘LooktotheStars’’de-scribesitselfasasitethatwassetup‘‘topublicizethemanywonderfulthingsthatcelebritiesaredoingtohelptheworld.Wehopetohelpcharitiesbyinspiringtheircelebritysupporters’fanstofollowtheirheroes’example’’.9.TheFairtradeFoundation’srecentshiftfromfeaturingdifferentcelebritieseachmonthonthecoverofitsmagazinetofeaturingFairtradefarmersisoneexampleofmovinginthisdirection(FairtradeFoundation2007).10.BoltanskialsodrawsonCharlesTaylortodiscussthedominanceofcontemporaryattemptstopresentan‘‘authentic’’versionoftheself,whichalsoresonateswithdemonstrationsofcelebritycaring.NotesoncontributorJoLittlerisSeniorLecturerinMediaandCulturalStudiesatMiddlesexUniversity,UK.TogetherwithRoshiNaidoosheco-editedThePoliticsofHeritage:TheLegaciesofÔÔRaceÕÕ(Routledge,Comedia,2005).SheiscurrentlyworkingonthebookRadicalConsumption?ShoppingforChangeinContemporaryCulture(OxfordUniversityPress,forthcoming),whichanalysesdebatesaroundethicalconsumptionandoverconsumptioninrelationtotheoriesofglobalisation,cosmopolitanismandneo-imperialism.ReferencesAbramson,A.2007.High-prolecelebritiesgainattentionforAfrica.WashingtonPost,June11.http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2007/06/11/DI2007061100926.html(accessedOctober2007).Andrejevic,M.2004.RealityTV:Theworkofbeingwatched.Maryland:RowmanandBauman,Z.2000.Theindividualisedsociety.Cambridge:Polity..1994.SmashieandNicey.Video.London:BBC.BBC.2006.Extras.Series2.DVD.London:BBC.Beck,U.2006.Cosmopolitanvision.Trans.C.Cronin.Cambridge:Polity.SocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 Beck,U.,andE.Beck-Gernsheim.2001..London:Sage.Biressi,A.andH.Nunn.2005.(eds)RealityTV:Realismandrevelation.London:Wallower.Boltanski,L.1999.Distantsuffering:Politics,moralityandthemedia.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.Brierley,S.1995.Theadvertisinghandbook.London:Routledge.Bruce,I.2005Charitymarketing:Meetingneedthroughcustomerfocus.London:ICSA.Castells,M.1998.Endofthemillennium.Oxford:Blackwell.Cheah,P.,andB.Robbins,eds.1998.Cosmopolitics:ThinkingandfeelingbeyondthenationMinneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.Chouliarki,L.2006.Thespectatorshipofsuffering.London:Sage.Connelly,C.2007.Angelinafromtheheart.MarieClaire,October,126Couldry,N.2000.Theplaceofmediapower:Pilgrimsandwitnessesofthemediaage.London:Routledge.Couldry,N.andJ.Littler.2008.Work,powerandperformance:Analysingthe‘‘reality’’gameTheApprentice.CulturalSociology,forthcoming.Drake,P.andM.Higgins.2006.I’macelebrity,getmeintopolitics:Thepoliticalcelebrityandthecelebritypolitician.InFramingcelebrity:Newdirectionsincelebrityculture,ed.S.HolmesandS.Redmond,87100.London:Routledge.Dyer,R.1998.Stars,2nded.London:BFI..2004.Heavenlybodies:Filmstarsandsociety.2nded.London:BFI.FairtradeFoundation.2007.Faircomment.http://www.fairtrade.org.uk/resources_newsletter.htm(accessedOctober2007).Feasey,R.2006.Getafamousbody:Starstylesandcelebritygossipinmagazine.InFramingcelebrity:Newdirectionsincelebrityculture,ed.S.HolmesandS.Redmond,17794.London:Routledge.Fielding,H.1994.Causeceleb.London:Picador.Frith,M.2005.Celebrities‘‘hijacked’’povertycampaign,sayfuriouscharities.,13September.http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/article335171.ece(accessedOctober2007).Garrett,S.2007.ScarlettJohansseninIndia:‘‘Wecanmakeadifference’’.MarieClaireOctober,204Gilbert,J.2004.Smallfaces:Thetyrannyofcelebrityinpost-Oedipalculture.Gilroy,P.2004.Afterempire.London:Routledge.Gopal,P.2006.The‘‘MoralEmpire’’:Africa,globalisationandthepoliticsofconscience.Formations59:81Gough-Yates,A.2003.UnderstandingwomenÕsmagazines.London:Routledge.Hall,S.1997.Thecentralityofculture:Notesontheculturalrevolutionofourtime.Inandculturalregulation,ed.K.Thompson,20738.London:Sage.Harvey,D.1989.Theconditionofpostmodernity.Oxford:BasilBlackwell.Hesmondhalgh,D.2007.Theculturalindustries,2nded.London:Sage.Holmes,S.2005.Offguard,unkempt,unready?’’:Deconstructingcontemporarycelebrityinmagazine.Continuum:JournalofMediaandCulturalStudies19,no.1:21Holmes,S.andS.Redmondeds.2006.Framingcelebrity:NewdirectionsincelebritycultureLondon:Routledge.Kotler,P.andA.Andreason.1991.StrategicmarketingfornonproÞtorganisations.NewJersey:PrenticeHall.Illouz,E.2007.Coldintimacies:Themakingofemotionalcapitalism.Cambridge:Polity.Laclau,E.,andC.Mouffe.1985.Hegemonyandsocialiststrategy.London:Verso.Lai,A.2006.Glitterandgrain:AuraandauthenticityinthecelebrityphotographsofJuergenTeller.InFramingcelebrityNewdirectionsincelebrityculture,ed.S.HolmesandS.Redmond,21530.London:Routledge.J.Littler Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009 Landry,C.,D.Morley,R.SouthwoodandP.Wright.1985.Whatawaytorunarailroad:Ananalysisofradicalfailure.London:Comedia.McCracken,G.1983.Whoisthecelebrityendorser?Culturalfoundationsoftheendorsementprocess.JournalofConsumerResearch16:310McDougall,D.2006.Nowcharitystaffhitatcultofcelebrity.TheObserver,26November.http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2006/nov/26/internationalaidanddevelopment.internationalnewsMediatrust.2007.Attractingandkeepingcelebritysupport.http://www.mediatrust.org/training-events/training-resources/online-guides-1/guide_attracting-and-keeping-celebrity-support(accessedOctober2007).Moor,L.2007.Theriseofbrands.Oxford:Berg.Nietzsche,F.1887/2003.Thegenealogyofmorals.Dover:NewYork.Rajagopal,A.1999.Celebrityandthepoliticsofcharity:Memoriesofamissionarydeparted.MourningDiana:Nation,cultureandtheperformanceofgrief,ed.A.KearandD.L.Steinberg,126141.London:Routledge.Redmond,S.2006.Intimatefameeverywhere.InFramingcelebrityNewdirectionsincelebrityculture,ed.S.HolmesandS.Redmond,2744.London:Routledge.Rojek,C.2001..London:ReaktionBooks.Sargeant,A.1999.MarketingmanagementfornonproÞtorganisations.Oxford;OxfordUniversityPress.Sala-i-Martin,X.2006.SharonStone’sBasicInstinct.WallStreetJournal,10February.Reprintedonline.http://www.columbia.edu/xs23/catala/articles/2006/Sharon_Stone/Sharon_Stone.htmSlater,D.,andF.Tonkiss.2000.Marketsociety.Cambridge:Polity.Stole,I.2006.‘‘Cause-relatedmarketing’’:Whysocialchangeandcorporateprotsdon’tmix.CentreforMediaandDemocracy,14July.Weber,T.2006.Shouldcelebritiesdecidewhat’sagoodcause?BBCNews,27January.http://news/bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4655908.stm(accessedSeptember2006).Young,T.andG.McLean.2007.Hollywoodorbust.TheGuardian,16January.http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/jan/16/usa.travel1(accessedDecember2007).SocialSemiotics Downloaded By: [University of Colorado, Boulder campus] At: 22:26 21 August 2009