Forget advertising tasteless tat, celebrities have jumped on a better bandwagon ? supporting causes in the news
And lo, the Lord said unto thee, "Behold, let the peoples of the world marketh the birth of my Son by watching underemployed actors hawk turkeys in television adverts. Alleluia!"
Truly, 'tis the season of celebrity endorsement and, while adverts rarely make sense at the best of times, it's when you chuck a celebrity into the mix that you get shameless ego rubbing up against pointless rubbish, coupled with something called brand alliance, producing an effect that can only be described as toxically pretentious.
Jude Law can currently be found shilling for some kind of cologne that, as far as I can ascertain, makes balding men miraculously sprout a full head of lustrous hair, suggesting that it's not cologne so much as Regaine.
A similarly surprising message lies behind Bernie Ecclestone's foray into advertising. Ecclestone has stumped for some stupid watch brand by sporting in the advertisements the black eye and damaged jaw he incurred after a recent mugging. "See what people will do for an overpriced phallic substitute of an accessory?" the strapline asks, ever so waggishly (I paraphrase, but only slightly.) Indeed, nothing makes me want to spend a quarter of a million pounds on something that my mobile phone will do for free more than the promise that I might be mugged.
But this festive season, it's not just tasteless tat that is blessed with a celebrity face ? it's news stories and, in particular, something the celebrities themselves like to refer to as "causes".
Of course, celebrities have been getting in on news stories for some time, like drunken uncles barrelling on to the wedding dance floor, determined to show these youngsters how dance moves are really done, and the media has been a most welcoming dancefloor. Heaven knows no one would have ever even heard of, you know, wars and famines and stuff were it not for the likes of Angelina Jolie looking ever so solemn in her headscarf (the international sign for "female celebrity in Deep mode") as 10 million paparazzi photographed her, possibly trampling on various limbless children underfoot in the pursuit of the picture. But it's all for a good cause, that good cause being "self-publicity for Jolie and brightening up a dull page for newspapers".
The past week has produced a bumper crop of celebrity-fronted causes because, clearly, a news story without a celebrity is the equivalent of a tree falling in an empty forest: an irrelevant waste of wood that may as well not have happened.
The pinnacle of such alliances was plumbed on Monday when a news- paper's front page proudly proclaimed "Hang on, Iranian dudes, this is serious shit: you gotta release that woman now. Sting has signed a petition." (Again, any paraphrasing is slight.)
And not just Sting. As a journalist, I can give you the exclusive insider knowledge that newspapers tend to put their best stuff on the front page and one personage whose objection to the imprisonment of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani made that particular newspaper's front page was ? hang on to your fascinators! ? James Corden. One can well imagine the Ayatollah Ali Khomeini sitting bolt upright in alarm, his beard all aquiver: "What, James Corden wishes this? Corden, you said? Of Lesbian Vampire Killers fame? I loved that film! My God, release that woman, at once!"
But of course, that's ridiculous. No one even saw Lesbian Vampire Killers, let alone loved it.
Jemima Khan is the Kate Moss of current causes and her face, signature and ever impressive hair are currently fronting not just Ashtani but also the very underexposed Julian Assange brand. This has been salvation for all those out there saying: "Hang on ? never mind what international lawyers are saying about Assange ? let's hear what the daughter of a dodgy millionaire has to say on the subject."
For a moment, it looked as if the collective face of student protests would be Charles and Camilla. As if having to pay extra fees wasn't bad enough: students were finding their story represented by the Waleses. Happily, a new personage has been found: Charlie Gilmour, son of Dave. Ooh, a child of a celebrity ? how ever so zeitgeist. Presumably Peaches Geldof was too busy making her signature dead-eyed pout to a paparazzo to express her always valued opinion.
Now, some might say that some kid swinging on the Cenotaph is of marginally less interest than a policeman allegedly clubbing a boy so badly that he needed brain surgery, making it puzzling that the coverage of the former has exceeded the latter by at least 10:1. But these people clearly did not listen carefully: I said A CHILD OF A CELEBRITY. Lucky you, students! And you were worried the rent-a-mob would hijack your day; instead, it was an overprivileged prat in a military coat.
But note! Despite the rhinestone-like shimmer bestowed by the celebrities on all of these otherwise snoresome news stories, the results ? amazingly ? have been mixed. In fact, the only celebrity-fronted news story that has come good this week is that of salvia ? a substance that, I'm assured, has nothing to do with saliva but is rather a means to obtain what one is apparently duty bound to describe as "a legal high". According to tmz.com, after Miley Cyrus was filmed allegedly getting legally high last week, sales of the drug have increased threefold.
Obviously, to conclude that the power of celebrity has its limits would be both ridiculous and heretical. But perhaps it suggests that one needs to have a certain kind of mindset to be persuaded by celebrities, one more akin to someone who sits around smoking plants all day than pretty much anyone else. Maybe that could be the strapline on Miley's surely inevitable upcoming campaign: "Salvia: officially makes you more stupid than a Tory and an Iranian fundamentalist."
Naomi Watts Leonor Varela Joanne Montanez Michelle Obama Kerry Suseck
No comments:
Post a Comment