Reining in the stars

Joanna Lumley has successfully promoted the Gurkhas' cause. Photo / AP

This decade has given us many striking images of celebrity culture. In years to come, it will be difficult to forget Britney Spears' shaved head and Tom Cruise's euphoric performance on Oprah's couch.

Celebrity oddities, scandals and faux pas entertain us all. But should we still be laughing now that Angelina Jolie has weighed in on Iraq's refugee crisis? What about Charlie Sheen's conspiracy theory about September 11? Is it okay for Richard Gere to swing the vote in the Palestinian presidential elections? Marina Hyde certainly doesn't think so.

A prolific British columnist, she is a keen observer of the celebrity circus. It's the focus of her first book, Celebrity: How Entertainers Took Over the World and Why We Need an Exit Strategy. Hyde worries about the "mission creep" of stardom. Once, she says, our entertainers would simply entertain.

These days, celebrities hold roles which often exceed their knowledge and expertise. Some try to moderate the Aids debate, others want to write policy.

"It's ludicrous," Hyde says on the phone from her London home. "These people make music and movies, for goodness sake.

They're not especially bright, they don't have analytical brains, and they're not experts in the fields they are drafted into. Stars have always done charity work, but these days they are wooed by presidents. They are making visits to Baghdad, they are sitting on foreign policy think-tanks with Henry Kissinger. It's ridiculous. They are doing more harm than good." Hyde began her journalism career as a secretary on the showbiz desk at British tabloid newspaper The Sun. She didn't last long. Now, Hyde commentates on weightier subjects like politics and society for The Guardian. She has also spent years documenting the "gradual erosion" of popular culture. Hyde believes that while we lie in a celebrity-induced slumber the stars themselves are slowly winning influence over our democracy and our economy, not to mention our common sense.

"Madonna held a benefit for Malawi, hosted on the lawn of the United Nations headquarters in New York," she recalls. "It turned out to be a cross-promotion for the new Gucci store. Each guest was given a special edition of a Gucci handbag valued at US$800 ($1260). Malawi's GDP per capita is US$800. Most people aren't aware that this kind of thing is going on, because you only hear what is presented in the media itself.

Many celebrities have gone well beyond their mandate and they need to be reined in." It seems political leaders are increasingly dependant on media luminaries to win favour. During a visit to the Middle East actress Sharon Stone held a joint press conference with Israeli president Shimon Peres, for the purpose of raising awareness for peace. Hyde hates the notion of "raising awareness". She says that most of us are already aware of the need for peace, "and if you need Sharon Stone to explain it, you shouldn't be allowed to vote". Even so, politics and celebrity continue to converge.

"George Bush had to announce an African aid initiative, but he refused to do it unless Bob Geldof stood next to him.Politicians hope the stardust of the celebrities will rub off favourably on them. They adopt celebrity strategies' because they know that people are less critical of celebrities than of world leaders. We'll criticise the United Nations, but not its spokesperson, Angelina Jolie; people see her as a heroine. Celebrities have this weird, starry-eyed legitimacy. That's why this is so insidious." Hyde's book covers many dimensions of celebrity leakage, from spirituality and parenthood to activism and medicine. Her key proposition is that, while many celebrities have a lot to say about issues like poverty, their commentary does not rock the boat. Public figures find causes "which aren't radical, which aren't controversial, and which won't offend their fans in their home countries". While some celebrities seem willing and able to get their hands dirty, Hyde believes their talk is rather cheap.

"What about goodwill ambassadors'? What is the definition of goodwill' if we're sending Geri Halliwell out there? What kind of goodwill is that? It seems like we're saying to Africa Look, we don't care about your problems, so we're sending you Ginger Spice'. What does she know about African maternal healthcare? I mean, you could learn anything that she knows by reading a pamphlet. Celebrities should give money to charity silently, rather than pretending they are having an impact."

Not all celebrities fail to make an impact. Some well-meaning public figures manage to effect change. Absolutely Fabulous' Joanna Lumley has spent years campaigning to allow Gurkha war veterans from Nepal to settle in Britain. Hyde says Lumley "is more informed than most government ministers". Last month, the British government announced it would welcome the veterans to Britain.

Chef Jamie Oliver has had similar success in getting the government to put funds behind his school lunches campaign.

Hyde doesn't doubt the fact that most celebrities are well-meaning; they care about the issues they are promoting. But, she says, they have conned themselves into believing that they can "make a difference". Many of today's stars have spent decades on the celebrity circuit. After gaining fame and fortune, it seems many are desperate to add some lasting meaning and significance to their professional and public lives.

"A lot of people get very successful, but don't feel as valued as they thought they would be by that point in their careers. They think the only answer is to gain gravitas; to become merciful angels and move into higher positions. They don't want to just hand over a cheque for a million dollars, which would be useful. Instead, they want to be part of the solution. They want people to see them on the frontlines in a flak jacket. All they're doing is dumbing down the debate and switching people off." Hyde's conversation is peppered with words like "revolting", "ludicrous" and "disgusting". She is genuinely incensed by the blurring of lines between celebrity and charity. But, despite the hostile nature of her book, Hyde insists she doesn't loathe the cult of celebrity. She finds some aspects of it "really hilarious", and particularly loves to see Paris Hilton take her ferret for a walk on the red carpet. She just wants us to be more critical about our own media consumption, and ignore self-righteous celebs.

In the past decade, technology has improved and citizen journalism is on the rise. The market for celebrity coverage is growing. British personalities are fighting back by taking injunctions against photographers. Hyde believes no celebrity deserves to be hounded. When she began working at The Sun in 1998, the market for celebrity images was limited, and the range of outlets that provided tabloid fodder was smaller.

"Back then, Britain had OK! and Hello, but we didn't have an endless array of magazines which were obsessed with celebrity culture and body mass. Photographers were photographers. These days, they're sex pests with cameras. Back then, you had to transmit the photos into the newsroom in quite a complicated way. People came in with prints and negatives, and there were no digital cameras. That was only 10 years ago. Now, anybody can be a paparazzo; anybody can get the shot." The result is a never-ending stream of compromising and unflattering shots of public figures. Hyde believes readers who devour tabloids are often oblivious to the scheming and crafting that goes on in newsrooms and publicists' offices. Some paparazzi pictures are "staged", while gossip stories rely heavily on mystery sources. She does, however, believe consumers are becoming savvier about celebrity content. But it seems we're hypocrites. Despite our savvy, we still buy and read tabloid tat.

"It's disgusting that we allow someone to be harassed by the media, simply because they've had a hit song. It's not news; it's nonsensical. We do it to people like Amy Winehouse and Britney Spears. These people are practically mental patients. Why would you harass a mental patient? Just so you can get a picture of them outside their house in their underwear at 4am? It's harassment, and it's also a self-fulfilling prophecy: if you give the public more of this kind of stuff, they'll want more of it." The author rejects the populist argument that the public should have access to whatever content they want. She insists readers should be honest about their role in the celebrity machine. By using media that exploit celebrities we signal to editors and advertisers that we want more of it. Although Hyde says we pay celebrities "for their talent, not for access to their lives", many stars are keen to exploit the public's interest for their own gain. Others try to shy away from the attention, but cannot escape the media's reach. Princess Diana's death could have been a wakeup call for the media.

"After Diana died, some media said we'll never run paparazzi pictures ever again'. Are they running paparazzi pictures now? Of course they are. Whenever Diana was in the tabloids, the sales went up. We all bought the papers and we know we did. Make no mistake, if she was killed in a car crash today, instead of six photographers, there would be 35 photographers taking pictures of her while she was dying. Most likely, the photos would be published immediately and everyone would look at them."

That immediacy is aided by tabloid websites like TMZ, which display edgy and explicit pictures which some print media may shy away from. But the online world is also breeding "organic" celebrities like Susan Boyle, whose Britain's Got Talent audition has been viewed more than 60 million times on YouTube. With a financial crisis looming, the entertainment industry provides a form of escape. In a sea of world-changing stars, Susan Boyle stands out as a natural success story. But Hyde doesn't buy it.

"I haven't seen Susan Boyle's performance. If aliens come down to Earth and want to find the last human uncorrupted by Simon Cowell's latest venture, it would be me. But it's not surprising that the world has reacted to her. The music industry has been homogenised for so long, but now there are new ways to make a star, with sites like YouTube which disseminate content so quickly. Even so, it's a young phenomenon and I'm not sure how long it will last." Although her celebrity columns highlight the antics of proud, popular and powerful people, Hyde doesn't believe that she feeds our obsession with celebrities. The columns, she says, provide an "alternative take". But not everyone is a fan of Hyde's sardonic writing. She was sued for defamation by Elton John after she wrote "a silly little bit of fluff" about his glitzy charity events. To Hyde's delight, the singer lost the case, and the judgment has become part of British case law on defamation.

The author jokes she wants to raise £50,000 ($898,000) for an academic study to find an "exit strategy" from celebrity culture.

In practical terms, she wants the media to give less attention to public figures who drift into areas in which they are not qualified.

Hyde wants us to laugh at celebrities more, to encourage them to take themselves less seriously. Finally, she wants world leaders to spend less time wooing stars. Just maybe, she says, we can rewrite the job descriptions of our entertainers.

"Remember that James Bond movie in which bloody Denise Richards was a government nuclear physicist? Seriously, that's the world we are hurtling towards.

We're crowding public intellectuals out of the debate about important issues. We need to come to terms with the fact that some people who aren't very pretty are going to have to tell us about complicated issues like poverty.

Let's give the experts the right to do that, and allow the pretty people, the celebrities, to get back to their day jobs."

* Celebrity by Marina Hyde (Random House, $39.95).