| Summary: | Celebrities are able to mobilize a wide range of people on a global scale. In his Oscar acceptance speech, Leonardo DiCaprio urged his international audience to work collectively to combat climate change. Another example of celebrity activism is Daryl Hannah's support for biofuels and the campaign against the Keystone XL pipeline. The article analyzes the legitimacy of such celebrity power in international relations, along three criteria (political impact; broad participation; control and accountability). It argues that as long as celebrities' claims are vague and do not go further than UN consensus, celebrity power can be considered legitimate through the political impact. In addition, DiCaprio and Hannah contribute civil society perspectives to the international agenda - while, however, not necessarily voicing most marginalized positions. Finally, by urging governments to comply to international agreements, as DiCaprio does, he holds governments accountable on behalf of the public. However, both DiCaprio and Hannah claim to speak on behalf of affected people who cannot hold the celebrities themselves accountable for their political action. This lack of control is problematic if celebrities convey more radical positions which are not generally endorsed by the international community, as Hannah does when protesting against Keystone XL and promoting biofuels.
|
|---|
