Does fame really give you responsibility?

MadHatter wrote: One thing I have seen time and again in the news or on social media is that some how fame imparts some responsibility to act better then the average. I regularly hear that so and so is a role model and thus should act better. Usually this is conjunction with some scandal.

But is this really the case? Should fame demand that you are some how more socially responsible to act in a way that is considered acceptable? Should it dictate that your language or actions are held to some sort of higher standard? Does fame really dictate that you deserve a higher level of scrutiny or harsher criticism?

Nope. The world owes you nothing. If people want to make an idol out of you, then so be it, it's not your responsibility as a famous person to satisfy any illusion built up in others' heads.

However, you do have to keep in mind that if you decide to be a jerk, you might face a huge setback in your career. For example, a famous football player who is caught using drugs might lose corporate sponsorships he once had because those corporations need to appease their clients or lose them.

If people use celebrity for aspirational purposes 'and' then they also pay for it, by buying into the brand with their work effort.... then they probably think they in some small way own a bit of that identity. Making it seem more justified as self identity (ownership rather then mimicry). Given that celebrities often sell their brand through music, clothing etc then I think the celebrity at that point also buys into the impact they themselves will have in that exchange. So IMO copying a celebrity who isn't selling themselves out as personalities spreads very little if any responsibility to them, but if they make themselves a brand and sell it out, then I do think they take on some portion of responsibility.... not legally though and as Manu says if the branded celebrity does not 'perform' to market requirements then they do their own brand in anyway.... the fluidity of money, almost as fickle as us!!!

I don't think celebrities are expected to behave better than average at all. Everybody expects everybody else to be a good role model (even themselves, though very few people are honest about whether they are or not).

The same people who criticize Miley Cyrus for being a bad role model will also criticize their town drunkard and the grocer who cheated on his wife. The expectation is the same for everybody, celebrities just hear it from more people because they're seen by more people. Just like the town wants to minimize the negative impact that the town drunkard has (by having him spend almost every night in the drunk tank), they want to minimize the negative impact that celebrities have (by getting them out of the spotlight).

So thanks to everyone for the responses. I feel as many do that no you are not any more responsible for their actions any one else. I do not think that fame of any kind makes you responsible to be some sort of paragon of virtue that should be shamed if you have normal human failings just like anyone else.

However I do think that A.) people of fame should consider that they have young fans and maybe how they can use that adoration for good. I also think that B.) too many celebrities forget that being famous does not come with the burden of being in the public eye. The public being as fickle as it is one should realize that the smallest thing can get you raked over the coals.

To me, it depends on what you are famous for.

If you are famous for being an idiot (*cough Charlie Sheen *cough) then there should really be no expectation for you to act in any way other than an idiot. We shouldn't place any responsibility on someone who we know does not deserve it. Charlie gets paid to make us laugh, and we keep watching his shows because of it. That's our choice, and he doesn't owe us anything.

If you are famous for being a child educator (let's use Mr. Rogers as an example) then your fame certainly does come with responsibility. You are famous for your ability to educate children, so you have the responsibility to do it in an appropriate way and we will expect it of you all the time.

Olympic athletes have a responsibility to represent their countries in a positive way. Part of their fame comes from being ambassadors of good sportsmanship. Professional athletes represent themselves and maybe their team and they get paid based on personal performance, so the responsibility is not there. While each may be famous in their own right, they are for different reasons and so have different expectations of responsibility.

I believe fame neither grants, not hinders responsibility, it simply gives one more attention. Both the successes and failures of celebrities are a lot more well known that lets say mine or yours because they naturally have more coverage. A celebrity and I could commit the very same attrocity and it would be the former to gain the most attention, despite both offences being of equal stance.

What I feel we must also take into consideration is that the Media is guilty of exaggerating some stories for more publicity. I have particularly found this to be the case with Celebrity stories, naturally because they have followers. As an example of an "atrocity" from a celebrity I have seen recently is that of Liam Neeson punching a child when he was training to be a teacher many years ago. While the title of the article painted it to be outrageous and Mr. Neeson "lashing out", further examination f the story told me the child Neeson punched threatened and went for him with a knife.

It is true that these so called "celebrity scandals" are widely shown and that Celebrities need to take more care, but we must also look at the other side of this; that is that sometimes the "scandal" isn't half as big as it is made out by media coverage.

Senan wrote: To me, it depends on what you are famous for.

If you are famous for being an idiot (*cough Charlie Sheen *cough) then there should really be no expectation for you to act in any way other than an idiot. We shouldn't place any responsibility on someone who we know does not deserve it. Charlie gets paid to make us laugh, and we keep watching his shows because of it. That's our choice, and he doesn't owe us anything.

If you are famous for being a child educator (let's use Mr. Rogers as an example) then your fame certainly does come with responsibility. You are famous for your ability to educate children, so you have the responsibility to do it in an appropriate way and we will expect it of you all the time.

Olympic athletes have a responsibility to represent their countries in a positive way. Part of their fame comes from being ambassadors of good sportsmanship. Professional athletes represent themselves and maybe their team and they get paid based on personal performance, so the responsibility is not there. While each may be famous in their own right, they are for different reasons and so have different expectations of responsibility.

I find that the idea that your job defines your level of responsibility interesting. However to what point? Who gets to decide? I mean lets take Mister Rogers as an example. Should he have been taken to task if he over indulged in drink one night and someone put it on youtube? ( I know it wasn't around at the time but you get the idea) Should he have any more responsibility then me to never ever get tipsy. What if he got that way because a loved one passed? Should he have any requirement to explain that t anyone?

I am of the mind that if I am an actor or entertainer that is what I am paid to do. I am not paid to be a parent or exemplar of virtue. I am paid to do the job I signed up for and any fame that results is not my issue other the I should know that it will cause the public to be more critical.

As for the Olympic athlete well the whole they are ambassadors stuff I heard that all the time in the military. So I will take that concept from my own experience while I was in. I was stationed in Japan and so often the upper chain of command would drone on and on about being good ambassadors. Well I signed up to do my job as a Sonar Tech. I didn't sign up to do foreign relations. So if I am human and mess up that should not be held to any higher standard then any one anywhere else in the world. I feel the same with Olympians they are paid to put on a show and to do the best they possibly can in their chosen sport. Why should they be expected to be saints? If that is the case I believe we owe these people a LOT more money for the burdens we are putting on them

MadHatter wrote:

As for the Olympic athlete well the whole they are ambassadors stuff I heard that all the time in the military. So I will take that concept from my own experience while I was in. I was stationed in Japan and so often the upper chain of command would drone on and on about being good ambassadors. Well I signed up to do my job as a Sonar Tech. I didn't sign up to do foreign relations. So if I am human and mess up that should not be held to any higher standard then any one anywhere else in the world. I feel the same with Olympians they are paid to put on a show and to do the best they possibly can in their chosen sport. Why should they be expected to be saints? If that is the case I believe we owe these people a LOT more money for the burdens we are putting on them

Olympians don't reguraly get paid a dime, that is unless they earn a medal. They are also being watched by the world, many countries view bad behavior on the part of the athletes not only poorly represents the rest of the team participating, but their native countries as well...

Zenchi wrote:

MadHatter wrote:

As for the Olympic athlete well the whole they are ambassadors stuff I heard that all the time in the military. So I will take that concept from my own experience while I was in. I was stationed in Japan and so often the upper chain of command would drone on and on about being good ambassadors. Well I signed up to do my job as a Sonar Tech. I didn't sign up to do foreign relations. So if I am human and mess up that should not be held to any higher standard then any one anywhere else in the world. I feel the same with Olympians they are paid to put on a show and to do the best they possibly can in their chosen sport. Why should they be expected to be saints? If that is the case I believe we owe these people a LOT more money for the burdens we are putting on them

Olympians don't reguraly get paid a dime, that is unless they earn a medal. They are also being watched by the world, many countries view bad behavior on the part of the athletes not only poorly represents the rest of the team participating, but their native countries as well...

I should have been more clear. By paid I meant endorsement deals and sponsors etc. Thanks for pointing out how muddled what I wanted to say was.

As far as how people view their conduct well just because many people view it that way does not make it right. Simply because many people think that something is not ok or is a bad representation does not make it objectively true.

MadHatter wrote:

Zenchi wrote:

MadHatter wrote:

As for the Olympic athlete well the whole they are ambassadors stuff I heard that all the time in the military. So I will take that concept from my own experience while I was in. I was stationed in Japan and so often the upper chain of command would drone on and on about being good ambassadors. Well I signed up to do my job as a Sonar Tech. I didn't sign up to do foreign relations. So if I am human and mess up that should not be held to any higher standard then any one anywhere else in the world. I feel the same with Olympians they are paid to put on a show and to do the best they possibly can in their chosen sport. Why should they be expected to be saints? If that is the case I believe we owe these people a LOT more money for the burdens we are putting on them

Olympians don't reguraly get paid a dime, that is unless they earn a medal. They are also being watched by the world, many countries view bad behavior on the part of the athletes not only poorly represents the rest of the team participating, but their native countries as well...

I should have been more clear. By paid I meant endorsement deals and sponsors etc. Thanks for pointing out how muddled what I wanted to say was.

As far as how people view their conduct well just because many people view it that way does not make it right. Simply because many people think that something is not ok or is a bad representation does not make it objectively true.

Perhaps you should do a census Hatter, I am pretty sure if you did and asked every possible individual competing in the olympics, the vast majority would agree that they are representing their individual countries, and do so with pride.

I'm not disagreeing that we dont place tremendous pressure on people in the spotlight, but honestly, for two weeks, even in your own homeland much less in another foreign country, how hard is it to behave and hold oneself to a higher standard?