Celebrities Endorsements: Are they really helping to Change the World?

In my previous post, I chose to explore the program Inner-City Arts and how it is changing the lives of at risk children in the downtown Los Angeles area. There are many organizations that are committed to changing the world, like Inner-City Arts, but what many of theses organizations and non-profit charities want is to bring their causes to the attention of the public. They have to do this because unfortunately one person alone cannot change the world. In efforts to solve this problem the most unlikely of methods is used to draw the publics attention to various causes: Hollywood Superstardom. Celebrities are now promoting various charities and organizations. Inner-City Arts, for example, has used this method of reaching out to the public by honoring the star of the hit television show Friends, Lisa Kurdrow and Grey’s Anatomy star, Sarah Rameriz. Because of the media tabloids and the fascination the American public has with celebrities, charities have found that this is a great avenue to broadcast their causes to the American public. Although this may be a great way to bring important issues to Americans, is using Hollywood stars the ethical way to do so? I chose to explore other blogs that offered their insights and opinions on the trend of using fame to endorse charities/ organizations. One of the blogs I discovered was, Wired blog network. Although this is a music-based magazine that sponsors the blog, the post by Eliot Van Buskirk addressed the celebrity charity endorsement trend. This blog’s particular post was titled “Is it so bad that Bono does good?” This post tackles the idea of Bono, lead singer of the popular band U2, using his fame to bring attention to the AID’s epidemic in Africa. I commented on this blog (as seen below) because I like the way the author took many of the pros and cons of using celebrities to better the world in his argument. Another way celebrities are brining attention to the problems facing the world today is by adopting at risk children from all different parts of the world. On the families.com adoption blog, I chose to comment on the post “Celebrity Adoption-Hurting or Helping the Adoption Community?” by the blogger Shoshanna Grey. I commented on this post, (also seen below) because celebrities have made a trend, of helping children not by just making a donation, but by actually taking children in as their own.

“Is it so bad that Bono does good?”

Comment:
I would like to thank you for your detailed and in-depth post about Bono and his efforts to battle the AID’s epidemic in Africa. I found your findings very informative because of the connection that is not highly publicized between American politics and celebrities. It is often not explained how much celebrities are really involved in various causes, and I found it refreshing to know Bono, was not just a face on the campaign but politically active as well. I was wondering what you thought of the RED campaign that became very popular within the last few years that Bono actually started. Do you think it was wrong for the RED campaign to use only celebrities in their ads, because I do not think all of those celebrities, such as Dakota Fanning and Jennifer Gardner, are as committed to the cause as Bono himself. Also, although Bono had made such great efforts to help the Aids foundations, his particular campaign has turned into a trend itself. I do not think that companies such as Apple and Motorola should be turning a profit because of the AIDs epidemic in Africa on their iPods and phones. I feel this campaign for Bono’s foundation, is just trendy. By having endorsed products, the focus has moved away from actually getting people involved in the cause. You had mentioned in your post that celebrities could hurt social issues and causes rather then helping them, if they are using the cause as a publicity stunt to cover up bad behavior. I thought this was a very good point and it made me rethink about the different celebrities that have used charities as a “cover-up” for their own problems. I was also wondering what your thoughts were about celebrities who are just donating money rather then taking an active political position on various issues? It is often publicized that pictures of newborn celebrity children are sold to magazines at a high price, and these profits are then donated to charity. I am not sure if this helps the cause but it defiantly seems unethical to me when the celebrities are selling their children’s picture and donating the money. This ploy, although it has raised massive amount of money, does not seem like it is really helping the cause.
“Celebrity Adoption-helping or Hurting the Adoption Community?”

Comment:
Thank you for your post on the celebrity adoption issue. Adoption is very important, and I know in American society it may even be seen as taboo; but, with the influx of celebrities choosing to adopt children, which would otherwise grow up in bad conditions and or unhealthy environments, it is becoming more popularly accepted. Although I do think adoption is a great option, I myself do think that celebrities making adoption a trend is not always helpful. I feel theses orphans, in some cases, are being used as publicity stunt. You did mention Angelina Jolie as one of the celebrities who has adopted children, but when she adopted her first son Maddox, she did so right after her scandalous break up with her former husband Billy Bob Thorton. Secondly, Meg Ryan brought her child home years after from China after years of the  tabloids has accusing her of cheating on her ex Dennis Quaid. Maybe these celebrities had always planned on adopting, but their timing was closely connected to when the media put a spotlight on their personal lives. Also, because of the emotional connections made when adopting a child, I was wondering if you thought that growing up in the spotlight is the best thing for these adopted children? I have a close friend who is adopted and growing up she told me that she and other adopted children she knew had problems grasping who they really were. I would imagine that growing up in the public eye, for an adopted child, would only make these children more out of touch with their place in the world. I do think that with the celebrities’ help of adopting children it has become more “normal”, which I think could better the adoption community. What I find the most concerning is that it is now a trend in Hollywood and adoption should not be trendy. The children are not little dogs that you can carry around in a purse. It is a serious commitment to take care of child and all that goes with it.

Art: Helping Downtown LA Become A Better Place

Downtown Los Angeles is growing, but what is happening to the children who still live in low-income housing and who know the street gangs better than they know who the first president of the United States was? Although this has been a prevalent problem in downtown for over twenty years, there are inspirational people who are dedicated to getting these children off the streets --with art.

In 1989, funding cuts eliminated art instruction from the Los Angeles Public schools, It included cutting 20% of teachers and making the maximum students in one classroom to one teacher for over 40 students. The budget was cut by Prop 98 in 1989, the total budget from 80 million to 50 million dollars for public school education throughout Los Angeles.

Bob Bates, the co-founder and Artistic Director of Inner City Arts, was an artist living in Downtown Los Angeles when these budget cuts were made, and witnessed the amount of violence on the streets of downtown. Along with Irwin Jaeger, a local businessman and entrepreneur, Bob worked to restore arts education to the children in and around Los Angeles' skid row area.

The organization has created a program where schools in the Unified Public School District are bused in to the facilities right off skid row, to have art education. The facilities include classes in the visual arts, dance, digital animation, music and drama. Most of the children that are bused into the inner-city arts program range in age from7 to 17. It has catered to over 150,000 students to date and now 42 public schools in the area attend the program. According to reports, these students are the largest group in the country who are at risk for dropping out of high school. The racial backgrounds of the majority of the students are Latino who have very poor English language skills. More than half of the students live in walking distance from the Inner City Arts campus, which is a block west of skid row. It is estimated that over one-third of the children are classified as homeless. Inner City Arts creates an “oasis” for these children removing them from the streets and giving them culture and a safe place to express themselves.

Bob Bates, founder, is a firm believer that the arts are important but it has also been shown in other studies just how important art is to a child and their success of excelling in school. Inner City Arts has been a subject of a study at the University of California, Los Angeles for the past five years. This study revealed that children who attend Inner City Art perform better on standardized tests in language, reading and math than those students who did not attend. These results became widely published, and interest peaked across the country. New York City public school systems (along with the rest of the United States) had to cut art classes because of the federal law, “No Child Left Behind.” This law led public school across the nation to cut funding in many subject areas to spend more time in math and English. With Inner City Arts as a model, the program “ Learning Through Art” was created and funded by the Guggenheim Museum. This program brings artists and instructors to the public schools in New York City for free after-school art classes. A study was also done on this program in 2005, and the results showed that these New York City kids, like those from Inner City Arts, achieved higher scores in critical thinking, through description, hypothesizing and reasoning. There is no clear reason why art education has this effect on other subjects, but Cynthia Harnisch, executive director of Inner-City Arts, "There is no bad art. There are no bad feelings. In art there are no mistakes or wrong answers. Only endless opportunities to experience the success of creating something from the heart."

The first time I went to Inner City Arts, it was clear to me that art does create a difference to these children. When walking into the campus that is fenced with barbed wire and homeless people walking the street, it truly is an “oasis”. From the moment a car pulls into the parking lot which is covered in art, the culture and artistic expression is tangible and the purest form of an art gallery. In this sad and depressing neighborhood nothing but smiles fill the halls, the rooms, theater, offices, and art studios. The amount of creativity, dedication and pride each student takes in their art project, play, dance or new song they have learned, made me believe change for these at risks kids is possible. Free form expression is giving these kids a fighting chance against statistics and previous generations before them, failed to meet, they will succeed. One child at Inner city Art, a fourth grader who is considered homeless and lives below the poverty line said, “Being at Inner City Arts is the best and most important thing in my life.” As a personal connection to this organization and resident of downtown Los Angeles, I can honestly say I have seen this community grow and Inner City Arts is one of the reasons the Los Angeles Downtown area is able to become a metropolitan center again.