How celebrities play the media

There’s no accomplishment as accomplished as fame

I have skipped over most of the articles about Stormy Daniels. And I was one of the few, apparently, who missed her appearance this week on “60 Minutes.” Yet I seem to know an awful lot about her.

I would not recognize a Kardashian, nor do I know exactly how many there are, yet I somehow encounter that name almost daily.

People famous for being famous are nothing new, but the phenomenon is certainly accelerating.

Every day now, the media makes a celebrity out of a nobody, splashing their faces on newspapers and flat screens, mobile phones and laptop computers everywhere. We know them by osmosis.

And it begs the question: Who is being manipulated — the celebrity or the media?

To be sure, some are legitimate celebrities with interesting lives or extraordinary accomplishments, but some are just faux stars, and they must be ever more creative to attract attention.

Meanwhile, being an “it” person is a full-time job, requires regular maintenance, a complex strategy, organizational knowhow, media expertise and often plastic surgery.

If you can’t keep calling attention to yourself, the media and everyone else will move on.

Remember Joe the Plumber or Kato Kaelin? No wonder. They failed to parlay their 15 minutes into a long-lasting career. Fame is fickle.

Others have managed quite well, however, and when celebrity for entertainment’s sake starts to wane, there’s always politics.

And so it is that journalists have helped elect countless thousands, many of them unsuited or unqualified, and some downright disastrous, to public service. Again, are we hapless pawns or enthusiastic accomplices?

Was it hard work, big ideas, organizational skills, political sense, creative thinking or simply name recognition and media attention that elected Sonny Bono, Jesse Ventura, Ronald Reagan, Clint Eastwood, Arnold Schwarzenegger and so many others to high office?

Might Cynthia Nixon, a former star of HBO’s “Sex and the City,” become the next governor of New York because she has good ideas or because she’s famous?

How did Doug Ford somehow become a step away from the Ontario premier’s office? His political experience is limited, his plans vague, his grasp of the issues tenuous.

But his name recognition? Everyone knows him because we all knew his infamous brother.

Famous names on ballots have always been a factor in a democracy. It’s why incumbents endure.

And there’s no reason why celebrities can’t be good politicians. Heaven knows many professional politicians make lousy ones.

But is a media profile really the best qualification for a job? Is courting the tabloids — on TV or in print — a legitimate route to fame?

Are Twitter followers now more valuable than reliable information? Are outrageous statements more useful than realistic proposals? Is media manipulation better than articulate speech, a well-argued debate, or a considered platform?

And are journalists — and the voting public — still too susceptible to sizzle rather than steak?

These questions are worth considering, preferably before Stormy Daniels or a Kardashian appear on a ballot somewhere soon?

Paul Berton is editor-in-chief of The Hamilton Spectator and thespec.com. You can reach him at 905-526-3482 or pberton@thespec.com