Social Question

Facade's avatar

Should a celeb's personal life tie in with their professional life?

Asked by Facade (22884points) February 12th, 2010

Some may say that their personal life is their professional life but anyway…

Example: Celeb A is known for beating his wife. Should he lose endorsements, roles in movies, etc. for that?

Do you remove you support– watching their films, listening to their music, watching their sports, etc.– from a celeb when you find out they are less than good people?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

11 Answers

wundayatta's avatar

This gets to an interesting distinction many of us make these days: we have a personal world and a work world, and the two are very different. Historically, this hasn’t been the case. Heck, your name advertised your work. You were your work. You never had any time off.

The industrial revolution changed that. People no longer worked for themselves, but for someone else. So while they were on the clock, they were being paid for their time. It was no longer their own time. And when not on the clock, it was their own time and it was different time.

It’s fairly easy to make this distinction for hourly workers doing non-professional work. However, the more that analytical thought is involved, and the more you are tied to the company in terms of importance, the more you become your work. Usually the people at the top really have no difference between work and private life.

With celebrities, they are the company. They are selling themselves. They are always at work. They have no time off. That’s why advertisers put “morals” clauses in their contracts. If Tiger Woods fucks up, he loses endorsements—or they can stop using him if they choose to. Because the person is their work, than anything they do reflects on the people who pay them to use their name.

Do I stop watching people who have done unfortunate things? I guess I don’t really have to think about it. OJ Simpson pretty much disappeared after what he did. How much have we seen from Chris Brown since he beat Rihanna? Pete Rose? Mark McGuire?

If the pattern holds true, we’ll probably be seeing less of Tiger Woods for a while. They will have to wait until some time has passed, or he’ll have to make a full explanation and confession before people are willing to attribute any credibility to him.

So, me personally, I don’t really have to withdraw support. It’s done for me. But if I did have a choice—depending on what I thought of their miscreance, I’d kind of put them on the back shelf, or never let them in the door. I don’t really want to support people who make a living off bad behavior.

CMaz's avatar

NO.

But bad character flaws can interfere with everything.

A conflict of interest is a conflict of interest.

Likeradar's avatar

Yeah, I do when I think the person has done something particularly heinous (Mel Gibson…). Money I spend on their art partially ends up in their pocket. I don’t want to be part of the paycheck for someone I strongly dislike.
I also can’t enjoy watching a movie or listening to music from someone I know has views I find disgusting- I can’t forget what I know and enjoy it as art.

CMaz's avatar

Because your personal life. Is personal.

Facade's avatar

@ChazMaz Would you employ someone who you knew to be an atrocious person?

lucillelucillelucille's avatar

I don’t usually follow celebrities and their personal lives.The mainstream news is not always such a reliable source of info anyway.

CMaz's avatar

Why would I?

CMaz's avatar

Unless I needed a WWF wrestler.

lucillelucillelucille's avatar

@ChazMaz -My mom in law is one :)

Simone_De_Beauvoir's avatar

Yes I would remove my support. And any decent company (of which there are few) would as well.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther