Factors that Reveal Celebritisation in Society 揭示社会中庆祝活动的因素
To begin with, democratisation as an indicator of celebritisation refers to the decentralisation of celebrity production. In reference to Draper (2008) quotes Andy Warhol, who predicted in 1968 that in future, nearly every person on the planet will achieve a celebrity status in society for at least 15 minutes. Speaking from this point of view, whereas the celebrity status in society was widely controlled by a small clique of individuals in spaces such as Hollywood, this is no longer the case. On the contrary, the emergence of new media platforms and technologies such as the internet and its interactive media and social websites (including Instagram, YouTube and Facebook) has establish a way for individuals in society who cannot access Hollywood or other larger platforms in spheres such as sports or politics, to engage in activities that have turned them into celebrities. Within this in mind, Sternheimer (2011) observe that the elite in society who were perceived as the only one who could achieve a celebrity status in the 1950s no longer have a monopoly on who can become a celebrity and who cannot. On the contrary, everyone in society who utilises the modern media and technologies has a chance to become a celebrity. Whereas this is the case, Turner (2006) argues that the democratisation of celebrity in society is only on the surface, but on a deeper analysis, it still remains an exclusive category and systematically hierarchical. However, Turner’s arguments are based on the fact that most celebrity statuses in the modern world are short-lived, a factors that can be explained by the fact that due to the proliferation of the modern media technologies, the society is constantly churning out new celebrities. Therefore, the ability of the existing celebrities to attract and maintain attention from the larger society is limited in some ways. Furthermore, the reality television among other media has also been responsible in creating celetoids (short-lived celebrities) who are turned into commodities and used to increase their profits, thus strengthening inequality in the celebrity system.
Apart from democratisation, another aspect that is an indicator of celebritisation is the diversification. In this regard, there is a need to observe that whereas in the past celebrities were associated with certain fields in society such as politics and entertainment, this has since shifted and nearly every field in society has a celebrity (Street 2004). This ranges from entertainment, media, sports, and politics, to the technology sector, and even the academic field among others. Similarly, the mainstream media such as newspapers, magazines, radio and television played an instrumental role in promoting the celebrity status of individuals in societies in the past (Gamson, 1994). However, with the advent of the internet and social media, there is a growing list of celebrities who have come to the limelight through non-mainstream media such as social media. With this in mind, there is a significant diversification in the media that is used to capture the attention of people in society and as such, enhance the celebrity status of an individual. The diversification of different celebrity production and consumption tools has created a platform for individuals from different social, political and economic background to enhance their public image, thus gaining a celebrity status. Furthermore, the main aim of most celebrities in the modern world is not just inclined towards gaining fame but also profiteering from this fame. For instance, Kurzman et al. (2008) observe that a doctor, a CEo or an attorney may hire a public relationship agent to enhance their popularity within their field and as such, create a platform to increase their fees. In addition to fame and profits, celebrities are also increasingly using their status to acquire power, thus diversifying the ‘use’ and ‘benefit’ of celebrity statuses in society.
The last aspect that reveals the element of celebritisation in society is migration. Migration in this particular case refers to the ability of celebrities to explore other fields by exploiting their celebrity status, thus successfully venturing in other fields than those that have made them who they are (Barron 2006). Speaking from this point of view, there are numerous celebrities who have moved from their initial profession to successful work in other professions. For instance, Arnold Schwarzenegger, after establishing himself as a celebrity actor, went on to successfully vie for a political office. In the same way, Barron (2006) notes that Elizabeth Hurley was famous as an actor and a model, and later moved on to work in film production. Importantly, the migration as a concept in celebrity affirms democratisation in celebrity status in the sense that celebrities are not just limited to a single profession but rather are free to move to other professions. Barron (2006) affirms that such a move is necessary to help celebrities establish long lasting careers.
揭示社会中庆祝活动的最后一个方面是移民。在这种特殊情况下，移民是指名人利用其名人身份探索其他领域的能力，从而成功地在其他领域冒险，而不是那些使他们成为自己的领域（Barron 2006）。从这个角度讲，有许多名人从最初的职业转向其他职业的成功工作。例如，阿诺德·施瓦辛格（Arnold Schwarzenegger）在确立自己的明星演员地位后，成功地角逐了政治职位。同样，Barron（2006）指出，Elizabeth Hurley以演员和模特的身份而闻名，后来转而从事电影制作。重要的是，移民作为名人的一个概念肯定了名人身份的民主化，因为名人不仅限于一个职业，而且可以自由地转移到其他职业。Barron（2006）确认，这一举措对于帮助名人建立持久的职业生涯是必要的。