On October 3rd, 2015, Hilary Clinton took the SNL stage alongside Miley Cyrus. In her first skit, Clinton plays “Val”, a bartender who serves Kate McKinnon’s version of her. As McKinnon’s version of Clinton pokes fun at the real Hilary’s sluggishness in condemning the Keystone Pipeline and supporting same-sex marriage, the steady hum of canned laughter floods the scene. Two skits later find Miley Cyrus unsure of how she identifies herself gender wise and concluding that she is “just gender lazy.” More recently, Miley Cyrus visited George Mason University where she marched from dorm to dorm, encouraging students to vote for Clinton. The real question amidst it all is what does this have to do with Hilary Clinton’s campaign? On the same note, how do Katy Perry’s performances and pro-Clinton sentiment at Hilary Clinton’s rallies affect polls and the people’s opinion? How does Donald Trump’s SNL appearance affect his polls and public opinion?
Well the answer is not always so simple, according to Anthony Nownes, a political scientist at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville. While some may argue that celebrity endorsements like Miley Cyrus and Katy Perry have little to no affect on political campaigns, Nownes and other political scientists argue otherwise. Celebrities’ political activity or in Miley Cyrus’s case, any activity at all, often make news, which captures people’s attention. If people are paying attention to Clinton because of Katy Perry or to John F. Kennedy, back in 1960, for his appearance on a late night talk show, then that’s exactly what politicians crave. In order for people to form any kind of opinion, politicians need to draw attention to themselves, even if its relentless public scrutiny as in Donald Trump’s case thus far.
A test on 500 University of Tennessee students revealed that celebrity involvement with a political party generally affected the people’s opinion of the party. In the test, students were told that Jennifer Aniston donated substantial sums to the Democratic Party, and Peyton Manning, who was popular among UT fans at the time, to the Republican Party. Results showed that Aniston’s involvement hurt the Democrats while Manning’s support helped influence public opinion in favor of Republicans.
There is a difference, however, between celebrities financially supporting a political party and simply performing before a candidate’s speech or appearing alongside them on a late night TV show. In fact, studies reveal that financially backing a political party can actually hurt a celebrity’s image and reputation. For example, in the aforementioned study, non-Republicans were often disappointed by Manning’s support for the Republican Party and as a result, altered their opinions of him as an individual. The same held true for non-Democrats who learned of Aniston’s support for the Democratic Party.
Regardless of how celebrities involve themselves in political campaigns, it is a gimmick that has long been used to attract public attention – attention candidates so desperately seek. All we can do is cast our vote and hope for the best, which, this election year, is frankly easier said than done.
