Celebrity Politics: Bono, Product (RED) and the Legitimising of Philanthrocapitalism

Celebrity Politics: Bono, Product(RED) and the Legitimising ofPhilanthrocapitalism

Nathan Farrell

This article reviews a framework developed by John Street which positions aesthetics, style andperformance, and celebrity politics as legitimate features within representative democracy. It appliesthis framework to the example of (RED), a political consumerism campaign fronted by U2 singerBono, which raises funds for African AIDS victims. It accounts for the use of style by Bono as acelebrity politician to represent himself as an authoritative figure and (RED) as a legitimateresponse to the epidemic, and relates this representation to the organisational arrangementsunderpinning the campaign. Further, it examines the relationship between the interests of theseorganisations and the manner in which (RED) represents AIDS. The article argues for a furtherintegration of textual readings of celebrity politicians based on their aesthetic qualities, and anappreciation of the organisations that contribute to the production of their campaigns.

Keywords: celebrity; political consumerism; philanthrocapitalism

IntroductionThe recent works of John Street demonstrate, in common with a range of his peerswithin political studies, a profound consideration of the intersection of culture(particularly popular culture) and what could be thought of as traditional politics.This is exemplified, to draw on examples taken from Street’s work, by the media’soccupation with politicians’ appearance, together with politicians’ increasing pri-oritisation of this, and the growing significance attached by the media to thepolitical opinions of celebrities from the world of entertainment. Street is hesitantto relate such shifts to some perceived dumbing down of political communicationsor debasing of the democratic process. Rather, he seeks to problematise thedichotomy between ‘the trivial (entertainment) and the serious (politics), and aconcern about the infection of the second by the first’ (Street 2004, 439). To thisend, he establishes a framework, over a series of articles, which positions popularculture and the role of the aesthetic as legitimate components within representativedemocracy.

In this article, I begin by drawing out some of the more pertinent aspects of thisframework, such as the importance of a politician’s appearance and the consider-ation of political participation as an expressive rather than strictly instrumental act,using three key articles (Street 2003 and 2004; Street et al. 2008). I then applyelements of this framework to an example of a celebrity-fronted NGO campaign:Bono’s political consumerism campaign, Product (RED). I demonstrate how Street’s

bs_bs_banner

doi: 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2011.00499.x BJPIR: 2012

© 2012 The Author. British Journal of Politics and International Relations © 2012Political Studies Association

framework can help illuminate the means by which two key aspects of Bono’scelebrity persona (dubbed ‘Bono-as-rock star’ and ‘Bono-as-activist’) position himas an authentic representative of concern about AIDS in Africa and, in turn, providelegitimacy to (RED)’s particular style of consumer activism. From there, the focusturns to a third aspect of Bono’s persona (‘Bono-as-capitalist’)—less evident inmany of his performances, but equally important to the success of his campaign—and how this relates to the organisational structures that make (RED) possible. I useStreet’s work (Street et al. 2008) to look at how the campaign constitutes consum-erism as an expressive political act and relate this to how Bono’s celebrity works tolegitimise this move. The article concludes by advocating Street’s approach ofcombining an appreciation of a celebrity politician’s style and performance and theorganisational arrangements that provide and shape their platform.

Aesthetics, Style and Performance in PoliticalRepresentationIn ‘Celebrity politicians: Popular culture and political representation’, Street (2004)examines what could be thought of as the personification of the merging of popularculture and politics: the celebrity politician. In doing so, he makes a significantcontribution to an expanding taxonomy in celebrity studies: celebrity politiciantypes 1 and 2. The first (CP1) refers to the elected politician ‘whose background isin entertainment, show business or sport, and who trades on this background’ orthe elected politician ‘who uses the forms and associations of the celebrity toenhance their image and communicate their message’. The second (CP2) ‘refers tothe entertainer who pronounces on politics and claims the right to representpeoples and causes, but who does so without seeking or acquiring elected office’(Street 2004, 437–438). More than this, Street’s article explores the means bywhich celebrity politics could be thought of as consistent with representativedemocracy, and does this by focusing upon the representative claims of celebritypoliticians. In particular, his article seeks to counter two criticisms of celebritypolitics which underpin the argument that this form of representation can under-mine democracy. They are: first, ‘the elected politician (CP1) impoverishes therelationship between representative and represented by marginalising issues ofpolitical substance in favour of irrelevant gestures and superficial appearances’; andsecond, ‘the celebrity (CP2) boasts irrelevant qualities and superficial knowledgethat do not justify their claims to represent’ (Street 2004, 439).

To defend celebrity politics, Street develops a framework that incorporates ‘theaesthetic character of the representative relationship’ (Street 2004, 449) and, indoing so, finds a legitimate role for the celebrity politician within contemporaryrepresentative democracy. He first identifies two competing notions underpinningclaims to representation: those premised on either the skills of the representative ortheir resemblance to those they represent. ‘[C]ritics of celebrity politics appeal tothe notion of representation captured in the idea of activity and acting for, while thedefenders favour an account couched in terms of resemblance or mirroring’ (Street2004, 442). Street goes on to challenge these two distinctions by, to some extent,collapsing them into each other on the understanding that representation neces-sarily exists as a symbolic relationship that entails ‘appearance’, and ‘claims to

2 NATHAN FARRELL

© 2012 The Author. British Journal of Politics and International Relations © 2012 Political Studies AssociationBJPIR, 2012

“represent” can emerge in a variety of contexts and can be validated in a variety ofways’ (Street 2004, 443). This move allows Street to focus more closely upon theaesthetic nature of the representative relationship, particularly upon the appear-ance of the political candidate. He positions appearance alongside more traditionalcriteria for evaluating a political candidate (policies, manifestos or political skills) inits potential role as proxy for such criteria of judgement. By this logic, the personaconstructed by, or for, a politician acts as an indicator of the political qualities (suchas being in touch with the electorate) or character traits (such as possessing familyvalues) with which they wish to be associated. The establishing of this personaupon the public stage becomes a key lens through which to analyse politicalrepresentation. An aesthetic account of representation along these lines highlightsthe importance of political style, and foregrounds use of the symbols and rituals thatmake up political performance. In this regard, political acts such as voting becomeless a rational matching of means to ends and more an opportunity, ‘allowing thevoter to identify with politicians and to seek out what they (the voters) find“politically attractive”’ (Street 2004, 443), less instrumental and more expressive.

In this sense, Street’s article fits with an earlier piece of work, ‘The celebritypolitician: Political style and popular culture’ (Street 2003), which makes moreexplicit the analogy between politics and show business. Here Street critiques anapproach largely prevalent in the study of political communications which placespolitics within the realm of marketing. Chief among Street’s criticisms is that suchmarketing approaches privilege a particular account of political rationality, onedriven by instrumentality, and do little to acknowledge ‘the capacity for the peopleto act “irrationally”’ (Street 2003, 90). Following P. David Marshall (2001), Streetargues for an account of politics that incorporates the ‘irrationality’ of emotions thatinspire political life and asks: ‘what if the business of politics is not commercialbusiness (i.e. selling oil) so much as show-business (selling people and perfor-mances)?’ (Street 2003, 90). Politicians, by this logic, are more akin to culturalcommodities, whose value lies in the meanings they generate. For Street, politiciansand political parties become more than just instruments, ‘[t]hey represent, and thismeans more than offering a conduit for prior preferences. They have instead to giveexpression to inchoate thoughts and feelings’ (Street 2003, 91, emphasis in origi-nal), drawing them together and giving them form. This suggests the constitutiverole of the representative relationship. If the appeal of a celebrity draws differentpeople together to become an audience, the appeal of a politician can draw thepeople into a represented body.

A similar theme is evident in ‘Playing to the crowd: The role of music and musiciansin political participation’ (Street et al. 2008), where the authors turn their attentionto CP2s, specifically musicians. While Street’s earlier works conceived of voting asan expressive act, this piece considers music in a similar fashion (for example Live8) and, as such, finds a place for music within the established canon of politicalparticipation. Importantly, in contradistinction to authors who explain music’spolitical involvement in, for example, the resistance movement in the Soviet bloc,as illustrative of predefined political goals, Street et al. view music as playing a moreconstitutive role, not only conveying the message or sentiment of the movementbut also motivating it (Street et al. 2008, 275). This, they contend, suggests a ‘stronglink’ between music and political participation of which they cite three important

LEGITIMISING OF PHILANTHROCAPITALISM 3


aspects: legitimation—the musicians must be thought of as ‘legitimate or authorita-tive representatives of their cause’; organisation—musicians, activists and non-governmental organisations (NGOs) must be enabled to work together viaappropriate organisational structures; and performance—the music must convey andmotivate the message or sentiment of the movement.

Street is careful to position his work as distinct from uncritical populism. ‘To drawattention to the role of “style” and “aesthetics” and “attractiveness” in politicalrepresentation is not to see all styles as plausible or appealing’ (Street 2004, 449).Rather, his purpose within these works is to open up a new forum for inquiry.While he counts himself as a ‘defender’ of celebrity politics, it seems more to thepoint that he is also defending the academic study of it. The value in his frameworklies in its potential to move understanding of celebrity politics beyond simpledebates concerning its role in the dumbing down of political culture vs. its eman-cipatory function as an expression of mass political will. However, in establishingcelebrity politics as a legitimate part of representative democracy, and as a worth-while focus of study, he opens up questions regarding what type(s) of politicscelebrity politics constitutes. In the years following the article’s publication (Street2004), debates have moved, but could move further, from justifications of the studyof, and explorations of the features of, individual celebrity performances andtowards incorporating a critical engagement with the production of celebrity poli-tics. In short, if celebrity politics is a ‘real’ political form, then it ought to be treatedas such. This means more than reporting the aesthetics, styles and performances ofcelebrity, it means integrating these new factors into an understanding of theorganisational features that allow particular celebrity politicians, or celebrity-fronted campaigns, to prosper on the political stage—how they work but, equally,what they do and what effect they might have. What seems of interest is not onlywhich components of aesthetics and style are present to be read in a celebritypolitician’s performance but also which ones are absent, and what the gap betweenthe two can reveal.

In the rest of this article I use the framework outlined above to look more closelyat one dominant (in terms of publicity) form of celebrity political activity, Product(RED),whose figurehead, Bono, is one of the leading CP2s currently on the mediastage. I begin by outlining the campaign and, using Street et al.’s (2008) headingsof ‘legitimacy’, ‘organisation’ and ‘performance’, demonstrate how Bono uses aparticular style of dress and type of performance to position himself as a non-partisan political expert outside the traditional centres of political power. I look athow two aspects of Bono’s persona, as a rock star and as an activist, work togetherto present him as a legitimate representative of concern, within the developedworld, for poverty and the spread of HIV/AIDS in Africa. From this I examineanother, less publicised, aspect of Bono (Bono-as-capitalist) and assess how thiselement of him likely contributes to the success of (RED) and how (RED) fits intoa broader organisational network of philanthrocapitalism. I then outline someof the potential problems with the (RED) model, particularly in terms of theorganisation’s transparency, and how the use of Bono as an authentic figure incontemporary philanthropy helps to minimise such problems. (RED) representsconsumerism as a political performance, an expressive political act, and I finish byarguing that these facets of the campaign and the manner in which it seeks to

4 NATHAN FARRELL


represent poverty and AIDS reflect the political economy of the campaign as muchas they reflect the style of Bono’s performances as a celebrity politician.

Product (RED)Product (RED) was launched in January 2006. As the brainchild of long-termactivist, current mayor of Santa Monica, California, and member of the Kennedydynasty, Bobby Shriver, and activist and U2 lead singer, Bono, the campaign is verymuch influenced by those who fit within Street’s mould of CP1s and CP2s. (RED),according to its website, has been designed to the following brief: ‘to create aware-ness’ within the developed world of the African AIDS epidemic and to ensure a‘sustainable flow of money from the private sector into the Global Fund [to FightAIDS, TB and Malaria]’ to help combat the disease. (RED) promotes itself as a‘business model’ and, moreover, as ‘a simple idea that transforms our collectivepower as shoppers into a financial force that helps those affected by AIDS in Africa’.Ostensibly, the campaign, according to its website, functions thus: (RED) workswith some of ‘the world’s most iconic brands’, referred to as (RED) partners, whichinclude American Express, Apple, Dell, Gap, Nike and Starbucks, among others.These partners produce ‘unique (RED) products, giving up to 50 per cent of theirprofits to the Global Fund to invest in HIV and AIDS programs in Africa’.1 So, forexample, Apple, which produces the iPod, markets a (RED) iPod, and donates aportion of the sales revenue to the Global Fund. Similarly, Gap produces (RED)clothing and American Express a (RED) credit card. The campaign also organisesevents such as a concert series called Rednights. A consumer, in other words,purchases a special (RED) product, often emblazoned with the campaign’s iconog-raphy, and which has the same mark-up as its non-(RED) equivalent, and the(RED) partner in question donates a portion of the profits to the Global Fund. Sofar, it has raised over $170 million.2

Product (RED) signifies the addition of political consumerism to Bono’s establishedmode of operation which, up to this point, had comprised lobbying governmentsand creating and performing politically charged music. Like music, this form ofconsumerism constitutes a politically motivated performance with the ability to callinto being and politically inspire an audience of supporters (as well as detractors).To explain the link between consumerism and politics, as found in Product (RED),it is useful to turn to the three conditions outlined by Street et al. (2008) withregard to music and politics—legitimation, organisation and performance—adapting them accordingly. Doing so provides a deeper understanding of thiscelebrity-led campaign.

Legitimation

Much of the perception of (RED) as a legitimate course of action in response to theAfrican AIDS epidemic stems from its association with Bono and the perception ofhim as both an authoritative and a virtuous figure in this field. As Lisa Ann Richeyand Stefano Ponte (2011, 37) argue, Bono’s involvement can ‘guarantee the coolquotient of (RED)’ and, it might be added, enhance its ethical dimension. According



to the popular press the rock star is an ‘ethical troubadour’ (Milmo 2006) and a‘preacher man’ (Ahmed 2006) who ‘has lobbied presidents and prime ministers allover the world’ (Harvey 2006); even Oprah Winfrey dubbed him ‘the reigning kingof hope’ (The Oprah Winfrey Show 2006). It is understandable, then, that the head ofthe international arm of Gap (a prominent (RED) partner) was quoted in the UKpress shortly after the campaign’s launch as saying that ‘[p]eople could be sceptical[about (RED)] but this is about making a real contribution. With his record in thisfield, Bono would not be advocating this programme unless he felt we were doingthe right thing’ (quoted in Milmo 2006, 12). This raises the question of whereexactly Bono’s perceived authority to pronounce on international developmentcomes from. It is not enough to point merely to his popularity or fame, as othercelebrities, to varying degrees, contribute to debates in international developmentand yet lack Bono’s elevated regard. There are, as journalist Chrissy Iley observes,‘many Bono’s all in one: the rock star, the activist, the writer, the family man’ (Iley2009, 14–16). Bono’s ability to act as an authentic representative of concern forAIDS in Africa stems from the interaction of these distinct but overlapping facets ofhis public persona. I focus on two in particular: Bono-as-activist and Bono-as-rockstar, and look at how Bono uses them to help create and maintain the perceptionof him as a legitimate political spokesperson.

As an activist, one factor that has contributed to establishing Bono’s credibility is thelongevity of his political work. Beginning in the mid-1980s with his involvement inthe anti-apartheid campaign, he has also participated in Bob Geldof’s Band Aid,Live Aid and Live8, worked with the Jubilee 2000 debt relief campaign, andestablished Debt AIDS Trade Africa (DATA). Bono’s long-term commitment topoverty and HIV/AIDS relief has brought him to the front line of relief efforts onnumerous occasions (for example, his visits to treatment clinics in sub-SaharanAfrica, aid distribution centres, etc.). This not only marks him out as a crediblespokesperson, ‘called upon to speak truth to public health’ (Richey and Ponte 2011,35), but allows him to act as an ‘emotional sovereign’, in the ‘classical republicansense where the sovereign manifests the true will of “the people”’ (Richey andPonte 2011, 36). The ‘reigning king of hope’, in some respects, comes to representthe collective emotional response of his audience and gives expression to their senseof responsibility.

It is Bono’s fame as a rock star that surely provides him with access to the corridorsof power, brings him to the attention of world leaders and grants him one-to-onemeetings with heads of government. However, as Philip Drake and Michael Higgins’analysis contends, he must at the same time account for the ‘lack of democraticmandate implied by his celebrity status’ (Drake and Higgins 2006, 91). In Bono’spolitical writings and speeches, there are ‘moments in which he seems to tempo-rarily concede to doubts concerning his right to speak, which are then followed bytransitions in which he reconciles his celebrity position with his holding the politicalstage’ (Drake and Higgins 2006, 92). Drake and Higgins turn to Bono’s address atthe 2004 UK Labour party conference to demonstrate this. Other examples can befound in his 2001 Harvard Commencement address in which he remarks: ‘in myview the only thing worse than a rock star is a rock star with a conscience, acelebrity with a cause’ (Bono 2001), before reconciling this by way of reference tothe commonly perceived heritage of political rebellion inherent in popular music.

6 NATHAN FARRELL


And yet, on the other hand, the fact that Bono is primarily a musician in somerespects augments, rather than impedes, his position as a political representative.This is demonstrated by Oprah Winfrey’s declaration to Bono: ‘you inspire mebecause here you are, the greatest rocker in the world, you could be sitting backenjoying your life ... and yet you have the passion to try to change the world’ (TheOprah Winfrey Show 2006). It is because Bono is a rock star that he is a legitimatespokesperson for development issues. By these accounts, Bono has nothing per-sonally to gain from his political activism in the manner in which it might bethought a politician could gain credibility through the appearance of concern forthe developing world.

Bono’s persona as a rock star also informs the perception of his political activism. Heis an outsider to mainstream political institutions, a non-partisan unbound byinstitutional allegiances who is free to address both the Labour party conference in2004 and Conservative party conference in 2009 and able to maintain workingrelationships with both the Clinton and Bush administrations. This detached, out-sider quality, with the implications of impartiality and apolitical objectivity, ispresented to his audience to be read in his attire—his trademark wrap-aroundsunglasses and casual yet cool outfits contrast with the suits worn by those in theinstitutions with which he is working—and his informal demeanour (see Drake andHiggins 2006). It is through this presentation that Bono acquires the position oflegitimate political representative and this legitimacy can, by association, be claimedby (RED). Moreover, this outsider status highlights a key difference between CP1sand CP2s: while the elected politician must, within a democratic system, declaretheir personal and financial interests, ‘the entertainer who pronounces on politics’is under no obligation to do so. The representation of Bono as an authentic politicalfigure (though he might be), negates the requirement for a thorough public under-standing of his interests and potential personal agenda (though he might actuallyhave none).

Organisation

Despite the purpose of (RED) being to generate charitable funds, (RED) is not acharity. It is, in fact, the property of a Delaware incorporated limited liabilitycompany called The Persuaders. As Sarah Dadush points out, it is to The Persuadersthat the (RED) partners pay ‘a licensing fee in exchange for the right to append theRed label to a segment of their product line’ (Dadush 2010, 1273). The involvementof The Persuaders is seldom included by (RED) in explanations of the workings ofthe organisation, though mention of the company can now be found on the FAQpage of the campaign’s website. As a relatively new form of corporate philanthropy(RED) occupies a grey area between charity initiative and business venture,between philanthropy and cause-related marketing. As a private company it is notobliged to disclose the details of its contracts with the (RED) partners, or the GlobalFund. Dadush observes that much of the structural workings of (RED) are notpublicly disclosed. This includes the selection process for admitting partners. It is:

unclear whether Partners are chosen for entry based on (1) their ability toout-bid competitors financially (e.g. how much they commit to paying in



licensing fees or in pledges to the Global Fund); (2) their social commit-ment to eliminating AIDS in Africa; (3) their CSR profile; (4) the size oftheir consumer base and its potential for generating sales revenues; or (5)some combination thereof (Dadush 2010, 1313).

This lack of transparency is of concern, yet Bono’s persona as an activist seemsauthentic enough to smooth over such concerns for supporters and much of thepopular media. Such is Bono’s importance that ‘[o]ne person working on the [(RED)]project’ informed Jem Bendell et al. ‘that the participating companies can pull outof the scheme if Bono is not involved in the future’ (Bendell et al. 2009, 65).

The genesis of Product (RED), according to numerous reports in the popular media(for example Bishop 2006; Vallely 2006) occurred during a meeting between Bonoand former US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin. During a conversation regardingpoor public awareness of the AIDS epidemic, Rubin remarked: ‘You need to marketthis like Nike’. It occurred to Bono that ‘We had the churches, the student cam-puses, the activists ... But we didn’t have the high street’ (cited in Vallely 2006, 10).(RED) constitutes that attempt to harness the high street. Although the marketingdrive for (RED) understandably relied heavily upon media exposure, for examplethe devotion of an issue of The Independent newspaper (edited for the day by Bono)to the campaign and an appearance by Bono on The Oprah Winfrey Show, the venuechosen for the launch of Bono’s recruitment of the high street to his cause was the2006 World Economic Forum at Davos, Switzerland. Surrounded by some of theworld’s leading economists and business elites, Bono took to the stage and intro-duced (RED). Matthew Bishop, a business editor for The Economist and co-author ofPhilanthrocapitalism (Bishop and Green 2008), in an article on the Davos forum inthe Daily Telegraph, remarked with ‘real surprise’ that Bono turned out ‘to be acard-carrying capitalist’ (Bishop 2006). This surprise is perhaps testament to thesuccess of the other aspects of Bono’s identity (rock star and activist).

Bono’s business acumen, as two journalists writing for Bloomberg noted, hasamassed him an ‘empire which encompasses real estate, private-equity invest-ments, a hotel, a clothing line and a chain of restaurants. Along with fellow bandmembers, he also owns a stake in 15 companies and trusts, including concert-booking agencies, record production firms and trusts that are mostly registered inIreland’ (Tomlinson and O’Brien 2007). It is this aspect of Bono that I refer to asBono-as-capitalist, distinct from Bono-as-rock star and Bono-as-activist. The lattertwo garner much public attention when working in tandem to help achieve hisphilanthropic goals. However, the less publicised Bono-as-capitalist is also impor-tant to the organisational structure that makes (RED) possible. Bono-as-capitalist istapped into numerous networks which aid the success of (RED). For example, asone of the founding directors of Elevation Partners, a Silicon Valley-based privateequity firm specialising in new media technology, numerous former boardmembers of Apple (now a (RED) partner) rank among his colleagues. Despitepopular media coverage being preoccupied with the rock star and activist, thecircles in which Bono-as-capitalist moves are also of importance to (RED). AsBendell et al. (2009, 66) note, (RED)’s UK offices are within the PR company Freud.This is the same PR firm that handles the marketing department of The Independent(Brook 2008, 11), which is the same newspaper that allowed Bono to act as editor

8 NATHAN FARRELL


for a special (RED) issue. This is not to suggest anything financially untoward, butrather to illustrate the importance of Bono-as-capitalist to the success and continu-ation of Product (RED).

While Bono’s style represents him as speaking on behalf of ordinary people withinthe centres of global power and as some type of political neutral, his political andeconomic views seem very much influenced by his mentor, Harvard economicsprofessor Jeffrey Sachs—the singer penned the foreword to Sachs’ 2005 The End ofPoverty. Sachs’ thesis understands poverty in the global south as largely the result ofgeographical factors, such as drought, or local corruption and poor governance.While accounting for some historical exploitation of Africa by European and Ameri-can powers, his analysis very much underplays the potential role of global capital inexacerbating problems in the developing world in the form of ‘shock therapy’structural adjustment programmes, welfare and state provision rollbacks, etc. Freemarket capitalism is represented not only as a benevolent and necessary force, butalso as the most efficient means of lifting people from poverty. So, for example,anti-capitalist protesters, who Sachs euphemistically dubs ‘rich-country protesters’(Sachs 2005, 12), have, according to him, been irresponsible in their argumentsagainst sweatshop labour. Such exploitative employment, while undesirable, rep-resents ‘the first rung on the ladder out of extreme poverty’ (Sachs 2005, 11)because the market, in and of itself, will provide employee rights, rather thangrass-roots activism or trade unionism.

The solution to extreme global poverty, according to Sachs’ thesis, is more andbetter private (corporate) investment and this is where (RED) steps in. (RED)constitutes part of the move towards philanthrocapitalism and social entrepreneur-ship: the belief ‘that business thinking and market methods will save the world—and make some of us a fortune along the way’, as Michael Edwards acrimoniouslyputs it (Edwards 2010, 2), or as Michael Strong unreservedly states, ‘entrepreneursand conscious capitalists can solve all the World’s problems’ (Strong 2009). This,Strong argues, can be achieved by turning over more natural and human assets tothe private sector, including the roles performed by civil society. Indeed in theirbook Philanthrocapitalism (2008), Matthew Bishop and Michael Green cite (RED) asan example of such a venture. For philanthrocapitalist Bill Gates (2008),

[i]t is mainly corporations that have the skills to make technologicalinnovations work for the poor. To make the most of those skills, we needmore creative capitalism: an attempt to stretch the reach of market forcesso that more companies can benefit from doing work that makes morepeople better off (Gates 2008, 26).

However, such policies will bring about, according to Edwards, ‘[s]mall change—limited advances in society as it is, not as it could be if we summoned up the courageto confront the deeper problems and inequalities that capitalism creates’ (Edwards2010, xi, emphasis in original).

The trend towards corporate philanthropy helps to explain why Bono and (RED)partner American Express ‘had an immediate meeting of minds’ (Martinson 2006,31). Laurel Powers-Freeling, the head of Amex’s UK consumer card business, notedthat ‘one of the things we at American Express have been observing for a while is



this trend towards what we now call the conscience consumer’ (quoted in Martin-son 2006, 31). Hence, ‘[w]hen Bono walked into the head office of AmericanExpress ... the company practically laid out the red carpet. The campaigning rockstar had something that one of the world’s biggest financial services groups wasvery much looking for: a way of reaching the growing band of so-called “conscienceconsumers”’ (Martinson 2006, 31). It is these conscience consumers, Bobby Shrivercommented, who ‘expressed interest’ in Make Poverty History but ‘shied away’from the type of activism that involves writing to politicians or marching on capitalcities, and yet they wanted to do something. ‘We had to come up with something forthem to do’, explained Shriver, ‘something easier’ (quoted in Vallely 2006, 10).These, as Powers-Freeling describes, are the individuals who maintain that ‘I haveto spend money anyway, so if there’s a way of using the powers of my purse forgood, great, but I don’t want to give up anything to do so’ (Martinson 2006). As aphilanthrocapitalist, it is this aspect of Bono’s persona who has developed, withBobby Shriver, the (RED) business model and so tapped into this increasing trendtowards conscience consumerism.

Performance

As noted above, in recruiting the high street, (RED) forms part of a trend towardspolitical consumerism, evident in campaigns such as Fair Trade. The act of purchas-ing a (RED) product or attending a Rednights concert can become for the consumera political expression of, first, concern for the victims of the HIV/AIDS epidemicand, second, the belief that consumerism of this nature constitutes at least part ofa suitable political response.

(RED) relies on much celebrity-focused publicity. Examples of this include Bonoand Oprah Winfrey’s televised shopping trip in Chicago (as part of an episode of TheOprah Winfrey Show). On this occasion Bono and Oprah were joined by glamorouscelebrities such as Penelope Cruz, Christy Turlington and Kanye West, each dem-onstrating (RED) products and modelling (RED) fashions. The celebrity appear-ances helped to tie (RED) to sexiness and style, on the one hand, and philanthropyand activism on the other. This is mirrored in phrases such as ‘be a good lookingSamaritan’, previously found on (RED)’s website but since dropped from thecampaign’s rhetoric. Buying (RED) becomes an expressive act, demonstratingsupport for HIV/AIDS relief programmes, and consumers are encouraged to followthe celebrity role model’s lead. Not only this, but wearing (and being seen wearing),for example, a Gap (RED) item also constitutes an act of political expression. AsCharles Dunstone of The Carphone Warehouse remarked upon the store carryingthe Motorola (RED) phone, since discontinued: ‘Everyone can carry this phone likea badge saying they care and want to make a difference’ (quoted in Harvey 2006).More than this, producing (RED) products equally becomes a political act, demon-strating a company’s philanthropic credentials and associating it with Bono and hisqualities as an activist. This is no doubt a major benefit to (RED) partners such asGap and Nike, previously the target of high-profile political campaigns regardinglabour rights. It must go some way to draw attention away from a report by theCentre for Research on Multinational Corporations (De Haan and Vander Stichele2007), which found that workers in Lesotho’s garment factories who produce

10 NATHAN FARRELL


(RED) T-shirts ‘are paid are the minimum [wage] or just above the minimum. Theworkers say that there is no way they can live on these wages ... [and so] willborrow money against their severance payment, which is the pension they receivewhen they leave the factory (2 weeks pay for every year worked)’ (De Haan andVander Stichele 2007, 26). Similarly, it must help draw attention from a 2007 reportby Dan McDougall, which found that ‘[c]hildren as young as ten are being sold intoslavery by poverty-stricken parents to churn out cheap, embroidered clothes forfashion chain Gap’, despite the company’s strict system of auditing suppliers(McDougall 2007, 6).

Product (RED), Political Consumerism and theRepresentation of HIV/AIDSContrary to Bono’s representation as a detached political outsider, he appears verymuch to be part of a network of business interests which, to greatly varying degrees,are ideologically driven by a belief that market methods can provide solutions toproblems such as the African AIDS epidemic. While it is beyond the scope of thisarticle to debate the validity of such an outlook, it is striking that this agenda is oftenat variance with the sentiments bound up with the aesthetics and style of Bono’spolitical performances. While (RED) presents itself as hip, stylish, sexy and rebel-lious, it forms part of a movement that traces its influences back to Friedman andHayek (for example Strong 2009) and situates the market as the key arena for socialchange, and the corporation and consumer as the key agents.

This is reflected in the manner in which (RED) seeks to represent AIDS in Africa.According to the campaign’s blog and Twitter updates, AIDS is disarticulatedfrom causal factors (certainly any causes relating to global capitalism). (RED)’sawareness-raising literature represents AIDS in two distinct ways. First, there arestatistics such as ‘33 mm people in world have HIV. 22 mm live in Africa. Help fightAIDS in Africa’ (RED Tweet, 1 December 2009).3 Second, there are personal nar-ratives which take one of two forms: either they are updates from (RED) membersof staff on field trips to recipient countries in Africa, observing how (RED) moneyis being spent, or they are the personal stories of people living with HIV/AIDSwhose lives have been touched by the help provided by (RED) supporters. Inexamples of the former, the messages concern the (RED) employee’s impressions ofthe landscape and their thoughts on the local cuisine and culture, as much asspecific references to AIDS relief programmes. Of a similar demographic to thecampaign’s supporters and with all the appearances of someone on a gap year, theseindividuals are like (RED)’s supporters and they are, to this end, representative ofthe campaign’s followers. As such these tweets likely form a key way of drawing insupporters. Examples of the latter frequently take the form of personal biographiesof individuals, previously close to death but since saved by the antiretroviralmedication specifically provided by (RED). These personal testimonies of AIDSvictims are invariably presented as good news stories; someone was in the processof dying, they took the drugs (RED) supporters provided and now they are alive andostensibly content. In this sense, such individuals can be thought of as directrepresentations of the benevolence of the campaign’s supporters. Such narrativesrarely, if ever, provide a context that includes global capitalism in anything other



than a benevolent role. Let me be clear that the impact of the campaign upon thelives of those suffering with HIV/AIDS is to be commended, however, the means bywhich the disease is understood is greatly simplified by the exclusion of debateconcerning, for example, why people cannot afford the necessary antiretroviralmedication. Richey and Ponte (2011, 9) consider this to be the result of a process ofdepoliticisation, consistent with what they identify as ‘Brand Aid’—the comingtogether of ‘aid to brands’ and ‘brands that provide aid’ (Richey and Ponte 2011,10). While there is merit to this approach, this seems more like a process whereby,rather than aid meeting brand, aid is situated within a political framework consis-tent with market ideology and subsumed within market logic; a political process, inother words.

If the cause of AIDS in Africa is this simple, so seems the solution. (RED) offers itssupporters three means of contributing to fighting the disease: buy (RED) products,tell others to do so or make a donation to the Global Fund. This approach allows(RED) to fulfil one half of its brief: to ensure a sustainable flow of funds from theprivate sector to the Global Fund. Upon occasion, it appears that the two compo-nents of the campaign’s mandate (awareness-raising and fund-raising) do not siteasily together. That is, letter-writing campaigns, boycotts, petitions and marchesmight also be thought of as valid forms of political expression but they do notappear to be suggested by the campaign as complements to (RED)’s conscienceconsumerism. (RED) originally conceived that ‘some people will buy (Product) REDproducts without even knowing what (RED) is about or without even knowingwhat they have just made happen for Africa’ and, further, that they ‘welcome thesepeople too!’ (RED FAQs, accessed 2008) The campaign has since changed itsapproach so that ‘the intent[ion] of the mark [the (RED) logo on products] is toeducate the consumer about (RED) and the impact that can be made in Africa’(RED FAQs, accessed 2010). Despite the campaign’s later emphasis on theawareness-raising aspect of its brief, (RED)’s representation of AIDS in Africa occurswithin clear limitations.

However, as Bono has argued, shopping can act as a ‘gateway drug to wideractivism’ (cited in Vallely 2007, 2). Equally this argument can be found in JeremyYoude’s defence of (RED) that critics of the campaign ‘miss out on the possibilitythat political consumerism may be a person’s starting point for action rather than itsendpoint’ (Youde 2009, 215, emphasis in original). This is a distinct possibility.However, it does not appear to be one encouraged by (RED). As noted above, (RED)offers three means for supporters to contribute and other activities are encouragedthat fall under these broad headings. For example, supporters can also spread(RED)’s message by turning their Twitter or Facebook profile (RED), in other words,adorning their profiles with (RED) imagery, or they can elect to take the ‘Starbuckspledge’, which ostensibly means promising to buy Starbucks’ (RED) coffee. Thisplaces consumer products squarely in the centre of political activity and consum-erism as the key means of enacting a political sentiment. While it is a distinctpossibility that an individual might be inspired by (RED) to learn more aboutinternational development, broadly, or poverty and HIV/AIDS, more specifically,the individual needs to find this information elsewhere as the campaign does notfacilitate this in its output. In a letter to The Lancet, written as a response to a critiqueof (RED) the journal had published, Christoph Benn of the Global Fund ((RED)’s

12 NATHAN FARRELL


recipient organisation) noted that ‘[t]o somehow demand that (RED) is only worth-while if it takes on the burden of political education is not only blind to what (RED)is about, it is patronising to the millions of people waiting for their medicines’ (Benn2008, 1835). He has a point and such criticisms draw attention away from (RED)’sincredible achievements. However, ‘political education’ must, in some way, fit into(RED)’s brief to raise awareness among its supporters.

In constituting political consumerism as an expressive political act (RED) hascreated an impressive revenue stream for the Global Fund but does so by perpetu-ating a particular understanding of HIV/AIDS and northern consumers’ role inalleviating such problems. The point is not whether (RED) is right or wrong—oreven if such binaries are applicable—but that Bono’s particular political celebritycan provide legitimacy to this in a manner that draws attention away from thesedeeper concerns such that someone could address these concerns with: ‘Bonowould not be advocating this programme unless he felt we were doing the rightthing’ (quoted in Milmo 2006, 12). I am not arguing here that Bono has acted tosimplify the African AIDS epidemic, or that this celebrity-fronted campaign hasdumbed down this complex social issue, but rather that the (RED) campaign hassought to construct AIDS in a manner consistent with the ideological views withwhich it is underpinned.

ConclusionsThe framework offered by Street opens up a terrain beyond debates regardingwhether celebrity politics is a feature of a political culture that is dumbing down oran expression of mass political will and provides the tools not only to situatecelebrity politics within a liberal representative democracy but to understand it asa real and credible form of representation. It is, in short, a ‘real’ form of politics and,as such, it is fitting to treat it accordingly. This can include using analyses of theaesthetic qualities and performance styles of individual celebrity politicians incombination with investigations of the organisational structures that underpin theirperformances—using an appreciation of the aesthetic qualities of celebrity politicsto inform an understanding of the political economy of celebrity politics (and viceversa).

Street’s work provides a route to engage critically with such campaigns, not nec-essarily by celebrating them as some populist manifestation of political will, or bydismissing them as irrelevant and lacking in seriousness. Rather, it permits a deeperappreciation of how such campaigns work—their methods and potentialoutcomes—and the roles of aesthetics and performance within them. Conceptual-ising aesthetics, style and performance as important political components allowsthem to be submitted to the same type of scrutiny previously reserved for theelements of ‘traditional’ representative politics. In ‘traditional’ politics the gapbetween a pre-election promise and a post-election delivery reveals much of inter-est. Likewise the gap between the appearance of a celebrity politician and theorganisational structures upon which that appearance depends is also of interest. Inother words, while it is useful to identify the claims to representation inherent in acelebrity politician’s appearance, it is also worthwhile to test the validity and



consistency of those claims and, moreover, the reception of those claims by therepresented (which space has not allowed me to include here). What is of interestis not only which components of aesthetics and style are present to be read in acelebrity politician’s performance, but also which ones are absent, and what the gapbetween the two can reveal. This is not meant to dismiss the form as politicallyimpotent, or to lead by implication to accusations of superficiality within celebritypolitics. It moves us to a position of appreciating the possibilities of this type ofpolitical representation while at the same time being aware of the potential costs. Itis, moreover, to navigate a path between celebratory populism and laments regard-ing a cultural decline, and to appreciate the complexities of the issues at hand.

About the Author

Nathan Farrell, Media School, Bournemouth University, Talbot Campus, Fern Barrow, Poole,Dorset BH12 5BB, UK, email: [email protected]

NotesI would like to thank Debbie Lisle and Susan McManus for convening the ‘Celebrity Politics’ round tableat the 2010 PSA Conference and also offer my thanks to the other panellists. I would also like to thankJutta Weldes, Eric Herring, Ana Jordan and Carina Fearnley for their support and input on earlier draftsand, additionally, the two anonymous reviewers for their comments.

1. http://www.joinred.com/FAQ

2. http://www.joinred.com/aboutred

3. Twitter posts are limited to 140 characters and this puts a limit on the amount of context (RED) canprovide when tweeting about HIV/AIDS. However, a number of the campaign’s tweets contain linksto (RED)’s blog, a platform with considerably more space.

BibliographyAhmed, K. (2006) ‘First person: With Bono the preacher man on his mission to Africa’, The Observer, 21

May, 26.

Bendell, J., Alam, N., Lin, C., Rimando, L., Veuthey, C. and Wettstein, B. (2009) The Eastern Turn inResponsible Enterprise: The Lifeworth Review of 2008 (Manila: Lifeworth), 63–66.

Benn, C. (2008) ‘Seeing (RED)’, The Lancet, 371:9624, 1835–1836.

Bishop, M. (2006) ‘View from Davos: Bono marketing his red badge of virtue’, The Telegraph, 27 January(online). Available online at: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2930938/View-from-Davos-Bono-marketing-his-red-badge-of-virtue.html

Bishop, M. and Green, M. (2008) Philanthrocapitalism (London: A. & C. Black).

Bono (2001) Harvard Commencement Address, 12 June. Available online at: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/bonoharvardcommencement.htm, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHrqUvTpvjE and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X-rvbEbABeI&feature=related

Brook, S. (2008) ‘Upward and onward for the Independent’s revolutionary’, The Observer, 13 April, 11.

Dadush, S. (2010) ‘Profiting in (RED): The need for enhanced transparency in cause-related marketing’,Journal of International Law and Politics, 42:4, 1269–1336.

De Haan, E. and Vander Stichele, M. (2007) Footloose Investors: Investing in the Garment Industry in Africa(Amsterdam: Centre for Research on Multinational Corporations).

Drake, P. and Higgins, M. (2006) ‘“I’m a celebrity, get me into politics”: The political celebrity and thecelebrity politician’, in S. Holmes and S. Redmond (eds), Framing Celebrity (London: Routledge),87–100.

14 NATHAN FARRELL


Edwards, M. (2010) Small Change: Why Business Won’t Save the World (San Francisco CA: Berret-Koehler).

Gates, B. (2008) ‘How to fix capitalism’, Time, 11 August, 26–31.

Harvey, O. (2006) ‘Change your phone change the world’, The Sun, 16 May, 20.

Iley, C. (2009) ‘Bono: The shades come off’, Sunday Times (Magazine), 21 June, 14–21.

Marshall, P. D. (2001) Celebrity and Power: Fame in Contemporary Culture (London: University of MinnesotaPress).

Martinson, J. (2006) ‘The Jane Martinson Interview: Laurel Powers-Freeling: The Amex chief providingbacking for Bono: American Express is part of a quartet of companies supporting the U2 singer’s AIDSin Africa campaign’, The Guardian, 17 March, 31.

McDougall, D. (2007) ‘Gap slave kids’, News of the World, 28 October, 6.

Milmo, C. (2006) ‘The Red revolution’, The Independent, 27 January, 12.

The Oprah Winfrey Show (2006) ‘Oprah and Bono paint the town “RED”’ (Programme Script), HarpoProductions, 13 October.

Richey, L. and Ponte, S. (2011) Brand Aid: Shopping Well to Save the World (London: University of MinnesotaPress).

Sachs, J. (2005) The End of Poverty: How We can Make it Happen in Our Lifetime (London: Penguin).

Street, J. (2003) ‘The celebrity politician: Political style and popular culture’, in J. Corner and D. Pels (eds),Media and the Restyling of Politics (London: Sage), 85–98.

Street, J. (2004) ‘Celebrity politicians: Popular culture and political representation’, British Journal ofPolitics and International Relations, 6:4, 435–452.

Street, J., Hague, S. and Savigny, H. (2008) ‘Playing to the crowd: The role of music and musicians inpolitical participation’, British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 10:2, 269–285.

Strong, M. (2009) Be the Solution: How Entrepreneurs and Conscious Capitalists can Solve All the World’s Problems(Hoboken NJ: John Wiley & Sons).

Tomlinson, R. and O’Brien, F. (2007) ‘Bono, who preaches charity, profits from buyouts, tax breaks’,Bloomberg, 27 January. Available online at: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aqdKjGJi9cHc

Vallely, P. (2006) ‘A RED revolution of the high street’, The Independent, 15 May, 10.

Vallely, P. (2007) ‘Bono’s message: The battle has only just begun’, The Independent, 1 December, 2.

Youde, J. (2009) ‘Ethical consumerism or reified neoliberalism? Product (RED) and private funding forpublic goods’, New Political Science, 31:2, 201–220.



Celebrity Politics: Bono, Product (RED) and the Legitimising of Philanthrocapitalism

Documents

Transcript of Celebrity Politics: Bono, Product (RED) and the Legitimising of Philanthrocapitalism