Taylor Swift is one of many celebrities who revealed whom she will be voting for in the 2024 Presidential Election. Graphic courtesy of Deadline. 

ABBY KIDWELL | STAFF REPORTER | arkidwell@butler.edu 

Déjà vu is the phrase of the month as the U.S. gears up once again for a highly contentious presidential election. Every four years, two candidates repeat the same song and dance — rallies, fundraising, debates and public appearances — in hopes of securing the highest office in the land. 

Another constant of election season is celebrity involvement in the political process. In the build-up to November, a revolving cast of Hollywood characters will voice their opinions and offer their support to whichever candidate best suits their fancy. Because of the polarizing nature of the upcoming election, a growing number of celebrities feel compelled to make a statement. 

Following the departure of President Joe Biden from the race in July 2024, Vice President Kamala Harris hit the ground running to generate momentum for her ascension to Democratic nominee. The Harris campaign quickly garnered widespread support from celebrities such as Olivia Rodrigo, Bruce Springsteen, Billie Eilish and, most notably, Taylor Swift. Former President Donald Trump has also had his fair share of celebrity endorsements, but no names as big as Swift or Springsteen. 

Kate Dillon, a sophomore critical communication and media studies major, appreciates when celebrities utilize their platforms to advocate for political involvement and thinks celebrity endorsement is impactful on campaigns. 

“Celebrity endorsements gain a lot of attention, spread a lot of awareness to election season and also get some unmotivated voters as well to really become motivated to vote,” Dillon said. 

From the right celebrity, something as simple as an Instagram post can be the spark to ignite a forest fire of civic engagement. In the specific case of Swift’s endorsement for Harris, a reported 405,999 users were driven to vote.gov through her link in the 24 hours following her post. 

Despite what their influence can achieve, the average celebrity still possesses minimal political experience. This raises the question of why people place trust in them and if this reflects a larger decline in political literacy, particularly among Gen Z. Collective distrust in news outlets could be a culprit. 

Stephen Barnard, associate professor and chair of the sociology and criminology department, theorized that the growing distrust in news and academic institutions will result in further political distance among younger demographics.

“We see this in the distrust in science and academics more broadly,” Barnard said. “One of the consequences of that is we are going to see — unless other things change — a further distancing of [the] public, and certainly of younger members of our public, in frequenting and supporting professional production of news.” 

For all the advantages and disadvantages of celebrity political endorsements, the essential question remains: can an endorsement from a public figure legitimately impact the outcome of an election? 

Assistant professor of political science Dr. Rhea Myerscough proposed that the influence of celebrity endorsements on the voting public is limited but not something to write off completely. 

“It makes a candidate from among other candidates in a primary seem more exciting,” Myerscough said. “It might make you more excited to vote if you maybe weren’t going to, but [it’s not enough] to [make someone] switch parties.” 

Remi Billanti, a sophomore speech, language and hearing sciences major, asserted that a celebrity endorsement could not change her vote. 

“You should vote for who you want to vote for, not because somebody else is,” Billanti said. 

Voters are more likely to use a celebrity endorsement as evidence for their pre-existing opinion rather than as encouragement to switch their vote. Why do celebrities feel compelled to share their opinion at the risk of alienating their fanbase for such a slim reward?

The answer lies in the dynamic relationship between celebrity and fan, which social media has undeniably encouraged. 

Social media has made the celebrity accessible in a way that was previously impossible. An expectation exists within fandoms that their idol will speak on relevant global issues due to the advent of parasocialism, which refers to the one-sided relationship in which someone develops an attachment to a person they do not know. Fans even experience a sense of victory when their favorite public figure aligns with them on political matters.

On one hand, people wanting their dollars to support artists with similar belief systems makes sense. At the same time, the desire creates an impossible standard for celebrities to live by. In the case of Chappell Roan, harassment from fans forced her into revealing that she would be voting for Harris in November, despite her reservations to publicly endorse the Democratic Party.

The modern celebrity is faced with demands from many directions — to speak out or not to speak out, to endorse this candidate or that candidate. All courses of action have the potential to displease someone, but this dilemma is seemingly something celebrities will have to get used to for as long as their fans demand. One thing fans would do well to remember is that political change truly hinges on their own actions as individuals and members of the larger public. The responsibility is not solely with celebrities.