Pinpointing modern celebrity culture is difficult, but it certainly has expanded from what it once was. Its genesis can be traced back to the eighteenth century. The allure of writers and philosophers such as Rousseau and Voltaire exceeded their intellectual contributions—people were not only interested in the works of these figures, but the person behind them. The advent of the printing press enabled the production of gossip sheets which publicized the personal tales of both aristocrats and intellectuals; the public could now familiarize themselves with distant celebrities through the mediation of newspaper print. This served as a foundation for an industry built upon the projected image of celebrities: Hollywood.
In early twentieth century Hollywood, studios learned to craft and commodify celebrity images for public enjoyment. As the industry developed, the complex nature between spectator and performer became evident. 1950s sociologist Daniel Horton coined the term “parasocial relationship,” describing how “the most remote and illustrious (performers) are met as if they were in the circle of one’s peers.” This type of relationship is similar to that of an imaginary friend—it’s entirely dependent on a projected idea of a person and not real interaction. Parasocial relationships are inherently easy because they do not require maintenance. After a hectic day, it can be more appealing to listen to your favorite podcast host talk about their life than your family at the dinner table. This level of disconnect is what makes parasocial relationships so comfortable. One can experience emotional satisfaction comparable to what they would find in a companionship. However, authenticity is what ultimately distinguishes our relationships with celebrities from those with people in our own lives. One party (the fan) completely removes themselves and latches onto an idealized perception of the other party (the celebrity). In other words, parasocial relationships fundamentally mirror toxic real-life relationships.
In recent years, the negative implications of parasocial celebrity relationships have become glaringly apparent. During the COVID-19 lockdown, screens were our primary means of social interaction with both those we personally knew and with celebrities. This exacerbated the issue of parasocial relationships by blurring the line between genuine relationships and digital ones. Social media only complicates this issue further. Celebrities can post their most glamorous happenings to devoted fans. Additionally, the emergence of microcelebrities on platforms like Tik Tok and Instagram permits a “one-and-a-half” sided relationship; there is a greater likelihood of reciprocal interaction between the celebrity and the fan. This is an ideal environment for obsession.
Where do we draw the line between casual and pathological fandom? The Celebrity Attitude Scale is a spectrum created by psychologists for the British Journal of Psychology to conceptualize how people navigate their admiration for stars. Lower scores indicate more individualistic behaviors like watching and reading about a celebrity, while higher scores indicate extreme obsession and pathological behaviors like stalking. Obsessive fans often utilize vicious tactics like online harassment and doxxing to defend their favorite celebrities against even the most mild criticism. This attests to a desire to assume our favorite celebrities, those we revere most, morally align with us. However, this is simply foolish when their entire image is based upon a calculated illusion. Behind every celebrity interview and social media post is a team of professionals dedicated to preserving a facade of perfection, which only bolsters fan loyalty.
The allegiance of fans renders them highly susceptible to misinformation. While celebrities hold considerable leverage over public opinion, they are often completely ignorant to or have weak understandings of the social issues they choose to speak on.
