Industry NewsListsOpinion

6 Ways Liberal Celebrities Can Make a Difference

Mark Duplass deserves some sort of an award.

The indie titan behind HBO’s “Togetherness” and the co-star of FX’s “The League” did something few other stars attempt these days. He went on a conservative talk show to listen. And learn.

He didn’t even appear to have a product to plug!

#134 TRUMP KEEPS WINNING! Georges St-Pierre and Mark Duplass | Louder With Crowder

Duplass’ extended chat with conservative podcaster Steven Crowder proved enlightening, occasionally funny and never mean-spirited. The actor/director sincerely wanted to reach across the aisle in a way rarely done these days.

Mission more than accomplished.

Duplass and Crowder locked horns over President Donald Trump, celebrity activism, immigration and more. You could sense where each stood, and it’s likely few opinions got flipped. And yet Duplass probably walked away with, at the very least, a better understanding of what the average conservative thinks.

Which brings us to Kristen Bell. The star of CBS’s “The Good Place” and the upcoming “CHiPs” film recently defended her fellow stars for their political activism.

“So I’m not a citizen anymore because I’m an actor? F*** that,” Bell said during a conversation at the inaugural BE Conference, a gathering of influential women in Austin, Texas…

“I’m not any less allowed to share what I believe, and I’m very lucky for that and to have the audience. When people are listening you don’t quiet down, you speak up,” Bell said to applause.

She’s correct … on paper.

No one is saying she, or any other celebrity, doesn’t have a right to speak out. It still begs two significant questions:

  • Will doing so hurt their careers?
  • Are they actually having an impact with their rhetoric?

The first is up for debate, although anecdotally speaking some consumers have had enough with the constant proselytizing.

The second is growing more clear. They appear to be having the opposite effect. Besides, no other politician had Hollywood on their side quite like Hillary Clinton did in the waning days of the campaign.

And remember the results?

So how should celebrities push forward without losing their voice? Far be it from me, a conservative film critic, to offer the “other team” advice. Still, in the spirit of Duplass’ outreach here are six ways Hollywood can improve its political activism.

Pull a Duplass

Duplass could have appeared on MSNBC, Stephen Colbert’s “Late Show” or The Young Turks. The conversation would cover the expected ground. Few minds would change as a result. So what’s the point?

Why not appear on right-leaning shows to share your political views? Many hosts, like Crowder and Hugh Hewitt, would welcome the exchange. Crowder was aggressively polite to Duplass.

FAST FACT: Brothers Jay and Mark Duplass signed a two-year deal with HBO in 2017 to create TV product for the network.

Did any conservative listeners come away from the Crowder/Duplass debate thinking the liberal actor was a jerk? Seems darn near impossible. Instead, they heard an open dialogue as well as a perspective they may not hear in such context.

So let’s make this the new normal. Let Rob Reiner appear on Dana Loesch’s radio show. Bell could drop by with Dennis Prager or Michael Medved.

Let’s talk. Openly. And listeners can decide who has the better argument.

[Fill in the Blank] Isn’t Hitler

The “Trump is Hitler” meme began in Hollywood circles long before the reality show star become our Commander in Chief. That’s not good … or healthy.

Once upon a time, playing the Hitler card got you thrown out of the debate. Today, it’s too often a starting point for liberal celebrities.

Adolf Hitler Hates Being Compared To Donald Trump | CONAN on TBS

Stop. No one on the right will take you seriously after you deal that card. No one. The same goes for other political adjectives, like “fascist.” Liberals have been calling conservatives fascists for years. It’s not a way to change any minds.

Debate, Don’t Lecture

Ever wonder why stars love to get political while making acceptance speeches? It’s easy. There’s no one there to rebut their arguments. The crowd of like-minded souls in the venue will applaud. News reporters, who unabashedly lean left, will dub the rants “brave.”

Only a few conservative pundits and social media denizens will call them out. And those barbs likely never reach the stars in question.

So do more than serve up one-sided lectures. Seek out forums where your views will be challenged, be it online, in podcast form or other venues. And be ready to back up your facts.

Love Trump Hate? Now, Live It

It might be the most shopworn phrase of the Trump Era. “Love trumps hate!” It’s what many a progressive activist cries … in between slamming their opponents.

Look at Jimmy Kimmel. The most recent Oscars host shared a heartfelt plea for unity during his Academy Awards monologue. Then, minutes later, he accused President Trump of being a racist.


Jimmy Kimmel’s Oscars Monologue

It’s like a punk rock band telling us to come together as people and then barking “f*** Trump” later in the show.

You won’t get anywhere blasting your opponents as the very worst of humanity. A few may be just that. The rest, a rather large group, simply have a different governing philosophy. Period.

No More PSAs. Really

There’s nothing more smug than a celebrity cutting a PSA to tell you how to vote. And think.

The tropes are well established. The serious looks. The makeup-free appearance. The attempts at comedy betwixt nasty attacks. The repetitive phrasing. The simplistic lectures. The spare backdrop.

Smug, smug smug. And hopelessly unconvincing.

Which means the stars should stop making them. Why even bother? They instantly become fodder for uproarious Twitter memes. And it’s just more preaching to the choir.

Grow Up

Sounds nasty, right? Did you read some of the celebrity comments post-election?

Now, that’s nasty. And it’s hard to take someone seriously after hearing those kind of comments.

Drop the nasty. This is still America. We have checks and balances that can keep any president, even an out of control one, from overstepping his or her bounds. Speak with clarity, intelligence and wit. Tantrums are for children.

Now, perhaps none of the above will be well received in Hollywood circles. Comments made by liberal celebrities could simply be a way of lashing out or offering insta-therapy.

Then have at it.

But, if stars truly want to change a heart or mind, maybe more than a few, these six steps are a great place to start.


  1. One big thing they could do is stop putting their not-inconsiderable wealth toward electing statists and promoting Der Staat, but just donate that money to the poor and “disadvantaged” they have such vaunted “compassion” for. If the Hollywood Left pooled their financial resources with the Park Avenue Pinkos and Darth Soros, and gave it to poor people, we wouldn’t need Welfare State.
    “I remember when ‘liberal’ meant being generous with your own money.”–Will Rogers.

  2. Most lefties can’t rationally debate their positions so mockery and outrage is all they have.

  3. I think the underlying key is everyone needs to be humble enough to admit they might be wrong sometimes and there also may be more than one reasonable solution to a problem.

    1. Agreed but people also need to see beyond themselves for example all these cuts to social programs to me is a bad idea due to the simple fact that many people will need them at some point. The fact is you might believe that it can never be you but it could easily be you all it takes is 1 car crash 1 illness etc and for many it’ll be all they have.
      I have a disability but I work hard and contribute to the world in my tiny way however as much as I hate it I have to come to terms with the fact that at some point my disability will stop me from working among other things. Of course I have family but they can only do so much and at some point it’s going to be too much. But I am lucky because many don’t even have that your thoughts my friend??

      1. To me the issue is not whether there should be some social safety net programs but how should they be structured and who should be the primary beneficiaries. In this area many honorable people can have honest disagreements. If we understand that there will be trade offs because resources will be finite and every good idea has its pros and cons then there is a chance at crafting a well thought policy.

        The current problem is too many on both sides really but most notably on the left will not listen to what others say or their concerns. Also, too often the policy choices are presented as take or leave it options delivered by someone with delusions of deity, not as a proposal to be discussed, reviewed, modified to make it better.

        As far as disability, there are two main parts to the problem. Some can productively work if they can find an appropriate position. This may require some retraining which will cost someone money. Others can not realistically work and must survive on various pensions, disability payments, etc. again there is a monetary cost to someone. Many disabled come from modest backgrounds and their family may be able to provide limited support and more crucially may lack the training to properly care for certain disabilities. This is an area where I think many who create programs do not discuss with the disabled and their families what are the real issues they are facing and need addressing. To ask is to show a degree of humility that one does needs to learn from the source not a book or lecture. One can not solve a problem if one does not understand it and understanding a problem takes hard, grunt work to get the information. I do not know your situation other than you can currently work but I know several disabled people with very different problems; problems which have very different “solutions” if one can say they can be solved. A typical bureaucratic program usually fails some because they square pegs that do not fit into the round hole.

      2. Thanks for getting back to me and seeing where I am coming from,the huge issue is many people whether left,right center whatever are too willing to dogmatic extremes to the point where things have become totally abstructive and toxic. The current presidents flaws to put it mildly are making it worse and it isn’t helped that all sides are willing to throw massive nation wide tantrums to get their way
        I am the first to admit that while Ada has helped many it is far from flawless but the dark sad truth is you can try to reform something all you want but if the thing you are trying to reform has absolutely no interest in it and has the power to torpedo it

        Lastly what about the government plans for deep cuts is that it lacks a level of compassion understanding and arrogance in my opinion someone told me once that in the battle of theory vs reality reality almost always wins. For example I know this is a complex issue that might never be totally solved but you can’t stop terrorism by out killing it and enacting overly broad plans that leave things open to abuse or discrimination I am a child of refugees who had to deal with this but we can dig deeper later. Also as a disabled person the biggest issue or 1 of them is as a population we are ignored and looked down on I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard you have gotten x why do you need z your useless a leech etc. please share your thoughts as soon as possible you always have thoughtful answers I hope to hear from you soon

      3. The problem for the disabled is the causes are so varied. At times what is best for one type of disability is bad for another; talk about a possible no-win situation for a company. Also, many disabled look at first glance healthy as they are no in any obvious pain or impairment. Also, to understand the issues facing someone requires a willingness to listen and mull over what you learned which require true empathy and compassion.

        I am concerned about the budget cuts but I am more irritated at those who wish to virtue signal without actually doing anything to help. Part of the issue with the mouthy Hollywood “stars” is too many virtue signal about the current hot topics while ignoring the more pervasive problems facing people that will always be present. It seems as if they are more interested polar bears than people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button