Changing Society Briefing 8: The rise of celebrity and personality and the decline of policy and its implications for charities

Introduction

This is the eighth in the Heyheyjoe briefing series, looking at external social, economic, and demographic changes and their impact on charities and non-profit organisations. This one focuses on how it is personalities and celebrities that increasingly dominate our thinking socially and politically.

Some ways in which celebrities rise, and institutions fall

Celebrities dominate social media, particularly Instagram

The top ten accounts on Instagram have an astonishing number of followers. Cristiano Ronaldo and Messi each have more followers than the population of the EU (about 450 million people), and Selena Gomez and Kylie Jenner come in just below that number. On Twitter/X politicians do slightly better with Elon Musk, Barack Obama, Donald Trump and Modi of India all featuring in the top ten. The point is that the reach and attention that these individuals get is huge (and dwarfs any corporate following, which tends to be for top brands like Instagram, Nike, Samsung and the like).

Influencers become famous through social media.

Stars created through social media are some of the most popular accounts on social media, particularly on TikTok. Indeed, of the top ten accounts on TikTok, seven are from stars made famous by the internet. I haven’t found a social media account dedicated to the work of a charity in the leading ‘most followed’ accounts on social media. Creating elaborate videos of magic, or dance, or pranks gets people famous. Doing great work, not so much.

Trust in institutions is falling.

While celebrities rise, institutions fall. Trust in political institutions is falling across (https://www.southampton.ac.uk/news/2025/02/democracy-in-crisis-trust-in-democratic-institutions-declining-around-the-world.page ) across many Western countries, including the UK. This decline is particularly true for political parties. At the same time, trust in more ‘neutral’ institutions often rises, particularly in the police, for example. Many would say that trust in charities is high. This partly depends on what that trust is compared to, and it's also not clear how ‘rising’ or ‘declining’ trust in charities affects anything that charities actually do.

Increasingly, the winners in politics are personalities.

The people who do well in politics are increasingly individuals rather than governments or political parties. Often, they have high levels of social media following and personal following, and are independently wealthy or have wealthy backers. This means that the policies they adhere to are not bound by party ideology, and may be extremely mercurial and expedient to circumstance. This increases the challenge of influencing these figures – for charities, companies or other countries. This growth in personal loyalty and decline in party loyalty means that electorates are less and less likely to stick to a party because ‘I have always voted that way’.

The issues about the rise of celebrities & personalities, and the decline in institutions

Political success may follow the individual, not the party or the government.

When the most popular in politics are individuals, rather than their parties, the challenge is that it makes those in power less stable, because party loyalty is so much lower than it used to be. Despite having a huge majority in parliament, the Labour Party is regularly predicted to lose the next election to Reform. This is because Nigel Farage is our ‘current’ popular political party leader. Reform’s policies and party are secondary in importance to the leader. Zack Polanski’s election as Green Party leader appears to be boosting their appeal. How do those who want to influence what governments do react to this trend?

Celebrities absorb our interest and bandwidth.

Celebrities post about their lives on social media. With their huge following, they can create brands, sell products, and become even wealthier.  This is true even if they are created by social media: YouTube influencer Mr Beast is now reported to be worth $1 billion. Our fascination with celebrities and influencers absorbs a huge amount of people’s attention. It gives us ‘banner headline’ mentalities. A 20-second clip on social media can feel too long. Cutting through that tiny attention span, with something as banal as charities, or political messages, to get public attention is only going to get harder.

Rational argument may not matter anymore, and loyalty may be gone.

Governments do sensible things. They drive their agendas. But in a world dominated by celebrities, personalities and influencers, it becomes increasingly hard for ‘rational’ politicians to gain traction. Those that succeed are those that are good at using social media – whether it's Trump in the US, Modi in India, Farage in the UK or populists in other countries. Successful politicians no longer need to have good policies, just good messages, to drive traffic on social media.

The implications for charities

In briefing 7, we talked about how the rise in choice leaves charities floundering. The rise of celebrities, and the decline in institutions and rational arguments, probably have the same effect.

How do charities use personality and celebrities?

Who are the personalities in the world of charities? Which people come from the sector, but cut through to the wider world? I struggle to see any people who even remotely fulfil that role. The last was probably Shami Chakrabarti, when she ran Liberty. Indeed, I think charities are often culturally disdainful of those from their midst becoming well known in the public media. The answer to my own question is that charities seem pretty poor at competing in a world of celebrities and personalities.

Charities often still believe that policy documents and rationality are enough.

The other cultural change for charities is to move away from their love of long, dull policy documents and believe that facts and being worthy are good enough to succeed. Indeed, the current Labour government is showing itself remarkably immune to the wishes of charities. Being worthy and doing good is no longer enough to effect change – if it ever was.

Can charities make an impact in a world where headlines rule?

My last question, I don’t have an answer to. Charities need to effect change, through ideas, through services, through campaigning, as they have tried to do for many years. The question is whether, as the old ways of doing things become increasingly ineffective in a world where headlines beat detail, and popularity beat rationality, charities can reinvent themselves.

Charities will need to change their culture to harness a world in which popularity, social media and headlines dominate life. Towards headlines and celebrity and away from worthiness and rationality. It won’t be easy.

Joe Saxton

October 2025

This briefing is part of a series looking at the impact of social, economic, technological, and demographic changes on charities and non-profit organisations. We have already published a briefing on:

·      the ageing population (briefing no 1)

·      changing numbers of single people and fertility rates (no 2)

·      the impact of growing government debt (no 3).

·      Changes in the way we die and its implications. (no 4)

·      wealth, inequality and poverty in the UK (no 5)

·      changing patterns of religious observance (no 6)

·      The rise of consumer choice and its implications for charities (no 7)

In future issues, we will look at the impact of digital, the growing cult of the individual, and changing patterns of support for different causes. Go to www.heyheyjoe.info for more information.