“Why aren’t we talking about this?! #FarmersProtest.”

On Feb. 2, Rihanna made the above tweet in reference to the violent clashes between police and farmers that occurred during the ongoing farmers’ protests in India. These clashes were against the new agrarian bills that make it easier for corporations to exploit farmers. In the following days, her comment received a mixed barrage of backlash and support from public figures, igniting a tweet storm. A number of celebrities, including environmental activist Greta Thunberg, American football player JuJu Smith-Schuster and actress Susan Sarandon, expressed their support for these protests by tweeting their solidarity to the farmers.

However, these protests have been happening since September 2020, with smaller scale protests dating back even further to August. So why did many of us, as part of these online communities, only become aware of the protests when famous celebrities decided to tweet about it? Why did it take a single celebrity post to prompt other public figures to care and speak out?

Social media is an important tool in raising awareness about various social and political issues due to its wide accessibility. Traditional media platforms fail to sufficiently represent marginalized voices because their aim is to cater to mainstream interests. As such, minority groups in countries like the U.S. have to rely on what are often called “ethnic” media sources for alternative sources of information — which do not have the same international reach as more elite sources do. Social media, on the other hand, has the potential to democratize the news-making process and increase public access to international news. The book #Hashtag Activism delves into the way that marginalized groups have been able to use Twitter to advance counternarratives and advocate for social change. It highlights how “[access] to public discourse, and thereby access to politics itself, has always been severely limited for those with less power and privilege.” Social media platforms provide marginalized members of society the opportunity to synthesize webs of communication and awareness campaigns that can then make their way into public consciousness. It allows for the ordinary person to have a voice.

At least, theoretically. Despite the fact that — as #Hashtag Activism puts it — platforms like “[Twitter has] low financial and technological barriers to entry,” they also have an oversaturation of voices. Anybody has the ability to post; but not everybody has the ability to be heard by a broad audience. While it is true that with some dumb luck a random individual’s post about an important issue might start trending, a select few people with large social media followings will always be more likely to be heard.

Enter the celebrity. They are in the precarious position of having a large platform to post about important issues, but also not wanting to alienate their audiences — the ones who sustain their fame. The result is often either silence or euphemized, uncontroversial posts on important social issues. One notable example is the case of #blackouttuesday, an event that many celebrities — some of whom were previously silent on racism and police brutality — were all too happy to partake in. That is not to say that celebrities do not have the potential to incite change, as moments where celebrities discuss underrepresented issues unprompted can, and have, resulted in huge exposure to unaware audiences. Take the farmers’ protests for instance, where Rihanna’s post got so much attention that the Indian Ministry of External Affairs felt threatened enough to accuse foreign celebrities of sensationalism. Famous figures should use their large platforms to advocate for undervoiced issues.

However, we as the audience of celebrity posts, need to take more responsibility for our own social media consumption as well. While we shouldn’t shun celebrity activism, we should not be solely dependent on it to drive our opinions toward social and political issues either, because lauding celebrities that vaguely, and tokenistically, discuss global issues contributes to a culture of slacktivism — defined by “token displays of support” for issues without taking any further action. If we keep going down this road, it will become increasingly challenging to foster and sustain awareness for socio-political issues as few would understand and meaningfully engage with said issues. We don’t need to start or stop talking about issues when celebrities do, because silence is complicity and a glaring symbol of our privilege.

Ultimately, I’d like to refer back to her initial tweet. Why aren’t we talking about this? One viral post does not resolve the conflict at hand. International conflicts don’t disappear when celebrities stop talking about them — all of us need to take more responsibility for our social media activism.