Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Looking to the stars: perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector
(USC Thesis Other)
Looking to the stars: perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
1
LOOKING TO THE STARS:
PERCEPTIONS OF CELEBRITY INFLUENCE IN THE NONPROFIT SECTOR
Erin Elizabeth Barber
Sol Price School of Public Policy
Doctor of Policy, Planning, and Development
University of Southern California
December 13, 2018
2
To Joseph, My Son –
You are my love, my inspiration, my reason for everything – the absolute light of my life.
Thank you for being mine, and choosing me to be yours.
I love you more than words can say, and I want you to know:
of all the things I have ever done, and all the things I will ever do,
YOU will always be my greatest accomplishment.
3
Acknowledgements
What a journey! I have so many people to thank for their help, love, and support
over these many years; I am and will always be grateful to each and every one.
To my professors in Price, thank you for challenging me, mentoring and
supporting me, and pushing me farther than I ever thought I could go. You have each
inspired me with your work, your commitment to excellence, and your dedication to your
students. Thank you for welcoming me into your classrooms and guiding me through
your world; I am a better student, scholar, and person because of each and everyone of
you.
To my amazing committee, thank you for your unending guidance, support, time,
and input over this process. Professor Elizabeth Currid-Halkett, your work inspired me
before we even met, and those feelings were only deepened during our time together.
Thank you for leading me in the right direction and pushing me to go farther and deeper.
Professor Karen Sternheimer, thank you for your never-ending support and
assistance. Working with you was my honor and my pleasure, and I remain grateful for
your time, guidance, and leadership.
Professor Deborah Natoli, thank you for every single second of our time together,
from our introductory meeting in my basement office to attending your incredible class to
our countless emails and conversations. You have been my professor, my committee
member, my mentor, and now, my friend. Thank you, Debbie, for your support,
guidance, mentorship, and friendship through each and every step along the way.
To my family, thank you for your love, support, and patience over these many,
many years. To Geoffrey, my love, the two little words “thank you” cannot encompass
4
the gratitude I feel. Thank you for your unending support and encouragement. Thank
you for the late nights. Thank you for letting me complain, cry, and announce my desire
to quit, but gently reminding me that I could do this, that I am not a quitter, and that it
would end someday. You were right: I did it, I am not a quitter, and now it is almost
over. I did it with you by my side, encouraging me, supporting me, and loving me every
step of the way. Thank you, Geof. I love you!
To my wonderful Granny Sue, thank you for being my cheerleader! Thank you
for the cards you sent me; they brought me such joy and encouragement, and I’ve kept
each and every one. Thank you for always being there for me, for listening to my
triumphs and my challenges, and for loving and supporting every single step of the way.
Knowing that you were always there for me brought me such peace and provided me
with such encouragement, and I simply cannot thank you enough. I love you so much,
Granny Sue…thank you!
To my beloved Mother, oh, how I wish you were here to read these words and
celebrate with me! But I know you have been with me every single second, and that you
have watched me, protected me, and guided me through this thing called life. I know I
have made you proud; thank you for allowing me to live peacefully with that knowledge.
I still feel the warmth of your love around me; I celebrate it, I bask in it, and I have tried
every single day to give Joseph that love and for him to feel the extraordinary love that
you so freely and blessedly bestowed upon me. Thank you, Mom, for your love, for your
support, for your encouragement, for your never-ending belief in my dreams and in me. I
love you so so much and miss you every single day.
5
And finally, last but most certainly not least, to my dearest Father who I love so
very much, thank you for always pushing me to be the best and encouraging me to
surpass the farthest limit. I have never forgotten the lessons you taught me, and they
have served me well. Thank you for these lessons, for showing me the world, and for
supporting me with love through every step of my journey. I can never fully express my
love or gratitude to you, Daddy, but I will spend forever trying. I love you so very much,
and I thank you from the bottom of my heart. I did it!!!
6
Table of Contents
Chapter 1:
Introduction: Celebrity and the Nonprofit Sector Page 8
Chapter 2:
Review of the Literature: Celebrity Outside the Entertainment Sphere Page 15
Chapter 3:
Methodology and Data Collection Page 47
Chapter 4:
Analysis and Discussion of Findings Page 57
Chapter 5:
Conclusion Page 120
Appendix One Page 128
Appendix Two Page 129
Appendix Three Page 136
References Page 138
7
Appendices
Appendix One: Glossary of Terms
Appendix Two: Interview Instruments
Appendix Three: Best Practices for Nonprofit Organizations Partnering with
Celebrities
8
Chapter 1:
Celebrity and the Nonprofit Sector
“One of the great truths about America in the media age is that celebrity translates into
power. Being famous creates an aura that enhances influence.”
-from Kissinger: A Biography
The phone call was nothing out of the ordinary for A Dog’s Life Rescue, a
nonprofit pet rescue organization in Los Angeles. A young, scared chihuahua had been
found abandoned on Wilshire Boulevard, and the caller wanted to bring her to the
organization. As she had done many times before, Co-founder and President Allison
(Alli) Lange quickly agreed to shelter the dog while they looked for a family to adopt her
permanently. Lange was not, however, prepared for the sickly state in which the dog was
brought to the shelter: emaciated, covered in fleas and mange, and barely capable of
walking.
Lange’s first thought was, of course, the health of the chihuahua. What was
wrong with her? What, beyond the obvious food, shelter, and bath, did she need? Would
she survive? These thoughts were quickly followed by another distressing question: how
would A Dog’s Life Rescue pay for her care? As a small nonprofit, financial concerns
were frequently at the forefront of Lange’s mind. The organization employed several
different fundraising strategies, but the number of animals that needed assistance always
seemed to be climbing. After she received the recommended course of treatment from
the veterinarian and a projected bill in excess of $5,000, Lange called in reinforcements:
9
her celebrity friend and A Dog’s Life Rescue supporter, Lost and Vampire Diaries actor
Ian Somerhalder.
Somerhalder had been a supporter of the organization since shortly after its
inception twelve years ago. He attended functions such as fundraising events and
adoption days, contributed financially, and promoted the organization on his social media
accounts. He was and is a great friend to the organization and to all the animals it has
served. It was, then, no surprise to Lange when Somerhalder agreed to help the sick
chihuahua. After a brief conversation, the celebrity offered to reach out to his social
media followers with a fundraising request of $5,000 for veterinary care.
In less than 24 hours, and after only one tweet from Ian Somerhalder, A Dog’s
Life Rescue had received over $5,000 in donations for the abandoned pup. Lange was
stunned at the response. She had anticipated receiving some help from Somerhalder’s
appeal, but was “shocked” by the amount donated and the quickness with which the
dollars came in. Lange remembers thinking of Somerhalder at the time, “Wow, that’s a
lot of power!”
Thanks to the organization, the celebrity, and their partnership, the young
chihuahua made a full recovery and was later adopted into her forever home. Lange fully
credits Somerhalder and his help in this success story, and remains grateful for his voice
and his assistance. She has continued her relationship with him, and other celebrities
throughout Hollywood, to the great financial benefit of A Dog’s Life Rescue and, of
course, the lives of the dogs.
The concept of celebrity has been growing beyond just the entertainment sphere
for nearly a hundred years. According to “Celebrity Endorsement – Through the Ages,”
10
companies began using celebrity endorsements in their marketing and public relations
campaigns in the 1930s with athletes as spokesmen (Vemuri and Madhav, 2004). Post-
World War II saw the rise of the movie star as product endorser, while the popularity and
accessibility of the color television in the mid-60s ushered in the TV star (ibid.). Today,
celebrities of all types (actors, singers, reality stars, etc.) endorse products, and some
celebrities have gone so far as to create product lines of their own. Academia has taken
notice of this phenomena of the celebrity endorser; scholarly literature abounds on the
endorsement relationship between companies and celebrities in terms of marketing and
public relations. But with it all, the Matthew McConaughey Lincoln car commercials,
the Kylie Jenner lip kits, the academic articles, it all comes back to the perception of
celebrity influence. Without the consumers’ perception of their influence, there is no
point to the partnership and subsequent endorsement.
Celebrity involvement has also expanded to the nonprofit sector, from Hollywood
legends like Audrey Hepburn partnering with UNICEF and Paul Newman creating his
own line of products with 100% of proceeds benefitting nonprofit organizations to
modern stars like Jennifer Aniston partnering with St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital and
athletes starting their own organizations such as the Peyton Manning Foundation
(Chouliaraki, 2012). Examples of celebrity involvement in the nonprofit sector are easy
to find, but research into the results of this involvement are in the nascent stages. What,
for instance, is the result of Aniston’s involvement with St. Jude’s? Do they receive
increased donations because of her commercial appeals for support? Aniston’s
perception of influence led the company Aveeno to hire her as their spokesperson; do
consumers also perceive she has influence in the nonprofit sector?
11
This study is designed to be a qualitative investigation and will utilize semi-
structured interview questions to ask participants about their perceptions relating to
celebrity influence within the nonprofit sector with the explicit intention of impacting the
practice of philanthropy for the greater good. My expectation is that both nonprofit
stakeholders and consumers perceive celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector,
and that this perception of celebrity influence can be used by nonprofit organizations to
compel action on the part of the consumer, similar to the way in which celebrities endorse
a product and consumers are compelled to purchase.
Research Questions
With a heightened presence in the everyday world and in scholarship, both the
scholarly literature and the increasing attention given to celebrities now suggests a need
to explore the perception of celebrity influence and its potential impact for social good
through the nonprofit sector. This study was designed to qualitatively investigate
participant’s perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector. Questions that
have guided this study include: Do participants perceive celebrities have influence in the
nonprofit sector? Did the past partnerships between celebrity and nonprofit organization
help in terms of dollars or awareness raised? Can endorsements by celebrities be used for
altruistic purposes as well as commercial purposes, inspiring consumers to donate funds
or volunteer time for the endorsed cause? If so, what are the best practices in
establishing and maintaining a beneficial relationship between a nonprofit organization
and a celebrity? These research questions represent the starting point in assessing if
participants in this study perceive celebrities have influence within the nonprofit sector.
12
Need for the Study and Purpose of the Research
On January 15, 2011, actor and humanitarian Matt Damon accepted the Joel
Seigel Award for Service to the Community at the 16
th
Annual Critics’ Choice Movie
Awards. The award was acknowledgement of the global work Damon has undertaken
with his partner, Gary White, and their nonprofit organization, water.org. As he accepted
the award in front of a crowded ballroom and millions of television viewers across the
world, Damon chose to use this platform to further his humanitarian efforts by inviting
viewers to join him in the fight for access to clean water and sanitation for all. After
providing a number of health-related statistics, such as the fact that a child dies every 15
seconds from the lack of access to clean water and sanitation, Damon said, “I invite you
all to go to our website, water.org. For just $25, you can bring a kid clean water for
life.”
1
Damon’s speech was not only inspiring, but it was also a call to arms, a call to
take action for a cause. He left the stage to a thundering round of applause from the
audience; from the reception by his peers, it appeared to be a successful acceptance
speech. What, however, happened next? What happened after the celebrities finished
their champagne, went home to their mansions, and returned to the glamorous life of
Hollywood? Did water.org receive an influx of $25 donations from Damon’s request?
Did they receive larger donations, or any increased donations at all? What was the
viewing audience’s perception of Damon’s speech?
1
Speech appeared on January 14, 2011. For full speech, please visit:
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1656052/matt-damon-recognized-at-critics-choice-awards-
waterorg-charity.jhtml.
13
These questions were at the forefront of my mind as I watched Damon’s speech
and subsequent appeal. As a veteran fundraiser in the nonprofit sector, I am well aware
of the financial challenges faced by most nonprofit organizations. Money is necessary
for all aspects of the nonprofit, from providing clients’ services to paying the electric bill.
The Giving USA Foundation 2015 reports revenues in excess of $1.73 trillion in the
nonprofit sector, with over $358 billion from individual donors (pg. 2). Aside from fees
for goods and services (such as tuition, membership fees, etc.), individual donors are the
greatest financial contributor to nonprofit organizations, and it is these individual donors,
these consumers of the celebrity product endorsement and nonprofit organization
campaign, who are the target audience of the partnership between celebrity and nonprofit
organization (ibid.).
Although nonprofit organizations employ a number of diverse strategies to raise
money (e.g., direct mail campaigns, special events, annual funds), many nonprofits are
still struggling to provide services to their clients and to keep their staff employed
(Hager, et al., 2002). The individual donor is the key to many organizations’ success.
Individual donors provide unrestricted funding for facilities’ costs, targeted funding for
new programs, and endowment funding for long-term financial security, to name a few.
Again, the individual donors giving to nonprofit organizations and the consumers of the
celebrity/nonprofit campaign are one and the same. The potential boost provided from
the celebrity and nonprofit partnership, because of the celebrity’s perceived influence,
could be highly beneficial to the financial status of the nonprofit, which, in turn, enables
the organization to benefit more people. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to
determine if participants perceive celebrities have influence within the nonprofit sector.
14
If this study can illustrate that these participants do indeed perceive celebrities have
influence in the nonprofit sector, then perhaps other celebrities will be inspired to endorse
their own causes on a level similar to that of the celebrities discussed in this dissertation.
This increased involvement from the world of celebrity could then translate to increased
giving in the nonprofit sector, thereby assisting nonprofits in one of their greatest
challenges of all: raising money.
As such, this dissertation strives to continue the process of filling in the gaps in
the knowledge and literature regarding perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit
sector. It begins with Chapter Two surveying the current academic literature regarding
celebrity outside the entertainment sphere and within the for-profit and nonprofit sectors.
Chapter 3 is devoted to discussing the data collection methods and methodology used in
this study, including the design of the semi-structured interviews and the ways in which
the 60 interviews were conducted over a two-year time span.
Chapter 4 presents a brief overview of the results of the 60 interviews, both in the
aggregate and broken down in the three interview categories. The majority of this
chapter, however, is dedicated to the finding of the interviews and the themes and
connections that have emerged across the interviews and literature review. The last
chapter, Chapter 5, presents the conclusion to the study.
15
Chapter 2:
Review of the Literature:
Celebrity Outside the Entertainment Sphere
Although difficult to determine precisely when the notion of “celebrity” expanded
beyond the entertainment sphere, it is clear from the literature that celebrity is no longer
bound by the confines of the literal and metaphorical Hollywood. Indeed, celebrity is
present in an increasing number of disciplines, as evidenced by the plethora of scholarly
literature on the subject.
The majority of scholarly studies on celebrity outside the realm of entertainment
can be found, as expected, in the for-profit sector, primarily focusing on the endorsement
of products in marketing and public relations journals. The power, influence, and social
capital of celebrity in terms of endorsements has been presented in numerous studies over
the past several decades, and this literature review will present an overview of their
results. It is evident that celebrity is no longer restricted to just the market economy of
the entertainment industry and commercial products. Celebrity has emerged as a
scholarly discipline in areas such as diplomacy, politics, activism, cause-related
marketing, communications, and, of primary interest to this study, the nonprofit sector.
Celebrity in the For-Profit Sector: Marketing and Public Relations
In one of the seminal works in the field of marketing and public relations
concerning celebrity endorsements in the for-profit sector, “Who Is the Celebrity
Endorser? Cultural Foundations of the Endorsement Process,” Grant McCracken defines
the “celebrity endorser” as “any individual who enjoys public recognition and who uses
this recognition on behalf of a consumer good by appearing with it in an advertisement”
16
(1989, p. 310). In so broadly defining the celebrity endorser, McCracken intentionally
allows for the inclusion of entertainment celebrities (those from movies, television, and
music) as well as athletes, politicians, artists, entrepreneurs, and the military (1989).
Anyone who possesses broad public attention is included in McCracken’s definition of
celebrity (the twenty-first century must, for better or worse, include reality television
stars as well, as numerous interviewees cited reality stars in their responses). McCracken
also delineates several modes present in celebrity endorsements, explaining the “explicit
mode” (e.g., “I endorse this product”), the “implicit mode” (e.g., “I use this product”), the
“imperative mode” (e.g., “You should use this product”), and the “copresent mode” (e.g.,
the endorser is simply shown with the product) (1989, p. 310).
In addition to his inclusive definitions of the celebrity endorser, McCracken
introduces a new model to explain celebrities’ effectiveness as an endorser of products,
the “meaning transfer model” (1989, p. 312-313). First, the endorser’s effectiveness
relies heavily upon the cultural “meanings” brought to the practice; these meanings may
include “distinctions of status, class, gender, and age, as well as personality and lifestyle
types” (McCracken, 1989, p. 312). The vast amount and variety of possible meanings
within the world of celebrity allow for an innumerable amount of options for advertisers.
It is also important to note that celebrities are not defined by just one meaning; they, like
all of us, are many things at once, representing numerous cultural meanings at any given
time. This fact also allows advertisers to appeal to a large, diverse audience of
consumers, as the consumer has a number of cultural meanings from which to choose.
Here, McCracken makes his second significant point when he states:
17
It is, I would argue, precisely the meanings of the celebrity that makes him or her
so useful to the endorsement process. For an endorsement succeeds when an
association is fashioned between the cultural meanings of the celebrity world, on
the one hand, and the endorsed product, on the other. Not all endorsements
succeed in this transfer. Indeed, some are too unsophisticated even to undertake it.
But the best endorsements take their power and their efficacy precisely from this:
the successful transfer of meaning (1989, p. 313).
For the endorsement process to succeed, the cultural meanings associated with the
celebrity must be transferred to the product, thereby enticing the consumer to purchase.
As Dr. Karen Sternheimer writes in Celebrity Culture and the American Dream: Stardom
and Social Mobility:
Celebrities seem to show us what it looks to make it big in America,
which changes based on economic, social, and political realities. As a
collective fantasy, we are active participants in both the American Dream
and the meaning of celebrity culture” (2014, pg. 263).
Indeed, consumers are transferring their associated meanings from the celebrity to the
product. In a similar manner, the meanings communicated by the celebrity endorser in
the nonprofit organization endorsement must also be transferred to the organization,
compelling the consumer to take action via donations, advocacy, etc.
McCracken also discusses the unique power of celebrity in the endorsement
process. As opposed to anonymous models in advertising, “Celebrities deliver meanings
of extra subtlety, depth, and power…[and] have particular configurations of meanings
that cannot be found elsewhere” (McCracken, 1989, p. 315). The history that the general
18
public shares with celebrities, in the form of their on-screen roles and personas, for
example, seems to also impact the celebrity endorsement process in a positive way.
“Celebrities ‘own’ their meanings because they have created them on the public stage by
dint of intense and repeated performance,” resulting in meanings being presented “more
powerfully” than by the anonymous model (ibid.). In many ways, we as a society
develop relationships and shared histories with celebrities, thereby giving their cultural
meanings more power and influence over our consumer habits.
McCracken concludes his article by discussing his critical view of the old,
limiting models of attractiveness and credibility by which endorsement was previously
judged (1989). His “meaning transfer model” provides a more comprehensive, and more
complex, lens with which to study the celebrity endorsement process and its effectiveness
by examining the cultural meanings we attribute to celebrities. McCracken’s model
shows “that the secret of the celebrity endorsement is largely cultural in nature,” and the
level of attractiveness is not the most important quality (1989, p. 320). Indeed, our
understanding of the perceived power and influence of celebrity can be enhanced by
studying the cultural meanings we assign to each respective celebrity. Once identified,
perhaps the cultural meaning can be matched to “products” outside the for-profit sector to
use the celebrities’ perceived influence for social good.
While McCracken introduced a new model to explain the process of celebrity
endorsement, Jagdish Agrawal and Wagner A. Kamakura sought to quantify the impact
of the endorsement in their article, “The Economic Worth of Celebrity Endorsers: An
Event Study Analysis” (1995). Acknowledging that it may, in fact, be “impossible” to
quantify the exact economic worth of a celebrity endorsement on a company’s future
19
earnings, the authors turned to event study analysis to determine investors’ opinion of the
monetary outlay on the celebrity contract (Agrawal and Kamakura, 1995, p. 57). Event
study analysis examines the “magnitude of the effect that an unanticipated event has on
the expected profitability and risk of a portfolio of firms associated with that event”
(ibid.). The contract presented to a celebrity for the endorsement of the company’s
product was identified as the “event” for the event study analysis, and the authors
examined 110 contract announcements and their impact on the company’s stock for the
purpose of this study.
While Agrawal and Kamakura did report both positive and negative returns on the
stock market as a result of the announcement of different celebrity contracts, they found
that “on average, investors seem to value positively the use of celebrities in
advertisements” (1995, p. 60). While it is, of course, of the utmost importance to match
the “appropriate” celebrity with the product to be endorsed, the authors state, “Overall,
these results clearly indicate a positive impact of celebrity endorsements on expected,
future profits, which lends objective, market level support to the use of celebrity
endorsers in advertising” (ibid.). The study concludes by declaring the cost of the
celebrity endorsement contract to be a useful and lucrative return on investment (ROI)
tool, proving a successful utilization of the perceived influence of celebrity (Agrawal and
Kamakura, 1995). Similarly, in her book, Starstruck: The Business of Celebrity, Dr.
Elizabeth Currid-Halkett discusses the economics of celebrity both inside and outside
Hollywood (2010). “Celebrity, a seemingly intangible quality, translates into real money
and lots of it,” Currid-Halkett states (2010, pg. 186), and this includes product
endorsements. Currid-Halkett cites the example of PepsiCo partnering with the Spice
20
Girls in 1997; the company owed its subsequent market share rise of 2 percent to their
endorsements (2010, pg. 180). Basketball superstar Michael Jordan was offered
numerous endorsements over the course of his career because of his superstardom. As
Currid-Halkett states:
Jordan, by virtue of being an enormous star, was given the opportunity to
Do many, many endorsements. Marketing executives call this ‘borrowed
equity’: The star’s value to his public (read: his celebrity residual) can be
transferred over to whatever product he claims to use (2010, p180).
In the same way that the “star’s value” can be transferred to a “product,” it can also be
transferred to a nonprofit organization through the celebrity/nonprofit partnership.
More than thirty years ago, Charles Atkin and Martin Block conducted an
experiment to study the impact of endorsements by celebrities, specifically examining the
relationship between advertisements for alcoholic products and their effect on young
audiences, with the factors of credibility and influence identified as the key attributes for
success of the advertisement (1983). Before beginning the experiment, the authors
studied and defined the parameters surrounding credibility and influence. In terms of
credibility, a celebrity is deemed credible in the eyes of the public when they are
perceived as possessing high levels of “competence, trustworthiness, or dynamism”
(Atkin and Block, 1983, p. 57). These three factors play out in an advertisement via a
perceived competency regarding the product (such as an athlete endorsing a piece of
sporting equipment), the audience’s trust in the advice given by the celebrity as opposed
to an unidentified or unknown endorser, and/or the highly dynamic qualities of the
celebrity, such as “attractive and engaging personal qualities” (ibid.). These factors
21
combine to determine the credibility of the celebrity, directly influencing the level of
persuasiveness of the advertisement. Atkin and Block report that “a source perceived as
highly credible is more persuasive than a low credibility sender” (ibid.). Credibility is a
key component to the success or failure of a celebrity’s endorsement within advertising.
Influence is closely tied to credibility, and also plays a large part in this process.
Atkin and Block discuss three main reasons for the influence of a celebrity: in a busy
marketplace full of advertisements and “messages,” the celebrity may attract attention to
their endorsed product more than unknown models or actors; celebrities are perceived as
“more entertaining”; and celebrities enjoy a “widespread attribution” that they are
endorsing the product because they possess a “genuine affection for the product” and are
not motivated by the endorsement fee. Influence may originate in a number of different
ways, and a celebrity with a perceived high level of influence can be more persuasive
than a non-celebrity or a celebrity with a perceived low influence over the public sphere.
At the beginning of their experiment, Atkin and Block made a number of
predictions, including “a celebrity source will have a greater impact than a noncelebrity
on responses to the advertisement and the advertised product”; the celebrity will be
viewed as “more credible,” leading to a more favorable response from consumers; and
the expected positive response to the advertisement will then lead to “a more favorable
attitude toward the product and a greater intention to use it,” which is, of course,
ultimately the purpose of the advertisement (1983, p. 58). To test these predictions, the
authors created two versions (a celebrity-based and a non-celebrity based) of three
advertisements for alcohol. The three advertisements centered around an older gentleman
(the celebrity version featured Telly Savalas while an unidentified male in identical
22
clothes was in the non-celebrity version), an athlete (with former basketball star Happy
Hairston in one version and an unfamiliar tall African American athlete in the other), and
a beautiful woman (which, interestingly enough, featured two versions of Cheryl Tiegs,
one with a picture of her from her days before fame with dark hair and no identifying
characteristics and the other with her signature blonde hair and name prominently placed
in the ad). The test subjects were exposed to the advertisements and then asked to
complete a questionnaire with 29 categories regarding what they had just watched. In 28
of the 29 categories, the celebrity character rated higher than the non-celebrity character,
with the total celebrity score being “significantly higher” than the non-celebrity score
(Atkin and Block, 1983, p. 60). The authors found that their experiment supported many
of their predictions and concluded that celebrities are seen as “more competent and
trustworthy” than their anonymous counterparts; the product’s image is perceived as
more favorable when presented by a celebrity endorser; and advertisements featuring
celebrities are more positively rated in the categories of “strong, interesting, effective,
and important,” when compared to their non-celebrity counterparts (ibid.).
Through the course of their study and experiment, Atkin and Block also
discovered another important component to the celebrity endorsement process: recall.
Regardless of the type of celebrity (actor, athlete, etc.) in the ad or the product endorsed,
consumers remembered both the advertisement and the brand name at greater rates when
a celebrity was involved. This is an important and relevant distinction, as not only is the
consumer more likely to purchase the endorsed product as a result of the celebrity
involvement, but it also leads to a sustained awareness of the product and parent
company because of the higher rates of recall. The perceived influence of celebrities
23
adds a tangible benefit to the parent company, both in the short-term intent to buy as well
as the long-term recall of the advertisement and product.
Another aspect of credibility within the celebrity endorsement is the attitude of
the celebrity toward the product they are endorsing. How does the celebrity feel about
the product? Do they like it, or are they participating in the endorsement process simply
for financial gain? In their article, “Factors Predicting the Effectiveness of Celebrity
Endorsement Advertisements,” authors David Silvera and Benedikte Austad studied the
effect of a celebrity’s attitude toward the endorsed product, consumers’ perception of the
celebrity attitude (in terms of like versus ambivalence), and how inferences on the part of
the consumer affect their attitudes toward the product (2003). Through their research,
Silvera and Austad found that as the effectiveness of the celebrity endorsement is based
on a number of factors (such as celebrity attributes, the type of product, current societal
conditions, credibility, trustworthiness, etc.), it might be helpful to abandon these
previously used factors in favor of “directly measuring the degree to which individuals
evaluate the celebrity as liking the endorsed product after viewing the advertisement” by
using a tool known as “correspondent inferences” (2003, p. 1510). Correspondent
inferences refer to the conclusion consumers infer based on the perceived congruency
between the celebrity endorsers behavior and feeling (i.e., the celebrity says she likes T-
Mobile phone and the consumer infers that she actually really does like T-Mobile
phones). Overall, the authors report that the effectiveness of celebrity endorsements “can
be strongly influenced by consumers inferences concerning whether the endorser truly
likes the product,” and that parent companies should increase their efforts to a.) match the
product to the appropriate celebrity, and b.) create believable scenarios and explanations
24
showing that the celebrity endorser truly does like the advertised product (Silvera and
Austad, 2003, p. 1524).
The way a celebrity feels about a nonprofit organization or social cause could also
be judged by these same standards. If an audience uses correspondent inferences to
determine a celebrity’s feelings about a nonprofit through their endorsement and is
perceived to “like” the organization or have close, personal feelings regarding the cause,
the endorsement is more likely to be positively accepted and have the desired result (e.g.,
increased donations). A celebrity promoting their own nonprofit organization, such as
Matt Damon and water.org, is a prime example of a celebrity whose claim to like the
endorsed organization would be believable; the public would be highly likely to infer
congruency between the behavior of the stated endorsement and the feeling that Damon
does in fact like the organization, as he is its co-founder. Conversely, if a celebrity’s
involvement with an organization is negatively inferred by the public (such as in the case
of an endorsement of Mothers Against Drunk Drivers resulting from the celebrity’s DUI
conviction and subsequent community service sentence), then support for the cause will
be negatively affected. Just as in the for-profit sector and products for sale, the fit
between the celebrity and the nonprofit organization and/or social cause is incredibly
important for the effectiveness of the endorsement campaign because of the power of the
correspondent inferences component.
In “The Impact of Corporate Credibility and Celebrity Credibility on Consumer
Reaction to Advertisements and Brands,” Goldsmith, et. al, explore the relationship
between the credibility of the endorsed products’ parent company and the credibility of
the celebrity endorser and its impact on the effectiveness of the advertisement (2000).
25
While the credibility of the celebrity endorser has been extensively studied and discussed
(such as in the previously presented article by Atkin and Block, as well as numerous
other studies not presented in this literature review), the notion of corporate credibility of
the parent company has been notably absent from the literature. The authors define
corporate credibility as “the reputation of a company for honesty and expertise,” and
report that the corporate credibility component of the advertisement process had its
biggest impact on the “attitude-toward-the-brand” while the credibility of the celebrity
endorser significantly affected the “attitude-toward-the-ad” (Goldsmith, et. al, 2003, p.
43). In the right partnership, the two work in tandem to establish short-term favorability
of the ad and product and long-term favorability for the brand and parent company.
Applying the Goldsmith, et. al, study to the nonprofit sector is necessary as well.
A highly credible celebrity endorsing a nonprofit organization with limited or low
credibility will impede the effectiveness of the endorsement and could affect the
credibility of the celebrity over the long-term. Just as nonprofit organizations must be
selective in choosing celebrities with which to partner, so, too, must the celebrity be
aware of the history and credibility of the nonprofit organization they choose to endorse.
Celebrity as Diplomat
Although celebrity diplomacy dates as far back as Audrey Hepburn’s initial
involvement with the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in 1954, scholars agree
that the 2000s have seen an upward trend in the involvement of the celebrity as diplomat
(Alleyne, 2005; Cooper, 2007; Kellner, 2010; Wheeler, 2011). The celebrity diplomats
appear to be able to bridge a gap between the public and government leaders that eludes
so many other ambassadors. When speaking of the Group of Eight (G8) summit in his
26
paper “Celebrity Diplomacy and the G8: Bono and Bob as Legitimate International
Actors,” Andrew F. Cooper stated, “Bono and [Sir Bob] Geldof were welcomed like
visiting heads of state…[they] used a sophisticated recipe of personal and shuttle
diplomacy to attract attention from state leaders and the mass public alike” (2007, p. 1).
Cooper continues on to present the celebrity/diplomacy relationship as a win-win for both
parties. “The attraction here is two-way: in celebrities, G8 leaders find a populist
recognition and legitimacy they are unable to cultivate on their own; while in the G8,
celebrities find access to the world’s powers to advance their activist agendas” (2007, p.
1-2). The involvement of celebrity in such activities brings the general public into the
conversation, both through increased attention as well as the perception that the celebrity
is speaking for the people.
Cooper also presents other strengths of celebrity within the diplomatic sphere
through an interesting comparison to international non-governmental organizations
(NGOs). Cooper states that celebrities “combine assertive individualism characteristic of
the West with an appreciation of universal or cosmopolitan values…they engage in
continuous dialogue through the power of voice…they are both transformative and
results oriented, in that they combine a critical sensibility on social justice issues with a
desire to fix things on an instrumental basis” (2007, p. 5). We see characteristics present
in the celebrity diplomat that may be perceived to elude the government actor, or the
“failure of the state diplomats themselves,” as Cooper stated (2007, p. 6). The celebrity
diplomat is once again the “filter” or “conduit” between the general public and the state
powers (Cooper, 2007, p. 19).
27
The late scholar Mark D. Alleyne did not have quite the same positive view of
celebrity in the public realm. In his article, “The United Nations Celebrity Diplomacy,”
Alleyne discussed celebrity diplomats as “tools” for the United Nations mission of global
inclusiveness. Alleyne wrote, “…celebrities are convenient tools for promoting the
universality that the U.N. project embodies” (2005, p. 176). In addition, celebrities can
be used to “raise the profile and credibility of the United Nations” (ibid.). Again, the
celebrity diplomat is found in the space between the public and those in power, utilized as
a bridge between the two spheres.
Alleyne credited former U.N. Secretary Kofi Annan as the catalyst for the recent
increase in celebrity diplomacy, noting that “never before has the list of celebrities on the
U.N. bandwagon been so large. By October 2004, the list of U.N. Goodwill
Ambassadors - the traditional celebrity corps for track-two diplomacy on behalf of
specialized agencies in the U.N. system - numbered more than 80” (2005, p. 176).
Alleyne also expressed a number of concerns with Annan’s use of the celebrity diplomat,
questioning the “intellectual substance” of celebrity ambassadors as well as the level of
influence the celebrity might have over government leaders and if this influence would
result in lasting change (2005). Despite these concerns, the U.N. received two of the
biggest donations in its history under Annan’s increased celebrity diplomacy tactic: $1
billion from Ted Turner to support U.N. humanitarian causes, and hundreds of millions
from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation to support international healthcare
initiatives, in addition to increased public exposure and discussion of the respective
issues (Alleyne, 2005).
28
Overall, Alleyne presented a “rather mixed” report card on celebrity influence in
diplomacy (2005, p. 179). While pointing to the “Live Aid” and “We are the World”
celebrity fundraisers as “tangible evidence of the global mobilizing ability of celebrities,”
he was critical of Annan’s use of celebrity to garner donations from civil society and “as
a means of currying favor in the richest, most powerful parts of the world” (2005, p. 182-
3). In addition, Alleyne noted that utilizing celebrities as diplomats “runs the risk for the
United Nations of merely putting a happy face on an organization that has serious
shortcomings in how it promotes itself and how it conducts international relations” (2005,
p. 183). Ultimately, much of Alleyne’s criticism was related to organizational problems
facing the U.N. as well as their ongoing issues to gain international credibility and less on
the use of celebrity itself.
Celebrity in the Political Sphere
Celebrity has also been shown to wield a great amount of power and influence
within the political sphere, through both the endorsements of political candidates or as
candidates themselves, with the Hollywood support of former President Barack Obama
being the representative example of the former and President Ronald Reagan of the latter.
Numerous scholars have investigated the practice of celebrity endorsements for political
candidates (Austin, et al., 2008; Brubaker, 2011; Jackson and Darrow, 2005; Inthorn and
Street, 2011; Nownes, 2012), while others focus on the celebrity turned politician
phenomenon (Street, 2004; West and Orman, 2002).
As briefly discussed in the previous section on celebrity as diplomat, the
“merging of celebrity and politics is becoming an established element of democratic
political culture” (Inthorn and Street, 2011, p. 479). This merging has been welcomed by
29
some and criticized by others. One side of the debate declares celebrity involvement in
politics to be a “democratization of the public sphere” (or “democratainment” as Hartley,
1999, declared) and brings politics closer to the public, while the other side denounces
the celebrity participation because of its potential “undermining of democratic culture”
(ibid.). Through the course of their study on teenagers’ (ages 17-18) attitudes towards
celebrity involvement in politics in the United States and the United Kingdom, Inthorn
and Street concluded that the young citizens possessed a positive view of celebrity in
politics, primarily because “they saw it as an alternative to formal government,” and used
words like “trust,” “learning,” and “factual” when responding to interview questions
regarding celebrities’ political causes (2011, p. 486). As with many consumers, the
youngsters reported looking for “authenticity” from those in politics, and felt that the
“public access to [the] private life” of celebrities such as rapper Eminem gave them the
“authenticity and genuine commitment” they so desired (ibid.). The authors also noted
that the young respondents did not speak of the elected officials with the same level of
trust as the celebrities discussed in the interviews (Inthorn and Street, 2011). Again, as
in the case of celebrity diplomacy, we see the celebrity as a bridge between the general
public (in this case, teenagers on the verge of the voting age) and politics.
In “The Influence of Celebrity Endorsements on Young Adults’ Political
Opinions,” Jackson and Darrow also focus on young adults, but delve more deeply into
the resulting effect the celebrities’ political statement has on public opinion (2005).
Utilizing a series of survey questionnaires and factors such as credibility and
attractiveness, the authors were able to explain the ability of certain celebrities “to
influence young Canadians’ political thinking” (2005, p. 91). They found that some
30
young and upcoming celebrities, such as Avril Lavigne, and older, established celebrities,
such as Wayne Gretzky, held profoundly more influence than artists such as Alanis
Morissette (who, despite her relatively young age of 31 at the time of the study, was
approximately 10 years older than the survey respondents, and was found to be perceived
as “settled down” and “mainstream” due to her recent engagement and pop music
successes) (Jackson and Darrow, 2005, p. 94). Finally, the study concludes by indicating
that “celebrity endorsement leads to increased agreement with a political statement” and
by recognizing the “apparent power of celebrity endorsement of political opinions”
(Jackson and Darrow, 2005, p. 95). Although focused on youth, the perception of
influence of celebrity within the political sphere is evident once again.
In adding to the celebrity endorsement of political causes and candidates
presented in the previous studies, John Street expands the discussion of the celebrity
politician to include the ways in which elected officials and candidates exploit the
fundamentals of “celebrityhood” to garner favor for their political cause and explores the
phenomenon of the celebrity turned politician (2004, p. 435). In “Celebrity Politicians:
Popular Culture and Political Representation,” Street discusses the reasons why
politicians and candidates seek to be associated with celebrity and pop culture (2004). As
Street writes, “…the world of celebrity politics is one in which politicians, acutely aware
of their loss of credibility and trust, resort to new forms of political communication”
(2004, p. 436). Politicians are turning to the world of celebrity for legitimacy,
validation, and as a tool to reach the general public. A prime example of this can be
found in President Bill Clinton’s infamous, and, according to Street, “exploitative,”
saxophone playing ploy on the Arsenio Hall Show in the 1990s (2004, p. 437). President
31
Clinton sought to connect with Americans outside of the confines of Washington, D.C.,
to generally favorable results, and the picture of Clinton and Hall smiling with the
saxophone entered pop culture forever.
In discussing the celebrity turned politician, Street identifies a link between
celebrity politics and “the transformation of political communication,” a medium that
may be uniquely suited to the individual with a background on the literal or metaphorical
stage (2004, p. 441). As Mancini and Swanson report, modernization has opened a space
for communication in politics whereby new “symbolic realities” consisting of “symbolic
templates of heroes and villains, honored values and aspirations, histories, mythologies,
and self-definition” must be created (1996, p. 9). Who better to fill this role of “hero” in
political communication than an actor, particularly one who has played this role in the
past?
Street concludes by suggesting that “the celebrity politician is not in fact an
exaggerated form or exceptional form of all political representation, but rather
characteristic of the nature of political representation generally” (2004, p. 449). As
politicians and candidates seek legitimacy, trust, and a connection to the general public,
and as celebrities seek to enhance their influence and promote their own causes, the “link
between politics and popular aesthetics” will continue to grow (ibid.).
The Celebrity Athlete
The power and influence of celebrity is not confined to the entertainment industry
of acting in movies, television, and theater. Celebrity has been extended to include sports
figures as well. In their article, “Sports Celebrity Influence on the Behavioral Intentions
of Generation Y,” Bush, et al., report, “Sports and entertainment marketing is one of the
32
fastest growing industries in the country today…A large and very visible part of sports
marketing is the celebrity athlete spokesperson” (2004, p. 110). The authors hypothesize
that prominent sports figures will act as a “socialization agent” in the buying practices of
the teenager (ibid.). The outcomes of the aforementioned socialization can, and often do,
translate into positive images and associations with the brand, leading to increased
purchases of the endorsed brand, a willingness to pay top dollar, and discussing the brand
with peers (Bush, et al., 2004). Given the frequently limited economic resources of
teenagers, the aforementioned influence on behavior shows a great amount of power with
the sports celebrity. A prime example of this occurrence is in the sneaker industry. As
Currid-Halkett discusses, in the 1980s, Nike partnered with up-and-coming basketball
star Michael Jordan to create the Air Jordan basketball shoe (2010, pg. 177). In a
brilliant display of foresight, Nike “took a gamble on Jordan,” and both basketball player
and athletic company reached levels of success that no one could have predicted (ibid.).
Air Jordan’s were quickly established as required footwear among trendy 12-19-year
males, and prices soared well above $100 a pair. Indeed, Jordan superseded the
basketball court and “…created an entire market of things from endorsements to actual
products within the Jordan brand”; he turned his star power into a “commodity” (Currid-
Halkett, p. 178). Jordan is now retired, and Lebron James has filled the marketplace with
his Nike basketball shoe; despite prices nearing $200, lines to purchase the shoes have
been around the block. As Bush, et al., conclude, “…celebrity sports athletes are
important to adolescents when they make brand choices and talk about these brands
positively” (2004, p. 113).
33
The celebrity athlete is also found to be a relevant and influential player in the
world of philanthropy. In “The Influence of Professional Athlete Philanthropy on
Donation Intentions” by Kim and Walker, the authors report that many professional
athletes are involved in the nonprofit sector via personal giving, volunteer hours, and/or
the solicitation of external donations (2013). Despite this activity, Kim and Walker note
that there is a dearth of scholarly research on the influence these professional athletes
have in garnering support for their personal nonprofit organization or charitable
foundation (ibid.). Through the course of their study, Kim and Walker found that “the
congruence between an athlete’s high-profile status and the significant media attention of
these [Hurricane Katrina and the 2010 earthquake in Haiti] disasters, assisted with the
immediate and long-term support for the impacted areas” (2013, p. 580). A more recent
example can be found in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey’s devastation in Houston,
Texas, in August of 2017. Houston Texans football player J.J. Watt started a fundraising
campaign on youcaring.com to help the communities affected by the hurricane and
subsequent flooding. Watt initially had a modest goal of $200,000; less than 12 hours
later, the fund had received almost double that amount. Over the next three weeks, Watt
increased the fundraising goal 9 times, and each time the goal was exceeded. By the end
of the three weeks, Watt’s fund had received over $37 million from 200,000+ donors all
over the world (www.youcaring.com/victimsofhurricaneharvey-915053). The financial
and volunteer support garnered for these disasters as a result of the athlete’s involvement
in relief efforts shows the potential power of the perceived influence held by this type of
celebrity.
34
Kim and Walker continue on to discuss sports-related nonprofits, such as a youth
soccer league. They state, “For sport-related non-profits, using professional athletes is an
effective marketing tool for bolstering potential donor attention. Because professional
athletes possess unique attributes, their involvement with causes can be a driving force
for social awareness and change” (2013, p. 581). When the sports celebrity is paired with
a cause or organization that matches their “unique attributes,” donors pay attention and
frequently act. This same principle can be applied to the entertainment celebrity when
causes are matched to their interests or attributes such as familial background, for
example.
Thus far, this literature review has discussed examples of celebrity in product
endorsement, politics, and diplomacy, as well as the phenomenon of the celebrity athlete.
The second section will briefly discuss the nonprofit sector in America before delving
into celebrity endorsements in the nonprofit sector.
The Nonprofit Sector
Scholarly studies into the nonprofit sector are still in a nascent stage. Books and
journalistic sources such as newspaper and magazine articles can be found with numerous
anecdotes and experiences from within the nonprofit sector, but scholarly inquiry and
subsequent peer-reviewed journal articles have not risen to the level that this sector
requires. A number of scholars have emerged in the field over the past few decades, with
Lester M. Salamon, Director of the Johns Hopkins University Comparative Nonprofit
Sector Project, leading the field and aiming to understand and explain the nonprofit
sector. As Salamon and his co-author Anheier lament in “Social Origins of Civil Society:
Explaining the Nonprofit Sector Cross-Nationally,” “Even the most basic information
35
about the scale, structure, and composition of the nonprofit sector has been lacking…”,
and what data is present is “hardly compatible or comparable” (1996, pg. 1). As a result
of this dearth of information on the sector and its infrastructure, scholars have been
unable to fully investigate the sector and/or test any theories (such as motivations for
charitable giving, for example). The authors stated, “As a consequence, theories have
proliferated in number, and often imaginativeness, albeit with little apparent
improvement in actual explanatory power” (ibid.).
Salamon sought to rectify this “lack” of information and data on the nonprofit
sector with the creation of the Johns Hopkins Comparative Nonprofit Sector Project. His
Project collected and organized data on the sector, making it possible “for the first time,
to subject existing nonprofit sector theories to more serious testing and, more generally,
to determine what the preconditions for a vital nonprofit sector really are” (Salamon and
Anheier, 1996). While the Project and the data it holds have been used by nonprofit
professionals, policymakers, and researchers, and has allowed theories to be tested within
the sector, more scholarly research into the field is necessary. Salamon stated, “This is
not to say that this data base will satisfy all theoretical concerns, let alone all actual or
potential theorists” (1996, p. 2). The authors continue on to discuss many of the
challenges of the nonprofit sector, highlighting one problem by stating, “The very
definition of the nonprofit sector remains highly contested, after all” (ibid.). Here, the
authors are referring to a long-standing discussion in the nonprofit sector of “who are
we?” In dissecting the word “nonprofit,” it is apparent that the sector is being defined by
what it is not (not seeking profit) rather than by what it is. Indeed, even the name of the
sector is still debated, with terms including “nonprofit,” “not-for-profit,” “charity,” and
36
“philanthropic organization,” used interchangeably. Internationally, the terms “non-
governmental organizations (NGOs)” and “private voluntary organizations (PVOs)” are
commonly used. How established can the sector truly be if its definition and its very
name are still debated and contested? Is the lack of consensus on the definition and name
of the sector detrimental to its cohesiveness and effectiveness? Again, although Salamon
created this Project over twenty years ago, the scholarly research is still in its early
stages.
Salamon and Anheier also discuss the links that exist between the nonprofit sector
and the public and market sectors, highlighting the “tremendous complexity” of
experiences within this field (1996, pg. 2). The authors state that “…explanations…in
this field must move away from a focus on the nonprofit sector alone and embrace as well
the complex interactions between this set of institutions and both the state and the market
sectors” (ibid.). The nonprofit sector does not, and cannot, exist alone. It is inextricably
linked to government as well as the market economy, in terms of funding but also in
terms of services rendered, clientele, and as an integral piece of civil society. Perhaps,
within this linkage to society as a whole, a space for the celebrity/nonprofit organization
partnership can be created.
While the nonprofit sector is emerging as a field of study, so, too, is scholarly
research into one of the primary challenges faced by nonprofit organizations: fundraising.
In “How Fundraising is Carried Out in US Nonprofit Organizations,” authors Mark
Hager, Patrick Rooney, and Thomas Pollak discuss some of the many ways organizations
seek to raise money, such as direct mail appeals, grants, and special events (2002, pg.
312). In addition, the personnel responsible for fundraising can vary widely, with some
37
organizations relying on staff fundraisers and/or volunteers, and others hiring outside
firms. This diversity of fundraising strategies employed by organizations can create a
problem for researchers. “Approaches to fundraising are nearly as diverse as the types of
organizations that populate the nonprofit sector, a fact that complicates efforts to
understand how fundraising is achieved” (ibid.).
Scholars such as Hager, et al., are still trying to understand the fundraising tactics
employed by nonprofit organizations, while others are focused on the other side of the
fundraising coin: the donor. In “Who Gives? The Determinants of Charitable Giving,
Volunteering, and Their Relationship,” author Kimberly Yao discusses the reliance
nonprofit organizations have on individual donors and how nonprofit professionals try to
identify these potential donors. Yao stated, “Charity organizations…seek to understand
the relationships between certain demographics and their likelihood to give money and
time, as these organizations run on limited resources and need to identify who to target in
their fundraising…campaigns” (2015, pg. 2). As Hager et al., discussed, nonprofit
funding originates from many sources (individuals, government, corporations, and
foundations), but individual donors typically donate unrestricted funds, allowing the
nonprofit to direct the donation where it is needed most. It is these individual donors that
Yao is referring to when she states, “Donors signal support and belief in a charity and its
mission when they ‘vote’ with their dollars” (ibid.). Nonprofit professionals must seek to
understand their potential donors and meld that understanding with their fundraising
strategies, whether that be traditional strategies such as direct mail appeals or partnering
with a celebrity for a new campaign.
38
One of the challenges of this study has been a lack of scholarly literature on the
nonprofit sector. In addition, of primary interest to this study, are the underlying reasons
why people support an organization that is not offering any direct benefit or service to
them. The work began by Lester Salamon and his colleagues and continued by scholars
such as Mark Hager, et al., and Kimberly Yao are valuable contributions to the nonprofit
sector, but further scholarly, peer-reviewed research is warranted to assist in the
understanding and growth of the nonprofit sector in America. This study has been
influenced and guided by the work of these scholars and as well as the scholars in the
following section where celebrity in the nonprofit sector will be discussed.
Celebrity Endorsements in the Nonprofit Sector
Although celebrity involvement in the nonprofit sector can be traced as far back
as 1930s Hollywood (Traub, 2008), this involvement has been the subject of scholarly
research and literature only in the last three decades. As such, there is a shortage of
knowledge and data in this area. However, scholars such as Sun-Young Park and
Moonhee Cho, Jo Littler, Robert T. Wheeler, Emma Samman, and Erica Harris and Julie
Ruth are studying the landscape and emerging as leaders in the field of celebrity
involvement in the nonprofit sector.
In their article, “The Relationship of Celebrity Affiliation to Nonprofit
Contributions: A Donations Demand Model Assessment,” authors Erica Harris and Julie
Ruth suggest that “celebrities who are associated with philanthropic causes help increase
financial support from the public” (2014). The authors have also found that celebrity
endorsements of nonprofit organizations offer a “credibility signal” to donors, adding
legitimacy to the specific organization receiving the donation (ibid.). For their study,
39
Harris and Ruth collected data on more than 500 nonprofit organizations known to have
affiliations with celebrities. They found that three categories of celebrity, athletes, movie
stars, and newscasters, were “associated with the largest increase in public donations”
(Harris and Ruth, 2014).
The article goes on to report that relationships with celebrities have long-term
positive impacts on the organization, as the increased donations resulting from the
relationship “allows nonprofit organizations to allocate more resources to service
missions than fundraising campaigns” (Harris and Ruth, 2014). In an interview regarding
the publication of the study, Harris said, “Charitable organizations have to spend a lot of
time to cultivate the relationship with a celebrity and we think that speaks well of
nonprofit managers. We hope nonprofit marketing professionals may increase awareness
of their organizations through celebrity endorsements.” As discussed in the need for the
study, insufficient funding is one of the biggest challenges nonprofit organizations must
overcome. Harris and Ruth strongly point to celebrity endorsements as a viable,
sustainable fundraising tool.
While Harris and Ruth focused on the celebrity endorsement at the organizational
level, Emma Samman, et al., have taken a different approach in studying celebrity
involvement in the nonprofit sector in their article, “The Role of Celebrity in Endorsing
Poverty Reduction through International Aid” (2009). The authors present the notion of
celebrity endorsement in selling an idea, an abstract idea at that, of international poverty
reduction through development aid, and study the effects of the endorsement in terms of
credibility, public perception, and translational impact (i.e., did the message compel
people to act). As the authors write, “…a growing number of celebrities have become
40
involved in heightened public awareness of poverty in low-income countries, its possible
causes, and possible actions that could be attempted by the international community.
What these celebrities are selling is therefore a relatively abstract idea, that requires, not
necessarily donation of money but political commitment” (Samman, et al., 2009, p. 138-
139).
Through the course of their descriptive study, involving surveys and brief
interviews with one hundred participants, the authors found a mix of both positive and
negative results (Samman, et al., 2009). In terms of compelling an individual to act,
“hardly any survey respondents cited taking any concrete step to support a given cause as
a result of celebrity influence” (Samman, et al., 2009, p. 145). The study also found that
credibility was not a great factor in influencing perception and actions. “Clearly having
credibility is not enough, as even those celebrities rated as highly credible only had a
moderate influence on respondents’ reported views” (ibid.). On the positive side,
however, “nearly all respondents” reported that celebrity participation provided a great
benefit to social causes by “raising the profile of issues,” which, in turn, results in the
message reaching a greater number of people (ibid.). Despite these mixed results, the
authors bring the article to a close by cautioning, “In an age of increasing
philanthropy…it might indeed be a mistake to overlook the potentially positive influence
that celebrities can have” (Samman, et al., 2009, p. 146). It is important to note that the
authors, by their own admission, used a relatively small sample size and the results were
of “questionable generalizability” (Samman, et al., 2009, p. 146). In addition, the study
was conducted in Dublin, Ireland, and utilized celebrity cases, such as Sir Bob Geldof,
who are more well-known abroad than in the United States, again lending to questions of
41
generalizability beyond the British Isles. While this was an interesting and important
study, further research is warranted on the subject of celebrity endorsements of abstract
ideas.
A more concrete example of celebrity endorsements in the nonprofit sector can be
found in the case of the “Katie Couric Effect,” as reported in the article, “The Impact of a
Celebrity Promotional Campaign on the Use of Colon Cancer Screening” by Cram, et al.
(2003). After the death of her husband from colon cancer at the age of 42, Katie Couric
devoted herself to promoting awareness of the disease and encouraging individuals of an
appropriate age to receive colorectal cancer screening. Ms. Couric underwent an on-air
colonoscopy in March 2000 on the Today Show as part of her campaign to raise
awareness. While past research had shown that “celebrity disclosure of their own
illnesses can increase public interest in the specific disease and can change the public’s
behavior,” a study into the “impact of a healthy celebrity spokesperson on the public’s
participation in preventive measures” did not exist (Cram, et al., 2003, p. 1601).
The study initially had highly positive results: rates of colonoscopies experienced
a definitive increase in the period immediately following the on-air screening, and the
following nine-month period sustained the increased screening levels by the general
public (Cram, et al., 2003). In the short term, the campaign worked, and the phrase the
“Katie Couric Effect” was born. The authors optimistically reported, “…these findings
support the premise that healthy celebrity spokespersons can enhance the adoption of
proven preventive interventions for a specific disease” (Cram, et al., 2003, p. 1604).
Unfortunately, however, the increased screening levels began to taper off after the nine-
42
month period, and the general rate of screenings returned to its pre-campaign levels
(ibid.).
Chapter Summary
The celebrity world is one of the most potent sources of cultural meaning at the
disposal of the marketing system and the individual consumer. It is, therefore, not
at all surprising that we should care about celebrities and the lives they lead.
North Americans are…active consumers of the meanings that are made available
by the celebrity world. (McCracken, 1989, p. 318)
Although McCracken wrote his seminal study almost 30 years ago, his words ring
truer than ever today. Indeed, the celebrity world has expanded vastly over the last three
decades, perhaps most notably with the advent of the “reality” celebrity and those who
are famous for simply being famous. Celebrity has been studied as a phenomenon in the
market economy and has been shown to possess great power, influence, and social capital
in our society, with endorsements from the “right” celebrity greatly impacting the profit
margins of the product’s parent company.
This literature review has attempted to show that the power of celebrity is not
confined to the market economy of the entertainment industry and commercial products.
The research into social causes such as diplomacy, politics, advocacy, and
humanitarianism presented here have attempted to show the breadth and depth of the
reach of perceived celebrity influence outside the traditional realm of Hollywood. In
addition, these articles were instrumental in the design of this study. McCracken has long
been heralded as one of the preeminent scholars on celebrity in marketing and public
relations, and his article “Who is the Celebrity Endorser?” was integral in understanding
43
his field. It directly influenced the design of this study in a number of ways. First,
McCracken’s broad definition of celebrity to anyone in the public eye guided my own
inclusion of many different types of celebrities in the overarching research questions and
subsequent interview discussions. McCracken believed that celebrity extends beyond the
silver screen, and this study was designed to reflect as such. In the glossary for this
study, I define celebrity as “a prominent figure in the public eye; may include actors,
singers, athletes, reality stars, and other entertainers.” My definition was influenced by
McCracken’s definition of celebrity as well as the definitions provided by Cooper in his
article “Celebrity Diplomacy and the G8: Bono and Bob as Legitimate International
Actors” and Kim and Walker’s “Influence of Professional Athlete Philanthropy on
Donation Intentions.” Each of these articles casts celebrity as a very broad net, and my
study did as well.
Second, McCracken’s “meaning transfer model” discusses consumer’s
perceptions of the celebrity, the product, and their role in the transactional purchase.
Consumers transfer their perceived meanings of the celebrity and the world of celebrity
onto the product, and are then compelled to purchase. In this study, I sought to
investigate the participants’ perceived meanings of celebrities specifically within the
nonprofit sector by asking semi-structured questions about perceived celebrity influence
as a whole (with the question, “Do you believe celebrities have influence within the
nonprofit sector?”) and in relation to a specific celebrity and campaign (Jennifer Aniston
and St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital). These questions allowed me to investigate if and
how my participants transfer the meaning they associate with Jennifer Aniston and her
44
celebrity world to the nonprofit St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital and if that meaning
transfer would result in action (such as donating, volunteering, etc.).
Both Agrawal and Kamakura as well as Harris and Ruth discuss the economic
impact of celebrity endorsements, in the for-profit and nonprofit sectors, respectively.
While this study was not designed to find a causal link between celebrity nonprofit
campaigns and increased giving (indeed, Agrawal and Kamakura themselves admit it
may not be possible to quantify the exact economic effect of the celebrity endorsement), I
did want to investigate past celebrity involvement in the nonprofit sector and some of its
outcomes. As such, a guiding research question for this study was “In your experience,
did past partnerships between celebrity and nonprofit organization help with increased
donations or awareness?” Although it did not ask for quantitative data, this semi-
structured question allowed respondents to detail their past experiences in the sector, both
positive and negative. In addition, these articles influenced the inclusion of the questions,
“Do you believe the celebrity helped your campaign/organization? If so, how? How did
you measure the celebrity’s impact on the campaign/event success?” in order to ascertain
a.) if evaluation metrics are in place, and b.) how success or failure was defined by this
organization. These articles and the subsequent questions they inspired assisted in the
investigation into past experiences within the nonprofit sector.
It was also important for this study to investigate the reasons why a celebrity
campaign in the nonprofit sector was successful (or unsuccessful). Atkin and Block as
well as Silvera and Austad wrote articles discussing factors present in successful celebrity
campaigns, leading to the inclusion of the question “Were there any campaigns/events
that were not successful or not as successful as you had anticipated? If so, to what do
45
you attribute the outcome?” on the interview instruments. Factors such as credibility,
attractiveness, and trustworthiness were discussed in the two articles, and it was
interesting to see these factors present in many of the interview responses.
Many of the articles discussing the nonprofit sector and celebrity endorsements in
the nonprofit sector also guided the design of this study. Hager, et al., and Yao discuss
fundraising in the nonprofit sector, giving examples of fundraising practices and types of
donors, while Samman, et al., and Cram, et al., discuss fundraising through celebrity
partnerships. These articles focusing on the nonprofit sector, combined with the articles
in the for-profit sector of McCracken as well as Agrawal and Kamakura, were integral in
the formation of one of the overarching research questions: Can endorsements by
celebrities be used for altruistic purposes as well as commercial purposes, inspiring
consumers to donate funds or volunteer time for the endorsed cause? McCracken and his
colleagues studying celebrity in the for-profit sector have established that employing
celebrities in marketing campaigns results in higher rates of sales. The nonprofit
literature is newer and celebrity involvement has not been established as successful in the
same way as it has in the for-profit sector, leading me to include this question in the
design of this study.
Examples of successful celebrity campaigns in the nonprofit sector were also
presented in this literature review, such as “The Katie Couric Effect” and NFL player J.J.
Watt’s fundraising campaign for Hurricane Harvey relief. However, the fact that a
celebrity/nonprofit campaign such as the “Katie Couric Effect” was not sustained for the
long-term points to a need for further research into methods to promote permanent
adoption of the celebrity endorsed activity, whether it be health screening activities,
46
donations to a nonprofit organization, or time volunteered. That onus falls on the
nonprofit organization to effectively manage the celebrity/organization endorsement
relationship and create a sustainable win-win scenario for long-term support. But first,
before the nonprofit organization can effectively create and manage the celebrity
relationship, the reasons driving the successes of the Couric and Watt campaigns must be
further investigated. Unfortunately, there is a lack of a theoretical framework or of a
generalizable theory that can connect to the empirical work of Samman, et al., and
international development, or to Cram, et al., and the Couric Effect, for example. Further
research must be conducted to determine why, for example, the Couric colonoscopy
campaign succeeded at first and then tapered off from the public view. Why did
colonoscopy rates rise dramatically after the campaign began? Was it because of the
celebrity’s presence? Because of her perceived influence? Overall, this qualitative study
was designed to investigate the gaps in the literature and the knowledge about celebrity’s
perceived influence within the nonprofit sector. The next chapter will further discuss the
study’s methodology, interview instruments, and data collection before presenting the
results and subsequent analysis of the interview responses.
47
Chapter 3:
Methodology and Data Collection
Methodology
As stated in the Introduction, this study is a qualitative investigation into
participants’ perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector with the intention
of advancing philanthropy for the greater good. In order to investigate participants’
perceptions, I designed a qualitative study to collect data by conducting three sets of
semi-structured interviews with a.) employees in the nonprofit sector whose
organizations have worked with celebrities, b.) nonprofit employees whose organizations
have not worked with celebrities, and c.) individuals in the target consumer audience for
nonprofit organizations’ campaign/events. The purpose of the first set of interviews was
to gain insight into the participant’s experiences working with celebrities in their
nonprofit organizations and to determine if they personally believe celebrities have
influence in the nonprofit sector. This category of interviewees was included because of
the specific experience they gained working with a celebrity during the course of their
professional career in the nonprofit sector; they provided a unique glimpse into the
partnership between celebrity and nonprofit organization that could not be gained without
their input. While these participants provided valuable insight to the study, it is important
to discuss the inherent bias present within this group of respondents. One bias these
participants could have is a highly favorable view of the importance of the nonprofit
sector. Many individuals working in the nonprofit sector have chosen to do so with the
explicit desire to serve the greater good. This choice, along with their dedication to and
48
experience in the nonprofit sector, could bias their responses to the interview questions.
In addition, as these participants in this category have worked with celebrities in the past,
the result of those experiences, whether positive or negative, could also bias their
responses. In total, twenty-two interviews were conducted within this first category.
The second set of interviews was conducted with participants at nonprofit
organizations that have not worked with celebrities. This set of interviews explored the
reasons why the organization has not worked with celebrities in the past, the employee’s
perception of celebrity influence in the sector, and if the employee would be willing to
partner with a celebrity in the future. The bias regarding the importance of the nonprofit
sector present in the first set of interviews could also be found within these participants;
these individuals could also have a bias towards their chosen field. These participants are
unique from the other two categories because they work in the nonprofit sector but have
not had personal experience with celebrities, and they are also in the target audience of
the nonprofit organization’s celebrity campaign. I conducted 17 interviews within this
second set.
The final category of interviews was conducted with participants, ages 18 and
over, who are the target audience for nonprofit organizations’ campaigns. I presented
each of these interviewees with a nonprofit celebrity endorsement, one of the St. Jude’s
Children’s Hospital campaigns starring Jennifer Aniston. After showing this example to
the participant, a series of semi-structured questions were asked in order to determine the
effect of the endorsement on the consumer and if they perceived the celebrity had
influence within the nonprofit sector. As the participants were shown only one celebrity
endorsement, the responses received in this category are open to a bias on the part of the
49
interviewee regarding the celebrity. For example, if a participant had pre-existing
positive feelings towards Aniston, those feelings could bias their responses in a positive
manner. The converse is true as well. Overall, 21 interviews were conducted in the third
category.
The deliverables for the project are this dissertation that expands knowledge of
the field by analyzing and discussing the findings of the interview instruments as well as
a newly created list of Best Practices that have emerged from the analyzed data. The
Best Practices are intended to assist nonprofit organizations in creating and maintaining a
mutually beneficial relationship with celebrities.
Interview Instruments
The following interview instruments were used to investigate the perceptions and
experiences of participants in each of the three categories.
Questions for Participants with Previous Experience Working with Celebrities in the
Nonprofit Sector
1. I would love to hear about your background in the nonprofit sector. How long have
you served as an Executive Director/CEO/President? Follow-up: How long have you
been with this organization?
2. Can you tell about the ways in which your organization works with celebrities?
3. What is your target audience for your campaigns/events involving celebrities?
4. Do you believe that the celebrity helped your campaign/organization? If so, how
(increased donations and/or memberships, increased volunteer time, lobbying Congress,
etc.)?
5. How did you measure the celebrity’s impact on the campaign/event success? Was there
a specific measure or did you just “have a sense” that they were helpful?
6. Were there any campaigns/events that were not successful or not as successful as you
had anticipated? If so, to what do you attribute the outcome?
50
7. What has been your personal experience in working with celebrities?
8. Given your experiences, do you believe that celebrities have influence in the nonprofit
sector? Follow-up question/s: If so, how much, and it what ways specifically?
9. If yes to Q5 - How can celebrities expand their influence in the sector and inspire
others to act for good? If no to Q5 - How can celebrities gain influence in the sector?
10. Do you have any recommendations for best practices in a.) establishing a relationship
with a celebrity endorser, and b.) maintaining a positive and beneficial relationship with
them?
11. Do you have any recommendations for other people I could speak to about celebrity
involvement in the nonprofit sector?
Questions for Participants without Previous Experience Working with Celebrities in the
Nonprofit Sector
1. I would love to hear about your background in the nonprofit sector. How long have
you served as an Executive Director/CEO/President? Follow-up: How long have you
been with this organization?
2. With the proximity to Hollywood and the entertainment industry, many local nonprofit
organizations work with celebrities on special events, fundraising campaigns, etc. I
understand that your organization has never worked with celebrities. May I ask why not?
3. Do you have colleagues in the sector who have worked with celebrities? If so, what
was their experience?
4. Do you believe that celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector? Follow-up
question/s: If so, how much, and it what ways specifically?
5. Would you be open to working with a celebrity in the future? Why or why not?
6. Do you have any recommendations for other people I could speak to about celebrities
in the nonprofit sector?
Questions for Participants who are Celebrity Nonprofit Campaigns’ Target Audience
Interview set-up: Show the interviewee an example of celebrity involvement in the
nonprofit sector (Jennifer Aniston’s St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital endorsement) and then
proceed with questions.
1. What is your reaction to the endorsement?
51
2. How did it make you feel?
3. To what extent would the celebrity influence your decision to get involved with the
organization or donate?
4. Would the absence of the celebrity have lessened the likelihood of your involvement or
awareness of the nonprofit organization and/or their campaign?
5. In general, do you believe that celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector?
6. Do you think that nonprofit organizations should work with celebrities to raise money
or awareness for their cause? Why or why not?
7. Are you more or less inclined to support an organization with a celebrity endorser?
Why or why not?
Data Collection
As I wanted to interview a cross-section of nonprofit organizations in Los
Angeles and beyond, I compiled a list ranging from large, prominent organizations (such
as United Way LA) to smaller, lesser-known organizations (such as A Dog’s Life
Rescue) for Category One of participants in the nonprofit sector with celebrity
experience. I found and solicited these organizations based on a.) my experiences as a
nonprofit professional in Los Angeles, and b.) Internet research into nonprofit
organizations that have worked with celebrities. The list I created contained over 50
nonprofit organizations. For nonprofit organizations that have not worked with
celebrities, my list creation was the same; I used my experience and research to compile a
list of over 20 potential interviewees. As I was hoping to determine the target audience
for the nonprofit/celebrity partnership, I asked all nonprofit stakeholders with celebrity
experience who they targeted with this type of campaign. The results were
overwhelmingly consumers who are 18 years of age or older. Therefore, Category Three
52
participants were interviewed last and were required to be 18 or older. The age of
participant was the only requirement for this category, so I sought participants from the
general public, utilizing participants at USC and the greater Los Angeles area.
One of the first obstacles I encountered in contacting individuals at nonprofit
organizations was a lack of access to email addresses, especially for those executives in
the upper echelons of the organizations. First, I tried calling the organizations and
introducing myself over the phone, but the levels of gatekeepers prohibited me from
doing anything more than leaving a message (which was inevitably never returned). I
then tried a different tactic in reaching these executives: I noticed that, even in the larger
organizations that did not list everyone’s email address, the addresses followed the same
basic format (e.g., first initial_last name@xyz.org). I determined which individuals I
most wanted to speak with, and sent them emails under the organization’s format. This
strategy did work for several of the organizations and I was able to conduct several
interviews as a result of these emails.
Beyond these few interviews, there were not many successful responses. Most of
the “cold” emails and calls were ignored; I frequently never heard a response despite
multiple attempts at contact. I also experienced the “yes, of course I’d love to be
interviewed, talk to my assistant…” only to be later revoked by busy schedules or
unreturned calls. I wrote letters on USC letterhead, to no avail.
The start was slow, but once I scheduled the first few interviews, the other
interviews followed in a much easier succession. I owe this success to this simple but
invaluable advice I received: ask each interviewee if they could recommend other people
to interview, a process called “snowball sampling” or “snowballing” (Suri, 2011). As
53
Harsh Suri wrote in “Purposeful Sampling in Qualitative Research Synthesis,” “Snowball
sampling involves seeking information from key informants about details of other
information-rich cases in the field” (2011, pg. 69). Snowball sampling proved to be
extremely helpful in my study, as it directed me to potentially “information-rich” cases I
was previously unaware of, it introduced me to a new individual and organization, and
provided instant validity to this study and to myself. In addition, I would like to note that
I utilized snowball sampling within each of the three categories of interviews. Not all of
these introductions yielded another interview, but many did.
Another surprising component of the interview process was the sheer number of
individuals that requested anonymity. I anticipated some interviewees would make such
a request, but I erroneously assumed it would be limited to the executives at the nonprofit
organizations (as we were discussing potentially sensitive information about their jobs,
indeed their livelihoods). Instead, the request for anonymity bridged across the three
categories of interviewees, with numerous executives, volunteers, consumers, etc., all
requesting privacy. I attribute the prevalence of this request for anonymity to the Internet
and the modern information age: the interviewees knew that what they said could be
published online, as could anything any of us say or do in this age of technology. For
example, one consumer expressed concern over his comments about politicians as
celebrities, stating that he could be “black-balled in my industry” over his responses. I
believe this consumer, as well as the other interviewees, were put at ease by my promise
of anonymity, and that this concern did not affect or impede the responses to the
interview protocols.
54
The participants for the 60 interviews were quite varied, adding to the robustness
of the responses received. In the first category of interviews, participants who have
worked with celebrities in the nonprofit sector, I interviewed veteran nonprofit
stakeholders at United Way LA, Magic Johnson Foundation, UCLA, United Nations
Foundation, and the Inland Empire Food Share, to name a few. I also interviewed
fundraisers, program officers, and volunteers while investigating the research questions.
For each of these interviews, I introduced myself and gave a brief background to the
study, and then proceeded to ask the questions from the interview instrument for
Category One.
The second category of interviews questioned participants in the nonprofit sector
who have not worked with celebrities. For this category, I interviewed individuals from
well-known organizations like the Peace Corps as well as those from smaller, sometimes
newer organizations such as StemYes!, a fledgling STEM organization for young girls
that is currently trying to partner with actress Danica McKellar to promote their services.
These interviews highlighted some of the reasons why these organizations have not
worked with celebrities in the past, such as lack of access to celebrities or a lack of
resources to manage relationships with celebrities, and if these organizations would be
amenable to working with celebrities in the future. Category Two interviews were
conducted in the same manner as Category One, where I introduced the study and myself
and proceeded to ask the questions from the Category Two interview instrument.
The third category of interviews, participants who are the target audience for
nonprofit organizations’ celebrity campaigns, was purposefully the most diverse in terms
of age. One of the questions in Category One asked what the target audience for
55
celebrity campaigns is. The answer from 20 of the 22 respondents was “everyone.” As
such, I interviewed a broad range of participants, from age 19-55, for this category
exploring the participants’ perception of celebrity influence. The interviews in Category
Three were conducted differently from the preceding categories: prior to asking the
questions from Category Three interview instrument, participants in this category were
shown a 31-second commercial starring Jennifer Aniston in support of St. Jude’s
Children Hospital. Although Aniston has starred in several St. Jude’s commercials, each
participant was shown the same commercial for the sake of consistency with the study
2
.
The interview instrument for Category 3 was based on the participants’ reactions to this
commercial. Unfortunately, in 2 of the 22 interviews in this category, there were
technical problems and the participant did not see the Aniston commercial at the time of
the interview. In each of these two cases, however, the participant had previously seen an
Aniston/St. Jude’s commercial and was familiar with their partnership, so I proceeded
with the interview instrument based on their previous exposure to the commercial.
There is a possibility that showing the Aniston/St. Jude’s commercial
inadvertently created a limitation to this study. The act of showing participants in
Category Three this commercial could have biased their responses; seeing a child who is
sick and in the care of the hospital could have affected their responses. Perhaps a future
study could create two groups, one shown this commercial and another a control group
who does not see the commercial, and investigate their reactions to see how viewing the
commercial impacted their responses and their perception of celebrity influence.
2
Please visit https://m.youtube.com/watch/v=6HIaYH18SOg to view the Aniston/St. Jude’s
commerical
56
The interviews were conducted in a number of different locations, depending on
the needs of the interviewee. For most of the interviews, I traveled to the participants’
place of business and conducted the interview there. A few interviews were conducted in
public places such as Starbucks, and a few were conducted over the phone as the
circumstances warranted. The interviews ranged in duration from 15 minutes to well
over an hour or more. A few participants were quite taciturn; it was a challenge to get
more than one or two sentences in response to the interview questions. Most, however,
were interested in the subject matter and had a number of insights and experiences they
readily shared. Some of these insights took the study in directions I had never before
contemplated, adding to the layers of what has been started with this project and
providing many additional research design improvements for future studies.
Overall, this study and its data collection were designed to explore the perception
of celebrity influence within the nonprofit sector and its potential impact for social good.
The analysis that follows explores this perception of influence from the perspective of the
interview participants who are nonprofit stakeholders that have worked with celebrities;
nonprofit stakeholders that have never worked with celebrities; and consumers that are
the target market for the celebrity endorsement.
57
Chapter 4:
Analysis and Discussion of Findings
For this study, I have investigated my participants’ perception of celebrity
influence in the nonprofit sector and if this perceived influence can be used to help
nonprofit organizations and their cause through awareness, advocacy, fundraising, etc. It
is important to note that I was investigating perceptions of celebrity influence in the
nonprofit sector; perception of influence is separate and distinct from actual, measurable
influence. Therefore, in order to conduct this study, I designed three sets of semi-
structured interview instruments to explore perceptions of celebrity influence and
involvement within the nonprofit sector. I would also like to note that the interview
responses are attributed only to the participant and are not intended to be extrapolated to
the general public.
The sixty participants overwhelmingly expressed their perception that celebrities
do have influence in the sector and that their involvement does help. In looking at the
aggregated set of 60 interviews, 59 respondents (98%) stated they perceive that
celebrities do have influence in the nonprofit sector. Broken down by interview category,
21 of 22 respondents (95%) in the first set (individuals at nonprofits that have worked
with celebrities) stated they believe celebrities have influence, while all 17 of 17
respondents in category two (individuals at nonprofits that have not worked with
celebrities) and all 21 of 21 respondents in category three (consumers who are the target
audience for the nonprofit organization) stated they believe in celebrity influence within
the nonprofit sector.
58
Aggregated Responses to Perceptions of Celebrity Influence
Overall Responses Column1 Column2
Perceive Celebrities have Influence:
Response Count Percent
Yes 59 of 60 98
No 1 of 60 2
No Response 0 of 60 0
In the first set of interviews, I also wanted to explore if the respondents believed
that celebrities had helped their organization and/or their specific campaign. To this
question, 19 of 22 (86%) respondents stated that yes, the celebrity did help the
organization; 2 out of 22 (9%) stated that no, the celebrity did not help; and 1 of 22
(4.5%) declined to respond because he felt he has not had enough time to determine if the
celebrity had helped or not. In this category, the respondents and I also discussed the
experiences of their colleagues in terms of working with celebrities. Here I found that 11
of the 22 (50%) had colleagues with positive experiences with celebrities in the nonprofit
sector, while 4 of the 22 (18%) reported negative experiences. The remainder of the
respondents, 7 of 22 (32%), stated that their colleagues’ experiences were mixed and
varied, some very positive and some very negative.
Interview Category 1 Responses
Perceive Celebrities have
Influence: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Yes 21 of 22 95
No 1 of 22 5
No Response 0 of 22 0
59
Celebrity Helped Organization: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Yes 19 of 22 86
No 2 of 22 9
Inconclusive 1 of 22 4.5
Colleagues Experiences: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Positive 11 of 22 50
Negative 4 of 22 18
Mixed 7 of 22 32
Category 2’s responses were very similar to those of the first category in support
of celebrity involvement in the nonprofit sector. In addition to the 100% positive
response that consumers perceive celebrities to have influence in the sector, 16 of 17
respondents (94%) reported that they would be amenable to working with a celebrity in
the future, while only one (6%) stated they would not work with a celebrity. In addition,
8 of the 17 respondents have colleagues in the sector who have worked with celebrities; 7
of those 8 (88%) reported that their colleagues had positive experiences with celebrities
while 1 of the 8 (13%) reported negative experiences on the part of their colleagues.
Interview Category 2 Responses
Perceive Celebrities have Influence: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Yes 17 of 17 100
No 0 of 17 0
No Response 0 of 17 0
Open to Celebrity Partnership: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Yes 16 of 17 94
No 1 of 17 6
Maybe 0 of 17 0
60
Colleagues Experiences:* Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Positive 7 of 8 88
Negative 1 of 8 13
Mixed 0 of 8 0
*Only 8 of 17 interviewees reported colleagues with celebrity experience
As previously mentioned, the third category of interviews, participants who are
the target audience for the nonprofit organizations’ campaign, had 100% of its 21
respondents stating that they perceive celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector.
In addition, all 21 of 21 respondents (100%) said nonprofit organizations should work
with celebrities. The responses to the final question were not, however, so emphatic.
When asked if they were more or less inclined to support an organization with a celebrity
endorser, 7 of 21 (33%) said they were more inclined, while 2 of 21 (10%) stated they
were less inclined to offer support. Although there were quite a few remaining
respondents, 12 of the 21 (57%) interviewees in this category stated that their
involvement would depend on the celebrity and the cause and therefore they could not
respond as more or less inclined.
Interview Category 3 Responses
Perceive Celebrities have Influence: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Yes 21 of 21 100
No 0 of 21 0
No Response 0 of 21 0
Inclination to Support Nonprofit w/
Celeb: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
More Inclined 7 of 21 33
Less Inclined 2 of 21 10
Declined to State 12 of 21 57
61
Should Nonprofits Work w/ Celebrities: Column1 Column2
Response Count Percent
Yes 21 of 21 100
No 0 of 21 0
Maybe 0 of 21 0
Overall, the results of the interviews point to a strong perception of celebrity
influence by stakeholders in nonprofit organizations and participants who are the target
audience of the celebrity endorsement. The results of the interviews also revealed that
the participants take action based on this perceived influence of celebrities. For the
nonprofit stakeholders, time, money, and human resources are employed in the quest to
build and maintain a working relationship with celebrities. Participants in the target
audience category reported actions ranging from donating money to simply visiting the
organization’s website.
As the interviews progressed, a number of responses that were not direct answers
to the interview protocol began to be repeated by the interviewees. Based on the
questions in the interview protocols, these responses were not necessarily anticipated, but
they led down new avenues for exploration. In addition, it was interesting to see the
manner in which they were echoed across the three categories of interviewees and
hearkening back to the scholars discussed in the literature review; time and again, I heard
responses from consumers that were nearly identical to those of nonprofit executives, and
vice versa. Once the 60 interviews were completed, the responses were analyzed and
organized into the following themes.
62
Connection:
“Connection” was the most discussed theme that emerged from the interviews.
Of the 60 interviews, 25 respondents (42%) talked about the importance of a connection
between the celebrity and the nonprofit organization, defining this connection as a type of
link between celebrity and organization. Respondents indicated this connection can
include such situations where the celebrity was a former participant in the organization
(such as Jaime Foxx and Big Brothers Big Sisters), it is the celebrity’s organization (such
as Matt Damon and water.org) or well-known passion (such as Jennifer Aniston and St.
Jude’s Hospital), or the celebrity is a current recipient of the organization’s services (such
as the celebrity whose child was a patient at a prominent children’s hospital). In each of
these examples and in the anecdotes from the interviews, the celebrity was “connected”
to the organization in some manner, and this connection was of key importance to many
of the nonprofit stakeholders and consumers interviewed.
Lenee Richards, an executive with Leaders Up, a nonprofit organization dedicated
to addressing youth unemployment through mentorship and community collaboration,
discussed the importance of a connection between celebrity and organization. Richards
reported that she believes that nonprofit organizations provide “an opportunity to connect
celebrities with their passion,” and this connection is a key component to the success of
the partnership. A good connection between celebrity and organization could create a
positive partnership that will be felt by the audience and hopefully translate to increased
awareness and dollars raised. “When there is a personal connection, a personal story, it
paints the picture of the organization or cause that will resonate with the audience on a
deeper level than when no connection exists,” Richards stated. Consumers appear to be
63
affected by this connection when it exists, perhaps due to the “meaning transfer model”
discussed by Grant McCracken in “Who is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foundations
of the Endorsement Process” (1989). McCracken stated that “the endorsement process
depends upon the symbolic properties of the celebrity endorser…Using a “meaning
transfer” perspective, these properties are shown to reside in the celebrity and to move
from celebrity to consumer…” (1989, p. 310). When consumers identify or perceive a
connection between celebrity and nonprofit organization, that connection can then be
transferred to themselves, leading to a feeling of personal connection to the organization
and/or cause. From the perspective of the meaning transfer model, a connection between
celebrity and organization is paramount in establishing a connection between
organization and consumer.
The cultural meaning transfer was discussed a number of times throughout the
interviews, specifically citing Jennifer Aniston. Three respondents, Cindy Tu, Charina
DeLaCruz, and an anonymous interviewee, all reported that they supported St. Jude’s
Children’s Hospital because of the way they felt about Jennifer Aniston. “Trust,”
“likeability,” and “I feel like I know her,” were among the responses as to why the
interviewees supported Aniston. I pushed a bit further and asked each of these
interviewees if the fact that Aniston is endorsing a children’s hospital makes a difference
in their reaction to Aniston’s endorsement (i.e., would you support an organization
Aniston endorsed if it was not a children’s hospital? Also, would you support St. Jude’s if
Aniston wasn’t the endorser?) Cindy Tu responded, “It’s Jennifer. I just love her. I
would probably support almost any organization she supported – although I would
research it and stuff first – but I definitely support St. Jude’s because of her. I mean, I
64
live in Los Angeles with several children’s hospitals in the area. I could support them,
but I don’t. I support St. Jude’s.” The other two interviewees reported similar feelings:
they would support a children’s hospital, but choose St. Jude’s because of Aniston. It
appears as though these interviewees transferred the meanings they associated with
Aniston, such as trust and likeability, to St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital over another
children’s hospital.
Professor Brenda Rothaupt, founder of StemYes!, a nonprofit organization
dedicated to providing STEM opportunities to at-risk girls, also discussed the importance
of a connection between celebrity and organization. Rothaupt has identified actress and
mathematician Danica McKellar as a potential celebrity partner for her organization,
citing McKellar as the perfect candidate because of the connection that already exists
between the celebrity and the StemYes! mission. “Danica started as an actress, then left
the industry to attend school. While in school, she became frustrated with the lack of
resources for girls, and proceeded to write several books to combat this,” she began.
“Flash forward several years, and she is acting again, but still promoting her math books
to young girls. As a mathematician and public figure, she is already connected to my
organization, she just doesn’t know it yet,” Rothaupt concluded with a laugh. This
director believes that partnering with a celebrity who already has a connection to her
organization’s mission is the best course of action in working with celebrities. Again,
McCracken’s meaning transfer model is evident with Rothaupt and StemYes!: Rothaupt
is anticipating that potential clients and donors will attach the cultural meaning of
intelligence, beauty, and success associated with McKellar will be transferred to her
65
organization in the same manner as Jennifer Aniston’s endorsement of St. Jude’s
Children’s Hospital.
A former executive from Jenesse Center, a domestic violence shelter in South Los
Angeles, also mentioned the importance of connection between celebrity and
organization, highlighting her organization’s work with specific populations. Jenesse is
located in South Los Angeles, formerly known as South Central, and serves a population
that is approximately 85% African American, 10% Hispanic, and 5% Caucasian. The
executive opined that a Caucasian celebrity would not provide the same connection to
Jenesse that an African American celebrity would. “We have worked with celebrities
over the years, but we won’t work with just anyone. Jenesse serves everyone regardless
of race, but, because of our location, most of our clients are black. I don’t think a white
celebrity would have the same impact,” she said. The executive feared that consumers
might not connect with the “wrong” celebrity. Yet again, nonprofit organizations must
ensure there is a connection with the celebrity that is appropriate, logical, potentially
beneficial to the organization, and allows for the transfer of meaning from organization to
celebrity to consumer.
Respondents from religious organizations also discussed the importance of
connection between celebrity and organization. Given that the mission of these
organizations includes a religious component, it is of the utmost importance that the
celebrity has a connection to the organization or the religion represented. “Any celebrity
we work with must adhere to the tenets of the Catholic faith,” reported one interviewee
from a Catholic school. This sentiment was echoed by Indira Persad, a former executive
with a Los Angeles based private Christian school. “We as a school are very open to
66
working with Hollywood; in fact, our campus has been used for filming movies and tv
shows in the past. But the most important thing with any celebrity we worked with
would be religion. They must be Christian and represent our values,” Persad stated.
Again, the importance of a connection between organization and celebrity is paramount
for these religious organizations; a well-known atheist endorsing a Catholic school, for
example, would not provide a connection and most likely not allow for the transfer of
meaning from organization to celebrity to consumer.
One of the youngest consumers interviewed, 19-year-old Thu Nguyen, reported
that it was specifically her connection to the celebrity that brought them to the nonprofit
organization, as opposed to the previous examples where the connection between
celebrity and organization is highlighted. After viewing the campaign starring Jennifer
Aniston in support of St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital, Nguyen reported that it was her
strong connection to Aniston that made her pay attention to the campaign. “I love
Jennifer Aniston,” began Nguyen, “I just connect with her…I grew up with her. Not
having Jennifer Aniston would hurt the campaign. Charities need a celebrity or someone
personable like her. People give more when they feel a connection!” Nguyen went on to
explain, “I follow celebrities in my daily life, so I feel like I know them. I already have a
connection to them. When I see a St. Jude’s commercial starring Jennifer Aniston, I get
super emotional because I already have a connection and an investment in her and I want
to support what she supports.” Nguyen and other participants touched on this similar
idea of familiarity with a celebrity, and how this feeling of familiarity leads to a feeling
of connection with the celebrity. As McCracken discussed, the sense of history with the
celebrity, the sense of “knowing” them, can be a powerful motivator of consumers in
67
both the for-profit and nonprofit sectors. In these cases, the consumer’s feeling of a
connection to the celebrity led to an almost instantaneous connection to the organization
and inspired action through a monetary donation.
Disconnect:
Four of the 60 respondents (7%) discussed the negative impact that a disconnect
between celebrity and organization can cause. First, the respondents defined the
“disconnect” in one of three ways: either when a celebrity is forced to perform
community service for a crime (such as drunk driving) and they partner with a nonprofit
organization to fulfill that obligation; the celebrity is receiving a financial benefit from
the partnership; or there is an incongruence between the celebrity and the message of the
campaign or the organization. When one of these three are present, a disconnect is
created between the celebrity and the cause. Several anecdotes emerged from the
interviews that discussed this disconnect.
First, a former staff member at the United Nations Foundation (who requested
anonymity) relayed the story of a campaign featuring superstar Jennifer Lopez. Many
consumers are familiar with Lopez and her international reach, as well as her propensity
to showcase her beauty in revealing outfits and somewhat risqué performances. This
particular campaign was focused on empowering young women and girls around the
world, and partnered with Lopez as the face of the campaign. “I love Jennifer Lopez as
an actress and an entertainer,” the staff member began, “but I don’t think it was a good fit
to use her, who frequently dresses skimpily and dances provocatively onstage, to deliver
a message of empowerment to young girls. To me, it was a real disconnect in the
campaign. It felt like we were just trying to work with her any way we could without
68
regard for the message or the optics.” The United Nations Foundation did not have an
evaluation metric in place to track the effectiveness of the Lopez campaign, so it is not
possible to measure any impact, positive or negative, from this endorsement. It does,
however, underscore the necessity of finding a logical and appropriate connection
between celebrity and organization. McCracken’s meaning transfer model could be
susceptible to both positive or negative attributions, potentially to the detriment of the
nonprofit organization in the case of the latter.
Arthur Ong, a 20-year-old consumer, discussed the disconnect created when
celebrities receive a benefit from the organization for their participation, whether it be an
appearance fee or the provision of services such as hair, makeup, limousine, etc. “It
really bothers me when charities pay celebrities to help them or pay for things like luxury
hotel rooms and first-class plane tickets. It shows there is no connection to the charity.
The celebrity probably doesn’t even care…they are just there for the perks,” Ong stated.
Another consumer who spoke on the condition of anonymity also mentioned this type of
disconnect. The consumer stated, “I don’t think charities should pay celebrities for their
help. For me, I think it looks bad on the charity, as in their work is so unimportant that
no one will help without payment/benefit, and it looks bad on the celebrity, like they are
selfish and cheap.” Such arrangements between celebrity and organization created a
disconnect for these consumers, and perhaps other consumers as well, and ultimately led
to unfavorable views of the organization and celebrity.
Another anonymous consumer spoke of nonprofit organizations partnering with
celebrities who have broken a law as part of their community service. He criticized the
nonprofit organizations for partnering with the celebrity. “I don’t understand why the
69
charity would jeopardize its reputation for this celebrity. I mean, everyone knows they
are only working with them because they got in trouble. We’re not stupid,” lamented the
consumer. The respondent went on to say that he now questions the organization and its
motives and is unsure if he would offer support in the future.
An executive from Community Counseling Service (CCS) in Los Angeles also
touched on the importance of connection (and avoiding disconnects) in celebrity
partnerships. CCS serves a very specific population of immigrants from South America
with mental health issues, and the executive believes that partnering with a celebrity who
did not have a connection to this specific population would actually do more harm than
good. “If we partnered with a mainstream celebrity who, for example, didn’t speak
Spanish, I believe that could have the opposite effect and isolate our Spanish-speaking
clients. In fact, they could see the ad/campaign in English and think CCS can’t help
them.” Using a celebrity that does not have a connection to the nonprofit organization
could not only be ineffective, but could also possibly alienate those individuals the
organization is trying to serve. Looking at this example through the lens of McCracken’s
meaning transfer model, when there is a lack of a connection between celebrity and
organization (in this hypothetical case, a language barrier), there is also a lack of
meaning, and with no meaning, there can be no meaning transfer (or, by extension,
connection transfer).
Prior to partnering with any celebrity, nonprofit organizations must ensure there is
a connection between the celebrity and the organization, whether the celebrity is a past
client or it is the celebrity’s own organization. Without this connection, the consumer
70
will most likely not feel the connection to the organization and the desired outcome of
increased awareness or dollars raised will not succeed.
Commitment to Partnership:
Another point emphasized by a number of respondents was the necessity of a
commitment on the part of both the celebrity and the organization to the partnership
between the two. Nonprofit organizations frequently operate with limited resources, and
creating and maintaining a partnership with a celebrity can be time-consuming and
resource intensive. Consequently, nonprofit organizations must ensure there is a
commitment on the part of the celebrity to the partnership while also providing their own
commitment to the relationship. This commitment to partnership can be seen at the
organizational level with consistency in celebrity partners and messaging. For example,
in the Jennifer Aniston/St. Jude’s partnership, Aniston has appeared in several different
commercials, but each commercial consistently features Aniston as the celebrity endorser
as well as a consistent message of helping the children who are patients at the Hospital.
This consistency assists consumers in understanding the celebrity’s level of commitment
as well as the mission of the organization itself. Fifteen of the 60 interviewees (25%)
discussed the importance of this commitment by both parties.
Lenee Richards, an executive with Leaders Up, reported that she has worked with
several celebrities over her career in the nonprofit sector. For the celebrity/nonprofit
partnership to be successful, Richards believes that foundational work must be completed
first. She said, “The relationship must be intentional; there must be a goal to it. Both
sides [organization and celebrity] must be clear about the time commitment and agree.
Without strategy, communication, and commitment on both sides, the partnership is
71
doomed to fail.” Richards also cautioned nonprofit organizations to temper their
expectations of the celebrity’s engagement. “Celebrities, like everyone else these days,
are incredibly busy. We [nonprofit executives] cannot ask or expect too much from
them. That’s why we must determine what this partnership will be like and effectively
communicate that to all parties,” she said. In Richards’ experience, allotting a certain
amount of time for strategic planning and open conversations in the beginning of the
relationship is paramount to establishing a positive relationship. In addition, clearly
setting the parameters for the relationship allows both parties to be clear about the
expectations and commitments necessary for the partnership. Amelia Williamson, the
former Executive Director of the Magic Johnson Foundation who now operates a
consulting firm, shared Richards’ sentiment about commitment and communication.
“Communication is key,” Williamson began, “in determining the level of the
commitment both sides are willing to go to. I advise my clients to talk to any potential
celebrity partner and determine to what degree are they willing to use their influence.”
Once an agreement has been reached as to the parameters of the relationship, the
organization must honor those parameters and the commitment with the celebrity.
A veteran nonprofit executive who requested anonymity discussed commitment in
terms of continued involvement on the part of the celebrity versus a one-time interaction.
“Traditionally, the one-off has been the norm in working with celebrities. We would
work with a celebrity for one event like a golf tournament or a fundraising dinner, and
that would be it. What I’m seeing now, though, is further engagement on the part of the
organization, resulting in an actual commitment from the celebrity,” he reported. The
executive went on to say that, in his experience, the most successful campaigns involving
72
celebrities are the ones where there is a commitment to the organization on the part of the
celebrity. “This is where the magic happens!” he stated. An anonymous executive with a
children’s hospital in the greater Los Angeles area echoed this sentiment. As a high-
profile children’s hospital, the organization had worked with celebrities for many years.
The relationships with celebrities began in the traditional manner for the nonprofit sector,
with the focus on one-off special events such as galas and golf tournaments. Around
2010, however, the hospital’s outlook changed. According to the executive at the
hospital who requested anonymity, “…we started looking at celebrities in a new way.
We went from a gala-style system to a new branding campaign with celebrities in the
limelight all the time.” In order to do so, the hospital identified a few celebrities who
were already involved in the old system and asked them to join to the new program, with
the goal of “strategic engagement with celebrities at all levels.” The resulting program
was one in which celebrities worked with the hospital numerous times over the course of
the year instead of the original one or two gala-type events. Celebrities would come to
the hospital and meet patients, attend music therapy sessions, and read books to the
children; their commitment was now on a different, much deeper level.
This new engagement also had an unanticipated side effect: it actually increased
the ability for the hospital to have the gala. As the executive stated, “Whereas in the past
the gala was the driving force for the celebrity relationships, now the gala is a receptacle
for the other work done by and with the celebrities!” By focusing on these smaller and
more engaging celebrity interactions, the fundraising event actually grew and raised more
money than previous years. The hospital has continued this level of commitment with
numerous celebrities, to great success. “Through the years, we have found that the best
73
relationships we have with celebrities are also the deepest and most profound
relationships. Some celebrities are just plain committed to this hospital, so we do
everything we can to foster that commitment and create a virtuous cycle between
celebrity and their work with us,” the executive reported. In contrast with the traditional
one-off engagement, the children’s hospital has been focused on strengthening and
deepening the commitment of the celebrity by continuous thoughtful engagement and
partnership.
Another executive mentioned her frustration with the one-off style of participation
and advocated for a deeper commitment on both sides. The former executive at UCLA
UniCamp, UCLA’s official charity, agreed to be interviewed but spoke under the
condition of anonymity. The executive told me about the organization’s biggest
fundraiser of the year, a golf tournament at an exclusive Southern California club hosted
by a former UCLA basketball star. UniCamp had been working with this particular
athlete for many years; he was a beloved star who had also been a part of UniCamp as a
student. The athlete was a big draw for the event, and attendance climbed steadily each
year. Although very labor-intensive for the staff, the executive shared that the event was
considered a financial success. Overall, the executive reported that the relationship with
the athlete was positive, but there was a hesitation in his responses. When I pressed for
more information, the executive revealed that he was frustrated with the “one-off” nature
of the relationship with the athlete. “Every year, we try to engage [the athlete] further
with the kids and our camp. We invite him to the camp, we invite him to see the student
counselors, we ask him to help with our annual appeal, but he always says no. His
response is that he already does the golf tournament.” I left with the feeling that the
74
executive was grateful for the athlete’s help, but as he had seen the power of the athlete’s
involvement, he couldn’t help but wanting more. An engagement and commitment with
this athlete at the same level as the children’s hospital could be highly beneficial to
UniCamp’s efforts.
Indira Persad, a development professional with Mayfield Catholic School in Los
Angeles, asserted her belief in the importance of commitment to the relationship when
working with celebrities in the nonprofit sector.
I think they [celebrities] can raise more awareness about issues. Whether
that translates into dollars is unclear but the cause or issue definitely gets
more attention. This can be especially beneficial for smaller
organizations like mine, but the relationship must be used and managed
wisely and not relied on too heavily.
She believes that the celebrity involvement can be very helpful to her organization
as long as that the relationship is beneficial, not just a public relations move. “In working
with celebrities, it would have to be good match for our values and mission. In addition,
I would want to ensure that the relationships maximized the benefit for Mayfield…the
celebrity involvement cannot become a three-ring circus.” Persad expressed her concern
that the celebrities could unwittingly pull attention away from the campaign, thereby
minimizing the impact of the relationship. The late scholar Mark Alleyne also wrote
about celebrities taking focus away from the organization or the cause, criticizing former
Director Kofi Annan’s strategy of partnering with celebrities to promote the United
Nations internationally. Alleyne urged “caution” when working with celebrities and not
allowing the “spotlight” to remain on the celebrity. Nonprofit organizations must
75
manage the commitment and relationships with celebrities and ensure they remain
focused on the goal of helping the organization, but if this can be accomplished, the
relationship can be beneficial.
Offering the consumers’ side of the commitment theme was Cindy Tu. Tu agreed
with the importance of commitment, and discussed how a celebrity’s commitment to a
cause personally impacted her. “It is easy to see the commitment Jennifer Aniston has to
St. Jude’s Hospital. She has worked with them for years and has done so many
commercials and campaigns and stuff. Seeing her commitment has inspired me to be
more committed to the charities I support,” Tu said. In this example, it was not only the
commitment, but also the level of that commitment, that struck a chord with this
consumer and led her to join St. Jude’s as a donor.
Perhaps, however, the best example of the importance of commitment and how
the depth of commitment can impact consumers, as shown with Cindy Tu, is A Dog’s
Life Rescue. When they founded A Dog’s Life in Los Angeles in 2005, Alli Lange and
Julia Pennington decided to target celebrities as part of their fundraising and awareness
strategy. They believed that the proximity to Hollywood would afford more
opportunities to work with celebrities than might be possible in other locales, and that
celebrities had the type of influence necessary to assist in fundraising for their fledgling
organization. Since its inception, A Dog’s Life Rescue has worked with several different
celebrities on a number of campaigns and events, ranging from social media campaigns
to pet adoption events to a spread in People Magazine.
Co-founder Alli Lange shared her experiences in working with celebrities. One
of the first celebrity partnerships forged by the organization was with actor Jared
76
Padalecki, star of Supernatural and several films. Lange worked with Padalecki and his
team to promote A Dog’s Life Rescue through a fundraising dinner and auction, links to
the organization on Padalecki’s personal website, tweets promoting the organization, and
a mention in Padalecki’s People magazine spread. Padalecki was instrumental in
bringing “a face and the limelight” to A Dog’s Life Rescue, which in turn, Lange
reported, “increased awareness of our organizations as well as increased donations.”
Lange also shared the story of Ian Somerhalder and his commitment to the
animals and the organization. As previously mentioned in the introduction to this
dissertation, A Dog’s Life had worked with Somerhalder for many years. When an
abandoned puppy was brought to the shelter in need of medical care totaling $5,000,
Lange contacted Somerhalder for his help; he immediately sent out a tweet appealing to
his followers to help the Chihuahua by donating to the organization. In less than 24
hours, A Dog’s Life had received the $5,000 for medical care from Somerhalder’s one
tweet. While emphasizing the incredible help she has received from both of these
celebrities, Lange did discuss the difference in the levels of commitment from the two
and the subsequent impact. While Padalecki was “so helpful” in raising awareness of the
organization and being a “face” for the organization, Lange reported that Somerhalder’s
commitment was deeper and more impactful in terms of dollars raised. “I have a sense
that Jared helped us, and we’ve had people come to us because of Jared, but I don’t have
any real idea of how much money he helped us raise, for example,” Lange stated. For
Somerhalder, however, Lange reported that “we could see the money coming in from Ian.
He sends out one tweet, we get what we need. Even just calling Ian about the
Chihuahua…I would not have thought to call Jared about that.” It is the perception of
77
Lange that the commitment and level of that commitment is greater from Somerhalder,
and has been more helpful and impactful for A Dog’s Life Rescue.
Overall, Lange perceives that the many celebrity relationships she and her partner
have created have been a large part of the continued success of her organization. When
asked if she believed that these celebrity relationships had helped the organization, Lange
responded with a very enthusiastic, “Yes! Yes! They have helped with exposure (in terms
of our website, Twitter, and Instagram), fundraising, pet adoptions, everything!”
Although the organization does not employ a formal evaluation measurement, Lange
reported that there was “definitely” an increase in donations and awareness from each
event and/or campaign featuring one of their celebrity partners. In addition, most of the
partnerships formed with these celebrities have lasted for years. Lange said the
celebrities are “still helping, still in contact, and their followers are still there as well!”
Given the successful relationships created by A Dog’s Life Rescue, and after
seeing the power and influence that celebrities possess, Lange believes more celebrities
should be involved in the nonprofit sector. Celebrities can and should “encourage
empathy and caring” by speaking out on behalf of causes and organizations they believe
in. In addition, Lange suggested other nonprofit organizations should be “encouraging
celebrities to speak out” about what they believe in and what organizations they support.
More celebrity partnerships in the nonprofit sector could be beneficial to the
organizations and the people they serve, as long as the commitment to the relationship
exists on both the side of the organization as well as the celebrity. In addition, the results
of the interviews indicate that commitment to the cause at hand from both organization
78
and celebrity can lead to stronger and more impactful partnerships, as in the case of the
children’s hospital and A Dog’s Life Rescue.
Risk:
Risk was a theme that came up repeatedly throughout the interviews, with 17% of
respondents (10 out of 60) discussing it in their interview. Risk was mentioned on both
sides: both on the part of the nonprofit organization and on the part of the celebrity.
Organizational Risk
“When we work with a celebrity, we are taking a huge risk. What if they pull a
Kobe Bryant? A Tiger Woods? Something like that would haunt us for years,” stated an
executive with a large nonprofit in Los Angeles. Celebrities are human; sometimes they
make mistakes. Other times they make colossal mistakes, or flat-out commit crimes, that
are broadcast on every website, social media account, and news channel across the globe.
Such incidents can be highly damaging to the nonprofit organization. Rationally, one
would think we as individuals would be able to separate the organization from the
celebrity, but, from the interview responses, this does not appear to be the case. Caroline
Kim, a development executive with Big Brothers Big Sister Los Angeles, discussed the
aftermath of the Kobe Bryant alleged rape case. “That was talked about for years. It was
our warning story to each other in the industry: be careful, don’t get a Kobe.” Even
though the organization did not do anything wrong, when it is a prominent partnership
and the celebrity commits an atrocity, people subconsciously associate celebrity and
organization. “If you have a negative experience with a celebrity that is highly
publicized, people will link the two together for years. It will most likely scare other
celebrities off, too, leaving your organization in the lurch.” An executive with a domestic
79
violence shelter in Los Angeles echoed these sentiments in her interview. “We want to
bring in positive male role models, male celebrities, in to the organization, and we have
in the past. But we are extremely cautious with this, because the risk of a domestic
violence incident by the celebrity is just so high. It would hurt us so much. So, we only
partner with male celebrities that we have a personal tie to, such as a friend of a Board
member, for example.” They have had successful partnerships with male celebrities in
the past, but they are less common because of the risk the organization believes they take
in partnering with them.
Religious organizations also assume risk in working with celebrities, perhaps
even more so as there is the moral component as well. The development director at a
nonprofit Christian school just outside of Los Angeles discussed the risk her organization
takes when working with celebrities. “We are a medium-sized Christian school, so we
are not attracting big name, national celebrities. We work with prominent alumni and
celebrities in the Christian world, such as Christian rock stars. But even with the
Christian rock stars, we are super careful. Any misstep by them would reflect negatively
on us.” As with the other organizations that discussed risk, the school carefully vets all
potential celebrity partners in order to mitigate risk. Indira Persad of Mayfield Catholic
School also discussed the increased vetting by religious organizations. “We are a
Catholic school and part of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles, so we are extremely careful
in who we work with. With the religious mandate of the school, we would have to be
very careful with any celebrity we partnered with.” Persad went on to mention
colleagues in the sector who work with celebrities. “Some friends of mine also work
with celebs, but they don’t care about their drinking or partying on the weekends the way
80
Mayfield does.” Indeed, the religious aspect of the organization adds another layer of
risk to the relationship.
A consumer who spoke under the condition of anonymity discussed risk in terms
of different types of celebrities. Athletes, for example, are generally “short-term
celebrities,” according to this consumer, while singers and actors have more longevity in
the public eye. “An athlete like Johnny Manziel is a short-term celebrity. He rose, he
hovered at the top for a minute, he fell. Heaven help the charity that worked with him!”
David Languilli, a nonprofit consultant who runs his own firm, echoed the notion of
“short-term celebrity.” Languilli stated, “As a nonprofit professional, I would be
cautious about which celebrity I work with. As we saw with Tiger Woods, celebrity
status and reputation can turn quickly.” On the other hand, however, a singer like Bono,
“is multi-dimensional, has put boots on the ground, and has staying power,” commented
the consumer. There is risk assumed by the organization no matter who the celebrity is,
but some of this risk can be lessened by partnering with celebrities who have been active
in civil society and/or the nonprofit sector for an extended period of time and maintains a
positive reputation.
Celebrity Risk
The risk undertaken by the celebrity was discussed fewer times than
organizational risk, but it warrants discussion nonetheless. As with any industry, there
have been a number of less than stellar organizations within the nonprofit sector. Stories
of mismanaged funds or misappropriated revenues have been well documented in the
media, and these stories have been incredibly damaging to the reputations of the
organizations. When a celebrity partners with a nonprofit organization for a particular
81
campaign, they are accepting a certain amount of risk through the relationship. As they
are on the periphery, it is unlikely that they would be privy to any problems or misdeeds
occurring within the organization, but as the partner or oftentimes face of the
organization, the celebrity would inevitably be connected with the problems of the
organization and their reputation could suffer as a result.
Jane Brumby, a 52-year-old insurance salesperson, spoke about celebrity risk in
her interview. “Charities are not always squeaky clean. When you have a celebrity as
beloved as say, Jennifer Aniston, she has to be careful to align herself with good
organizations. If she works with a charity and then that charity does something bad, it
reflects poorly on her. She should have chosen better.” It is important that the celebrity
perform their own due diligence prior to partnering with a nonprofit organization in order
to help minimize some of the risk in the undertaking.
Authenticity:
Authenticity is a key component to a successful partnership between organization
and celebrity. Almost 30% of respondents (17 out of 60) reported that the celebrity must
display authenticity in their partnerships with nonprofit organizations. Authenticity was
defined by respondents as “being real,” “realness,” and “genuine.” This theme
underscores the personal nature of the celebrity in the nonprofit sector; respondents
reported viewing the celebrity in a human realm of “realness” as opposed to their
fictional personas and how the more “real” the celebrity is perceived to be, the better the
campaign will be received.
Madeleine Lindvall, a 54-year-old consumer, discussed authenticity in terms of
the celebrity being “genuine.” She stated, “The celebrity and the endorsement or
82
campaign – whatever the celebrity is asking for - must be genuine.” Lindvall went on to
say that she trusts her “intuition and can tell when a person is being genuine or not,” and
that she would not support an organization where the celebrity was not authentic. Several
respondents echoed Lindvall’s sentiments: the audience can tell when the appeal or the
partnership is not authentic. As consumer Cindy Tu said, “They may be actors, but we
can tell if they are not sincere.” Another consumer shared this sentiment when she stated
that “celebrities must be genuine in their work with charities. They must believe in the
cause. We will know if they don’t believe.” In each of the responses, the lack of
authenticity from the celebrity reflected poorly on the organization.
Marisela Schaffer, an administrator in the nonprofit sector, talked about the link
between connection and authenticity for her. “I like Jennifer Aniston a lot, but I know
she doesn’t have children, so when I see the St. Jude’s commercials, it doesn’t feel
authentic. I would much rather see someone like Leah Strong’s dad work with St. Jude’s
Children’s Hospital,” Schaffer said. (Leah Strong was diagnosed with childhood
leukemia several years ago; her father played in the National Football League and was
vocal in his efforts to fight childhood cancer.) For Schaffer, the lack of a connection to
the organization translated into a lack of authenticity for the commercial. Conversely,
however, she believed that Strong’s inherent connection to the hospital would also create
authenticity in his appeal.
Consumer Jane Brumby reported that the celebrity’s motives are the determining
factor in whether the celebrity’s partnership is authentic or not. “When a celebrity is
volunteering their time or money, I definitely think they are being authentic in their work.
They don’t have to be there, they don’t need to be there, so it appears they are doing it for
83
the right reasons: to help. That appeals to me.” Conversely, if a celebrity is forced to
work with a nonprofit organization due to a crime, their authenticity would be in doubt.
Instances where celebrities are forced to work with a nonprofit organization for
community service were also cited as an example where the celebrity is perceived as not
being genuine or authentic. In the same way that celebrities must be authentic in the
products they endorse, so, too, is authenticity and an authentic partnership in the
nonprofit sector of the utmost importance.
Celebrities Have Influence, But Not Over Me:
Nine respondents from across the three categories (15%) made similar statements
in response to the interview question, “Do you believe celebrities have influence in the
nonprofit sector?” A few of the respondents became quite indignant at the question, as if
the insinuation that they would be influenced by a celebrity was an insult. It is, however,
important to note the recall of these respondents: every consumer and stakeholder that
reported this theme was familiar with the St. Jude’s commercials and 7 respondents
reported they had donated to organizations in the past after seeing a celebrity
endorsement or campaign. Although they reported not perceiving celebrity influence
over themselves, their recall and actions suggested otherwise. This contradiction of
feeling and action can be attributed to a lack of self-awareness on the part of the
respondent; the respondents appeared to genuinely believe the celebrity did not influence
them despite their self-reporting of action taken as a direct result of the celebrity
intervention.
Consumer Cassidy Thomas, a 22-year-old hair stylist, was happy to talk about
celebrities in the nonprofit sector. “I have noticed that more and more celebrities are
84
getting involved with charities, and I think that’s great. I think it’s something celebrities
should do.” She went on to mention Bono and his Red campaign; Thomas said she liked
those products and had purchased several of them. When asked if she believed that
celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector, however, Thomas responded, “Oh yes!
For sure. But not over me. I like to think that I am not easily swayed by things like
celebrities. I might look into a charity because of a celebrity, but that’s it.” Thomas
supports celebrity involvement, has purchased celebrity-endorsed products benefiting the
nonprofit sector, and believes in the influence of celebrities over people, but not over her.
Thomas expressed her belief in the influence of celebrities, and while a celebrity
endorsement might not compel her to give, the simple act of “paying attention” to the
endorsement and further investigating the organization may be enough to inspire Thomas
to give in the future.
Prof. Brenda Rothaupt, Founder and CEO of StemYes!, has made celebrity
partnerships a key component of her fledgling organization’s strategic plan. Since its
inception, Rothaupt has tried to partner with a celebrity to raise awareness of the
organization and raise money to support and expand. As a nonprofit focused on
providing STEM opportunities to girls K-8, Rothaupt was hoping to partner with actress,
author, and mathematician Danica McKellar. Despite her efforts to create this
partnership and her insistence that celebrity is “necessary in Los Angeles,” she reported
that celebrities do not have any influence over her personally. “I believe celebrities have
influence…of course they do! But for me, no. I support who I support because I want to,
not because of a celebrity.” Again, as with Cassidy Thomas, there is an incongruence
between the perception of influence over themselves versus over others.
85
Rothaupt’s sentiments were also echoed by Jason Cathcart, a 42-year-old small
business owner. “I’ve traveled all over the world as a serviceman and a businessman,
and I’m a skeptic. I don’t pay much attention to what celebrities are doing or saying. It
makes no difference to me.” Despite this sentiment, Cathcart stated that he perceives
celebrities do have influence over others. In fact, similar to Rothaupt, Cathcart said he
would “love” to work with a celebrity to promote his own business. “Look, I may not
believe in what celebrities have to say, but that doesn’t mean that other people don’t
believe. I know they do! I mean, I’d love to work with The Rock to promote my
personal training business!”
A few respondents indicated that a celebrity would probably make them take
notice of the organization and investigate further, but not necessarily to give. Jason
Kleynen, a former volunteer with Boys and Girls Club, stated, “Depending on the
celebrity and the charity, I would probably take notice of the ad or commercial and look
into it later. I wouldn’t give because Jennifer Aniston told me to give, but I would
probably go to the website and then decide from there.” The celebrity might be the
catalyst for investigation, but not for giving. An anonymous respondent shared this
sentiment with Kleynen. “I’ve seen lots of ads and stuff with celebrities, but I’ve never
given because of it. I have looked at a charity’s website just because of the ad and then
given money, but I gave because I liked the charity, not because the celebrity said to,”
she said. Although the celebrity did not directly influence them to give to the
organization, they did influence them enough to visit the organization’s website. From
there, it is the responsibility of the organization to effectively share their message and
pull in the potential supporter the celebrity has directed to them.
86
The varied perceived influence of celebrities can be seen in this theme. While
nearly all respondents reported their perception that celebrities have influence in general,
these 15% of respondents diverged from the rest with the caveat of “no influence over
me.” It is interesting to see this reported statement of no influence despite repeated
actions to the contrary in terms of purchasing charitable products and investigating
organizations that would not have been investigated had the celebrity endorsement not
occurred. These participants displayed a bias in their responses against the notion of
celebrity influence, but in each case, their actions contradicted their statements. Separate
from this bias and contradictory statements/actions, the perception that celebrities do
have influence was reported by each participant within this theme.
Type of Celebrity:
While this study defines celebrity broadly to include actors, singers, reality stars,
and more, several respondents discussed celebrities that were unique to their
organizations. These respondents reported that the definition of celebrity can be
broadened to include “local” celebrities specific to a particular area, community, and/or
organization.
A former executive with UCLA UniCamp spoke about a type of celebrity unique
to UniCamp: the former camper. UniCamp serves underprivileged youth in the Los
Angeles by providing a week-long camp vacation in the local Santa Monica Mountains.
Several of UniCamp’s former campers were so inspired by their experiences at camp that
they attended UCLA for college and went on to establish successful careers. Over the
years, UniCamp kept in touch with many of these former campers and partnered with
them for a number of fundraising campaigns. The most successful of these campaigns
87
were direct mail appeals that featured the story of one of these former campers. As the
executive stated, “I would contact the former camper and let them know what we were
trying to do. Once they agreed to help, I worked closely with them to craft the letter that
would go to our donors, focusing on their story and how UniCamp had changed their
lives.” The executive felt that it was the personal nature of these appeals combined with
the fact that they were coming from a former camper that propelled these campaigns to
financial success. Although these former campers were not mainstream celebrities, they
were celebrities to UniCamp, and their partnership helped the organization. This
example also recalls the Theme of Connection, discussed earlier in this chapter. This
type of celebrity to UniCamp, the former camper, also has a deep connection to the
organization as a former participant. Both the unique celebrity and the deep connection
to the organization could be assisting these campaigns in the financial success reported
by the executive.
Odyssey of the Mind is an international nonprofit organization serving ages 5 –
18 through problem-solving, team-based competitions. I interviewed two long-time,
anonymous volunteers with the organization about the potential for celebrity involvement
with the organization. “I love Odyssey, but every year I go to the competitions and see
the same population: white kids and Asian kids. I think we should work with a celebrity
to promote this program to inner-city kids and raise money so they can participate,”
stated the first volunteer. She went on to suggest a celebrity that would appeal to this
underrepresented population at Odyssey, such as singer Will.I.A.M. from the Black-Eyed
Peas. The second volunteer did not believe that a singer or actor would help Odyssey,
and that instead it should be someone in math or science, such as Bill Nye, the Science
88
Guy, that would be more closely aligned with the mission of the organization. Although
they disagreed on the type of celebrity that should be targeted, they wholeheartedly
agreed that a celebrity partnership would be helpful and that Odyssey should pursue such
a relationship.
Social Media Celebrity
Two of the respondents in this category discussed an emerging celebrity category,
the social media star. These two respondents were similar to each other in age and shared
a favorite hobby, playing video games. There is one particular social media star on
YouTube that is a well-known celebrity in the world of video games, the Angry Video
Game Nerd. The Nerd posts videos his YouTube channel once or twice a week, and has
amassed a following of approximately 250K viewers. This example of the social media
celebrity calls to mind Sternheimer’s chapter on “Opportunity in the Internet Age” in
Celebrity Culture and The American Dream: Stardom and Social Mobility. Sternheimer
could have been describing the Angry Video Game Nerd when she wrote, “YouTube has
its own celebrities, as people who do little more than talk to a webcam about their lives,
their favorite products, or dish about celebrities, can generate income from ads when their
list of subscribers grows to a critical mass” (2014, pg, 245). YouTube stars can and are
monetizing “just being yourself,” (ibid.), and, in the case of the Nerd, utilizing this
economic engine for the good of the nonprofit organizations he supports.
According to the interview respondents, the Nerd began posting a new type video
a few years, a fundraising video to support a children’s hospital. One respondent said,
“It’s so cool! These videos are just like his other ones – he is playing a video game and
talking to the audience at the same time – but every now and then he says something like
89
‘ok, everyone, we’re here today to raise money for the hospital…send in those dollars!’
and people do!” The second respondent agreed with this sentiment, stating, “I have given
money too, because I feel like the Nerd is doing this for the right reasons. He is not
getting anything out of this, and he has plenty of money, so I feel like he is doing this to
do something good. It makes me want to do something good, too.” The celebrity reach
is far and wide in the 21
st
century, and there is no shortage of avenues for involvement, as
evidenced by celebrities like the Angry Video Game Nerd.
Local Celebrities
Jason Kleynen, a former volunteer with Boys and Girls Club of North Florida,
also discussed different types of celebrities, but for a different reason than the other
respondents: geography. “We are located in North Florida, thousands of miles from
Hollywood and New York. Not a lot of celebrities around here!” Despite the lack of
access, Kleynen reported that he would be open to working with celebrities from the local
area through the organization. He said, “We are close to the university and its football
players are huge celebrities around here. I am sure that working with them would help
our organization.” The organization had not worked with a celebrity in the past,
primarily due to geographic and size constraints, but Kleynen, echoing authors Kim and
Walker as well as Bush, et al., identified another potential source of help: the celebrity
athlete.
Marco Ramirez seconded Kleynen’s viewpoint on the local celebrity. Ramirez,
an executive within the nonprofit sector with over 20 years of experience, discussed the
notion of celebrity and how it is defined. “There are lots of people who are celebrities.
For a Catholic School, a priest is a celebrity. A kid at a school or a children’s hospital
90
could have more influence than the actor or singer who is hosting. It is the organization
that matters, not the celebrity,” he stated. Ramirez’s focus is on the programs and
services provided by the organization for their clients, with little regard for the potential
celebrity relationship.
In the case of a small, isolated nonprofit or a religious organization, a national
celebrity might not be a good fit for reasons such as size, mission, or geography, but a
different type of celebrity, such as a local or niche celebrity who is connected to the
organization, could be beneficial in terms of raising awareness and funds.
The Dark Side of Celebrity Involvement:
While many of the interview respondents reported positive celebrity involvement
with their organizations, a number of negative interactions were also reported. Mario
Marin, former Vice President of Development at the United Way of Greater Los Angeles,
recounted an incident where a celebrity abandoned a project the night before the
scheduled event. United Way LA had been working with this particular celebrity, a
prominent athlete, for several years on a campaign to end homelessness. Most of the
relationship between the organization and the celebrity centered around an annual
fundraising walk named for the athlete. The 10K walk routed through downtown Los
Angeles, and traditionally attracted in excess of 10,000 participants. The event was labor
intensive for the United Way LA development staff, but each year had netted over
$1million for the organization and was considered successful.
This particular year, as the staff was coordinating the final details of the walk the
night before the event, Marin received a call from the athlete’s representative stating that
he would not be attending. Marin was flabbergasted. “He dropped out of the Walk the
91
night before. The night before! It was his Walk…it had his name on it!” Marin and his
staff were left with an enormous task: tell the 10,000+ participants that the host and
namesake, and arguably, the draw for the event, would not be attending. It was, as Marin
stated, “a nightmare.” The event proceeded as scheduled, and money was raised, but
there was a definite pall over the event, despite the best efforts of the United Way LA
staff. In addition, it is virtually impossible to ascertain the lasting impact of this event.
The fundraising numbers were similar to the previous year, but much of the funds were
raised prior to the day of the Walk, and most people did not discover the athlete had
dropped out until they arrived at the Walk. What will be the impact on the following
year’s Walk? Will consumers follow the athlete and abandon the organization? The
ripple effects of such an action are easy to speculate but hard to prove.
Unfortunately, Marin has not had many positive experiences with celebrities in
his short time in the nonprofit sector. He shared another example of a negative celebrity
experience at United Way LA. An athlete who had recently enjoyed a sudden rise to
fame approached the organization with an idea for a program to help disadvantaged
youth. Marin met with the athlete and his agents at United Way, anticipating the
development of a new relationship with the athlete and perhaps a new program to help
local youth. Marin was disappointed when he heard the athlete’s list of requirements.
Everything was on his terms. It had to be his program, his ideas, on his terms. Marin
tried to negotiate with the athlete about the program, and also introduced other United
Way programs that might be of interest, but the athlete would not deviate from his plan.
In the end, they were not able to form a relationship, and the program was never started.
92
Overall, Marin’s opinion of celebrities in the nonprofit sector is not positive. He
stated, “Celebrities are very self-serving! They want to see their name and brand, and
position themselves for their gain.” In his experience in the sector, Marin has seen “very
little, if any at all, impact from celebrities.” He attributes this lack of impact to, again,
what he perceives as the self-serving nature of celebrities:
In the nonprofit sector, we must mobilize and engage people. Celebrities
are not engaging because it is all about them! They are totally self-
serving. There might be an exception if an alignment already exists
between the celebrity and the cause or organization, but I personally
would not be swayed by the celebrity.
Caroline Kim, Director of Strategic Partnerships and Grants at Big Brothers Big
Sisters of Los Angeles (BBBSLA), has worked with several celebrities during her time in
the nonprofit sector. While her experiences with celebrities have been mixed, she did
share one anecdote with a less than favorable outcome. The annual BBBSLA gala is
always attended by a number of celebrities, and this particular year was no exception.
One aspect of the gala’s festivities was the introduction of several boys and girls who
were hoping to be accepted into the BBBSLA program and be matched with a “Big
Brother” or “Big Sister” in a mentoring relationship, as is the mission of the organization.
This year, one of the female celebrities was so moved during the introduction of one of
the girls that she jumped up and volunteered to serve as the girl’s Big Sister. Applause
broke out in the ballroom as the celebrity walked onto the stage and gave the girl a big
hug. The girl was ecstatic; she knew who the celebrity was and was obviously a fan. She
couldn’t believe this celebrity was going to be her “Big Sister.”
93
In the weeks that followed, the celebrity started the application process to serve as
a Big Sister, but, according to Kim, she “didn’t follow through.” Despite the staff’s best
efforts to help the celebrity through the application process, a month later, the celebrity
was no longer involved. She had told this young girl, in front of a ballroom full of
people, that she would be her Big Sister, and then she was nowhere to be found. The
young girl was left heartbroken over the experience, and the organization was left
scrambling for another potential Big Sister to take the celebrity’s place.
Kim shared her frustration over incidents like these. “Examples like this create
cognitive dissonance in the nonprofit world!” She lamented that more often than not,
celebrities are involved in a “one-off” event like a gala or campaign, as opposed to a
long-term commitment to the organization or cause. While a gala with “the right person”
can make seven figures in a night, such a relationship is labor and resource intensive. As
Kim stated, “The relationship must be cultivated for a long time, perhaps years, before
that relationship leading to endorsement will happen.” Again, the importance of the
Theme of Commitment to the relationship is seen through Kim’s experiences in the
sector.
Kim was sure to point out the positive aspects to celebrity involvement in the
nonprofit sector, but with an important caveat. “Many celebrities want to work on issues
close to their own background, experiences, and/or passion. Celebrity in and of itself is
not beneficial; celebrity with passion for the cause is where the real help will come
from.” Kim has found that the most beneficial and effective relationships with celebrities
are forged through the common passion and connection shared by the celebrity and the
members of the organization. “We want a champion for our cause!” Creating a
94
relationship with a celebrity simply because they are a celebrity will not create an
effective partnership; there must be congruency and connection between celebrity,
organization, and mission. Kim summed up her sentiments by stating, “Pursuing a
celebrity to get involved with your organization is probably not worth it, but if a celebrity
comes to you with a passion and a desire to help, then it is worth the time and effort to
maintain the relationship.” Again, the importance of a connection and commitment can
be seen in the Kim’s experiences.
Nonprofit organizations must exercise extreme caution in pursuing partnerships
with celebrities in order to minimize risk of a scandal and/or disengagement. These risks
can be mitigated by pursuing celebrities who have a connection to the organization and
commitment to the partnership.
Consumers Listen to What Celebrities Say:
Five respondents reported their belief in celebrity influence by stating that “we
listen to what celebrities say.” An executive with the California Endowment, who asked
to remain anonymous, shared an anecdote that illustrates this theme. The California
Endowment is a multi-billion dollar foundation focusing on healthcare issues (access,
insurance, policy issues, etc.). The executive shared some of the experiences he has had
with celebrities at his organization. “In my experience, there are golds, silvers, and
bronzes, and the Endowment has worked with them all. The golds are of course my
favorite; they can just make that one phone call. It is nuts!” While some of these
celebrities have been a bit self-serving, recalling Mario Marin’s concerns, most of the
experiences have been positive and helpful to the organization. “There are high-
maintenance celebrities, to be sure – those that are more concerned with how they look
95
than what they are doing. But most of them are using their power for good.” The
executive went on to share a story of a particular Hollywood director who had partnered
with the California Endowment on a new healthcare policy advocacy program. This
director was very involved with the program; he worked closely with Endowment staff
and even travelled to Sacramento to meet with lobbyists. The director made quite a
splash with the lobbyists; it seemed as though everyone knew who he was and wanted to
talk to him. Although the executive and the director were sharing the same message
about the program, the director was “heard” over the executive. As the executive stated,
“He moves things because of who he is.” Nonprofit organizations cannot compete with
that kind of fame and notoriety; it is simply not possible. What organizations can do,
however, is create partnerships with the people who are “heard”: celebrities.
Similarly, Lenee Richards was adamant about the “louder voice” that celebrities
have within the nonprofit sector. Richards stated, “Celebrities have so much influence!
Without a doubt! We listen to what famous people have to say.” This is a key statement
that has come up repeatedly: we listen to what famous people say. While some
respondents have debated the impact of the celebrities’ involvement, one thing is clear:
we, as a society, listen to what they, celebrities, say. The onus, then, is on stakeholders in
the nonprofit sector to use this voice strategically for the good of those being served.
This theme leads into the next, whereby nonprofit stakeholders are capturing the
idea of “we listen to what celebrities say” and capitalizing on the perceived celebrity
influence by employing celebrities in their organizations’ fundraising strategy.
96
Celebrity Endorsement as Fundraising Strategy:
As previously discussed, one of the biggest challenges facing nonprofit
organizations is funding. Each of the 22 nonprofit organizations interviewed from
Category One utilized celebrity partnerships as a fundraising strategy, with a further 16 of
17 nonprofit organizations in Category Two reporting they would be open to working
with a celebrity in the future.
Jovan Bowles, a development professional who has worked in the nonprofit sector
since graduation from college, spoke of the many “layered” ways his organization works
with celebrities. As Director of Development for Big Brothers Big Sisters of Los
Angeles (BBBSLA), Bowles has made celebrity partnerships a key component of his
fundraising strategy since joining the organization. Over the years, BBBSLA has hosted
fundraising dinners featuring celebrities such as Eva Longoria and Halle Berry, recruited
celebrities such as Nick Lachey to serve as a Big Brother to a local youth, and launched
social media campaigns on platforms such as Twitter and Instagram. In addition,
BBBSLA has worked in conjunction with the national BBBS office on Public Service
Announcements and fundraising starring celebrities such as Jaime Foxx and Eve.
Bowles stated that celebrities have “absolutely” helped BBBSLA and the best
assistance he has experienced has been increased “awareness to the cause.” Although
they do not employ a specific evaluation measure, there have been “increased
applications to be a Big [Brother or Sister],” but also many immeasurable outcomes to
the celebrity partnership. Bowles shared a story of his relationship with YouTube star
Andrea Russett. Russett partnered with the organization to host a group of Bigs and
Littles at Disneyland for an event called “Andrea’s Magical Day.” After the fun-filled
97
event, Russett posted one picture on her Instagram account of the group smiling in front
of Cinderella’s castle, and included a link to BBBSLA’s Instagram account. In the weeks
that followed, the organization’s Instagram account exploded with new followers,
topping off at a 400% increase in followers since the picture was posted. Bowles proudly
reported that BBBSLA has maintained that following in the years that have passed.
Bowles also compared the national campaigns, such as those starring Jaime Foxx,
to those campaigns and strategies employed locally in Los Angeles. In his experience, it
is the local strategies that work far better than the national campaigns. “There was a
disconnect between the Jaime Foxx campaign and the audience. The message was lost.”
He contrasted this experience with that of the Russett Instagram experience and the
celebrities that have served as Big Brothers or Sisters. “With Russett and Nick Lachey,
for example, the audience could see the celebrities with the kids we were trying to help.
These were local LA kids, with local celebrities, and people responded. With the
national campaign, not so much.” The campaigns and strategies employed by Bowles
and the BBBSLA organization were more effective, an outcome Bowles attributed to the
visibility of the organization and the relationships created within the LA community.
Bowles believed that “95% of the time, my experience with celebrities has been
extremely positive. Many of these celebrities are so connected to our cause, and their
help benefits BBBSLA in a number of different ways.” The celebrity partnerships
proved beneficial to the organization not just in terms of fundraising, but also with
increased awareness and increased applications for mentors. In addition, as in many of
the previous responses, the importance of a connection between celebrity and
organization is illustrated in Bowles’ experiences.
98
Another example of the utilization of celebrity in fundraising was reported by the
executive from a local children’s hospital. Although they work with many different
celebrities, the executive highlighted a recent, high-profile story involving a celebrity and
his newborn son. Shortly after he was born, the baby was diagnosed with a rare condition
that would require several surgeries at the children’s hospital. The first surgery was
quietly performed with no fanfare or publicity. A few days after the surgery, the
celebrity appeared on television, shared his son’s story, and very passionately thanked the
hospital that had saved his son’s life. At the end of the appearance, the celebrity
concluded by asking that everyone support this children’s hospital, or one near them,
with financial donations. After this appearance, donations increased immediately, so
much so that the executive stated that he began to “actively use the story in all
solicitations.” The television appearance was so powerful that “it became a self-directing
movement. All appeals and correspondences came back to this celebrity and his son’s
story.” This was a potentially tragic situation that the celebrity and the children’s
hospital turned around for good. In this example, the celebrity is utilizing strategic
empathy: he is using his strong personal connection to the organization to connect to
potential donors. In turn, the hospital has utilized the relationship with this celebrity, and
his experiences with their hospital, as a key component of this fundraising strategy, to
great financial success for the hospital.
One of the consumers interviewed, who spoke anonymously, discussed the
importance of nonprofit organizations strategically working with celebrities. “Charities
should work with celebrities…they can definitely inspire others to do something. But
charities can’t just work with any celebrity. There has to be a connection, a reason why
99
this charity is working with this celebrity. And I’d recommend a cost-benefit analysis
before beginning any campaign,” the consumer stated. He was the first respondent to
mention utilizing a cost-benefit analysis; such a tool could be invaluable to the nonprofit
organization and could further enhance the impact of the celebrity/nonprofit organization
partnership.
A development executive formerly with Community Counseling Service (CCS) in
downtown Los Angeles spoke anonymously about the potential help a celebrity could
provide. CCS serves a very specific community: immigrants from South America with
mental health issues. Given the niche audience, the executive stated that she believes a
mainstream celebrity would not offer much assistance, but a campaign featuring a
prominent Spanish speaking celebrity from South America could help “so much.” She
said:
I’ve frequently thought that having a celebrity specific to our
immigrant population would help build awareness of our clinic
and reduce the stigma around counseling therapy that is prevalent
in the Hispanic community. I don’t think an English-speaking,
American celebrity would help much – it wouldn’t make much
sense – but targeted ads in Spanish from a recognizable celebrity
could help our organization as well as the community we are trying
to serve.
The executive reported that CCS has not worked with celebrities in the past
because they have not had the opportunity to do so, but she would be open to such a
100
relationship in the future as long as it is a logical partnership with potential benefits to the
organization and the community.
Stuart Haniff, Chief Philanthropy Officer with Feeding America Inland Empire,
offered a unique perspective on his work with celebrities in the nonprofit sector. Haniff
reported that he views himself as a connector between the celebrity and the cause. “I am
the bridge between the celebrity and the people they want to help. It is my job to connect
people, build relationships, fundraising and friendraising!” Haniff does have a level of
experience with celebrities that is uncommon in the nonprofit world: he worked in
Hollywood on a number of high-profile awards shows, such as the Golden Globes and
the American Music Awards, prior to switching careers and joining Feeding America.
He has parlayed the network created by these experiences into partnerships with Feeding
America and other nonprofit organizations.
Haniff was also unique in his emphasis on working with celebrities as part of his
overall fundraising and development strategies. Celebrity seemed to be at the forefront.
Haniff explained this strong emphasis on creating celebrity relationships when he stated,
“I can raise the stake and visibility with celebrity partners.” He went on to discuss the
campaign results of his celebrity partnerships versus those without the celebrity presence
or influence. Although there was not a specific measure, Haniff reported increased
donations of food and money at the celebrity-centered campaigns. He stated, “Yes, it
[celebrity] absolutely makes a difference.” Haniff strongly stated his support of
celebrities working in the nonprofit sector and encouraged other nonprofit organizations
to pursue partnerships of their own.
101
While the larger, established organizations such as United Way and Feeding
America focus on celebrity fundraising strategies, newer organizations are also focused
on the same strategy. When Jared Thomas was writing the business plan for his new
nonprofit organization, Project Voice, he incorporated creating celebrity relationships
into the funding plan, just as Brenda Rothaupt of StemYes! has done. As the CEO and
Founder of the educational nonprofit dedicated to serving foster youth, Thomas knew that
his primary challenge would be funding. He decided to target celebrities as part of his
strategic plan because “Celebrities are the name of the game in private investment.”
Many of Thomas’ friends and colleagues in the nonprofit sector in Los Angeles have
worked with celebrities, so he was well-versed in the impact these relationships could
have. These experiences were a big part of why Thomas made celebrity relationships
such a big part of his business plan for the fledgling organization. “I know that it is
difficult to create these celebrity relationships – there are lots of layers to go through, lots
of gatekeepers – but the influence of celebrity is undeniable, and I believe pursuing these
relationships is worth the time, energy, and resources.” Thomas was hesitant to discuss
the celebrities he has worked thus far as he has not been able to assess their impact yet.
But, he reported that he is focused on continuing the strategy and growing his
organization by “creating working business relationships with celebrities” for the good of
the foster youth Project Voice serves.
Conversely, Tulia Capizzi, an administrator with the Peace Corps based in Los
Angeles, expressed her frustration that the organization does not partner with celebrities.
“Celebrities provide endless opportunities that we as an organization have not tapped.
Celebrities would be infinitely valuable to us! I have so many ideas…” she shared. She
102
also believed that the help a celebrity would provide could be exponential. “Celebrities
influence people to buy products, see movies, wear fashion trends, everything. An
inspirational message from a celebrity could have ripple effects that benefit the
organization in unforeseeable ways for an extended period of time.” Capizzi went on to
state that she would be open to working with celebrities in the future. In fact, she
indicated not only a willingness to work with celebrities in the future, but an excitement
to do so. “Celebrities are an untapped resource for us. I would love to work with a
celebrity…of course, the right celebrity…but it would be so helpful to our efforts,”
Capizzi said.
Capizzi also offered an insight that had not previously been discussed: the
perspective of the celebrity. While this study is investigating the benefit to the nonprofit
sector/organization from the celebrity, Capizzi introduced the notion of the relationship
benefitting the celebrity. “Working with the Peace Corps, or really any nonprofit, could
be a transformational experience for the celebrity. We in the sector must create win-win
opportunities for both the celebrity and the organization,” she said. This idea humanizes
the celebrity: they are not just entities, but people with thoughts and feelings and
passions. Partnering with an organization could benefit not only the organization, but the
celebrity as well, perhaps providing further incentive for celebrities to get involved in the
nonprofit sector. Capizzi’s idea also echoes one of the guiding tenets of this study:
compelling celebrities to join the nonprofit sector and use their perceived influence for
the common good.
Another interviewee with a wealth of experience in the nonprofit sector is Arianne
Edmonds. Edmonds has worked in the nonprofit sector since she graduated from college
103
almost twenty years ago. She has worked with celebrities in a number of different
capacities throughout her time in the nonprofit sector, but she pointed to her time at PBS,
and specifically with Sesame Street, as her favorite and the most impactful. Edmonds
believes that celebrity is an “untapped resource” in our society that more nonprofits
should attempt to utilize through partnerships. In her experiences, the celebrities
Edmonds has worked with “helped amplify” the work that was already in progress. They
served as a “complement to what was already happening” in the organization, and their
partnership increased the effectiveness of the programs by increasing the connection
between the organization and the audience. She pointed to a particular campaign with
former First Lady Michelle Obama; Obama was able to connect with the audience
members and communicate the message of the campaign. Edmonds believes in the
power of celebrities and has encouraged the organizations she works with as well as her
colleagues in the sector to partner with celebrities. They can be an important part of an
organization’s overall strategic plan to raise awareness of the cause and the organization
and raise money to support the programs. As Edmonds stated, “Some celebrities
transcend ages!”
Lenee Richards, an executive with Leaders Up, spoke of celebrity involvement
with her organization and its subsequent influence on their stakeholders. Leaders Up has
engaged with celebrities in a number of different ways, such as the Be the Next
Campaign with the Seattle Supersonics and a Power of Mentorship event with the Editor
in Chief of Essence Magazine, Susan L. Taylor. In each of the events, Richards reported
that the celebrity helped the campaign, either by “getting the message out, increasing
awareness, and/or bringing resources” to the event. Although they do not utilize a
104
specific evaluation measurement, Richards felt that they were very “impactful overall” to
their efforts. In addition, Richards believed the partnership created between Leaders Up
and Taylor was “…wonderful! Very impactful. Susan is very goal-oriented and did her
best to keep the focus on the event and not on herself.” The result was an event that
brought together community leaders and unemployed youth, created mentorships, and a
lasting relationship with Taylor.
Lynne West, Executive Director of a Big Brothers Big Sisters chapter north of
Los Angeles, shared a mixed report of her experiences working with celebrities. On the
one hand, West detailed the ways in which her organization works with celebrities. West
stated, “We use celebrities a lot,” and reported that they have 3-4 celebrity events per
year (which seems to be a lot considering the chapter’s budget is less than $1million per
year). She went on to detail the “Bags, Bling and Bubbly” event that has been hosted by
Laila Ali and Mindy Kaling, an event for the Little Brothers and Sisters hosted by actress
Teri Polo, and the annual golf tournament hosted by athletes. “People wanted to meet
them [the celebrity], just be in their sphere. They would come just for them. The best
celebrities bring their own people to the event,” West said of the attendees of the events.
Despite the amount of time and energy devoted to these celebrity partnerships,
however, West was not confident that the celebrities were helping. She believed that the
celebrity involvement “definitely increased awareness,” but in terms of increased dollars
raised, West stated, “I don’t know.” She went on to pose the question, “Does it make a
difference? I don’t think so. If it does, it’s not gonna be long-term.” These statements,
however, contradict the annual strategy of BBBS Ventura County and their numerous
celebrity partnerships. Why there was this incongruence between the strategy and the
105
feeling on the part of Executive Director West? While I did not receive clarity on this
matter, West indicated that the strategy would remain the same and that a number of
celebrity-hosted events were planned for the organization. Despite West’s feelings, it is
clear that the celebrity partnership strategy is alive and well at this BBBS chapter.
West’s responses call to mind those of the Theme “Celebrities Have Influence but Not
Over Me,” whereby there is contradiction between the reported feelings and actions of
the nonprofit stakeholders and consumers.
Marco Ramirez, a nonprofit professional with over 20 years of service the
nonprofit sector, echoed West’s sentiments when he stated he was less than supportive of
celebrity involvement in the sector. In fact, he was the only interviewee who responded
that he would not be open to working with a celebrity in the future. Ramirez said, “Do
celebrities have influence? Sure, yeah, of course they do. But does that mean we in the
nonprofit sector should work with them? I’m not so sure.” He went on to tell the story of
a recent fundraising gala for the Mexican American Opportunity Foundation he attended.
“There was a celebrity emcee for the event, but it appeared to be a non-issue. People
would have shown up anyway.” Ramirez did not believe that the celebrity emcee had
any impact on the event, but again, with no evaluation metrics in place, this is Ramirez’s
perception and it is unknown if other attendees shared this sentiment.
Another insightful celebrity experience was shared by the former golf tournament
director of Interface Children and Family Services, a community-based organization
providing services for families in crisis. The former director, who asked to remain
anonymous, traced the entire history of the organization’s golf tournament during our
interview. The golf tournament began in the 1970’s with two Los Angeles Dodgers
106
baseball stars as the main draw. Year after year, the tournament grew in terms of
participants and dollars raised, but as the careers of the baseball stars began to wind down
during the 80’s, so too did the appeal of the tournament. When the director of the golf
tournament began to see that the baseball stars did not have the same draw as in the past,
he decided to make a change to the tournament: he found another celebrity.
Professional golfer Corey Pavin had been on the PGA circuit for many years
before his star began to rise nationally. He gained fans steadily as he placed higher and
higher in tournaments; his fan base reached a crescendo when Pavin won the US Open in
the late 1980s. The tournament director knew the Pavin family; they had grown up in the
same community. In fact, Pavin’s extended family still lived in the community. With the
golf tournament suffering, Corey Pavin’s recent win at the US Open, and his ties to the
community, the director felt a “perfect storm” of opportunity had been created to bring
Pavin into the organization and ask him to host the annual golf tournament for Interface.
In short order, Pavin agreed to work with Interface and the golf tournament was
rebranded The Corey Pavin Golf Tournament. The director reported that the tournament
changed immediately with the rebranding and the addition of Pavin’s star power. “The
golf tournament evolved from a local, grassroots event with the baseball players to
corporate sponsorships and massive ticket price increases with Corey. He was a huge
value add to the participants and they flocked to see him.” The donations increased, and
the event was more successful in terms of dollars raised than ever before.
There was a downside to this evolution of the golf tournament, however: many of
the organization’s supporters, who had been with the organization for years and
supported the old golf tournament, were now being pushed out of the Pavin tournament
107
because of the newly exorbitant ticket prices. The director noticed this occurring, but
was at a loss for what to do. He did not want to isolate or lose these older donors, but he
could not justify losing revenue by lowering ticket prices just for these older donors when
the market was clearly supporting the new price point. He kept the new status quo with
the higher prices, to the detriment of the tournament and the organization. As the fickle
world of stardom goes, when Pavin began to slip in the PGA rankings and failed to win
another major tournament, his star power began to wane and the golf tournament’s
downward slide began. The corporate sponsors pulled their support, and then the big-
ticket spenders left, too. The director stated, “As Pavin’s star waned, his value decreased.
His value was no longer enough to support the new ask [of higher ticket prices].” And,
much to the director’s chagrin, “…the loyal donors from before were feeling alienated
and did not want to be involved anymore.”
Interface experienced a roller coaster of star power through their golf tournament.
It began as a moderate draw with two local celebrities and evolved into a must-attend
event with corporate sponsors, media attention, and high-dollar tickets. But the
organization isolated its “tried and true donors” in favor of quick dollars on the back of
the next big thing, ultimately losing both old and new donors. While it is of the utmost
importance for nonprofit organizations to pursue new development and revenue sources,
and celebrity partnerships could be a viable solution, the organizations must balance
these new efforts with maintaining relationships with current donors and partners as well.
In addition, the organization must maintain focus on their mission; while the director
discussed Pavin’s connection to the community, he never mentioned a connection to the
organization. It appears that the focus, in this example, was on a connection to the golf
108
tournament and the golf tournament attendees, with little to no attention paid to the
connection to the organization itself. As seen through these themes, without connection,
there is no commitment to partnership, and there is no authenticity. Without these key
components, the celebrity/nonprofit organization partnership as fundraising strategy is
doomed to fail.
Themes Conclusion:
Numerous additional avenues opened up during the course of the interviews, and
have been organized and presented in the preceding Themes. Stepping back from these
Themes and returning to the overall study, it becomes evident that there is a strong
perception of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector on the part of these participants,
and that this perception is leading to action. In the nonprofit sector, as illustrated by a
number of interview responses from nonprofit stakeholders such as Lenee Richards of
Leaders Up and Mario Marin of United Way LA, organizations are responding to this
perceived celebrity influence by using celebrity partnerships as a part of their fundraising
plans. These organizations are allocating time, money, and personnel to pursue and
maintain the celebrity relationship. On the consumer side, study participants like Thu
Nguyen and Jane Brumby cited the presence of Jennifer Aniston as the primary reason
they knew and supported St. Jude’s Children Hospital. They saw the campaign, and
because of their perceived influence of Aniston, were inspired to act (in this example, the
action is donating to St. Jude’s).
This study has not proven celebrity influence, as influence is difficult to prove,
but it has attempted to show that perceptions of celebrity influence are not limited to the
entertainment or for-profit industries, and that numerous nonprofit organizations utilize
109
celebrity partnerships because of this perceived influence (although there can be
unexpected drawbacks to the partnership, including personnel costs in managing the
relationship and negative publicity for the organization if the celebrity commits a crime).
In the same vein, this study does not claim to prove causation from perceived influence to
action (such as donation or visiting website), but it has tried to illustrate the great number
of actions that follow the perception of celebrity influence on the part of the stakeholder
and consumer. The responses from participants point to consistent patterns of action
taken after exposure to the celebrity/nonprofit campaign.
Linkages between Themes also became clear as the analysis progressed. The
successful examples of the celebrity/nonprofit partnership cited by participants shared
several factors: connection, commitment to partnership, authenticity, and credibility.
These three factors are the most salient for successful partnerships. In looking at the
example of Ian Somerhalder and A Dog’s Life Rescue, we see each of these factors
present. First, Somerhalder is a well-known animal lover and activist who has rescued
several dogs and other animals. To know him is to know of his love of animals; he is
connected to them in his daily life. This well-known love of animals, this passion,
provides the connection to the animal rescue organization. Second, through the course of
the relationship, Somerhalder has worked with the organization in numerous ways,
including soliciting donations, appearing at events, and lending his name and likeness for
campaigns. He has committed to the partnership and shows this commitment
consistently in these numerous ways. Third, Somerhalder is perceived as authentic in the
relationship. Respondents defined authenticity as “being real” and being “genuine”; in
this example, Somerhalder is perceived as such because, on a personal level, he has
110
rescued animals in the past, he supports the organization, and he is not receiving any
benefit from the partnership (as one respondent said, “They don’t have to be there…so it
appears they are doing it for the right reasons: to help. That appeals to me.”). These
three themes combine and overlap in the examples of successful celebrity and nonprofit
organization partnership.
Connection
Authenticity Commitment
111
One factor present in the literature review but not in the participant responses was
that of credibility. Authors such as Atkin and Block and Goldsmith, et al., discussed the
importance of credibility in the celebrity endorsement process, describing credibility as
an external attribute in terms such as trustworthiness and competence. The reputation of
the celebrity in the public’s eye affects their credibility, which can, in turn, affect their
partnership with a nonprofit organization. While connection, commitment, and
authenticity are the most salient factors in a successful partnership, the external factor of
celebrity credibility must also be taken into account.
Several other themes can be applied to this example as well. The risk in this
example is relatively low, as from the organizational side, they are not allocating any
funds to this relationship (Somerhalder has never made any requests that necessitated the
expenditure of funds), Somerhalder is a husband and father who has never committed a
crime, and now, because the relationship is established and the commitment evident from
both sides, very little time is expended on the relationship. A Dog’s Life Rescue
founders simply make a phone call or send an email, and Somerhalder is ready to help.
On the celebrity side, the risk is also low due to the limited visibility of the organization
(it is not a national or well-known organization) and the small size of the organization
(with a small budget and no funding from government sources, the risk of
misappropriation of funds is minimized). This example also illustrates the Theme of
Celebrity Endorsement as Fundraising Strategy as well as Consumers Listen to What
Celebrities Say. A Dog’s Life Rescue co-founders explicitly sought to partner with
celebrities for fundraising when they started their organization, and have continued this
strategy for over a decade. Their success in this strategy can be seen in the Somerhalder
112
example (the consumers listened to him and his one tweet netted over $5,000 in 24 hours)
as well as their partnerships with other celebrities. Nonprofit organizations should
consider each of the factors presented through these themes when considering partnering
with a celebrity.
Of course, not all examples presented in this study were as successful; there
appears to be a dark side to the celebrity/nonprofit partnership as well. As one veteran
fundraiser lamented, “Celebrities are just in it for themselves.” As we saw with the case
of the celebrity who pulled out of his namesake walk the night before, or the other
celebrity who committed to the nonprofit organization and to one of its clients before
dropping out, these relationships are not always helpful or fruitful (and sometimes
detrimental, in the case of the walkathon). Much of these difficulties or failures can be
traced back to a lack of connection, commitment, and authenticity. In the example of the
walkathon, the celebrity lent his name to the event and promised to attend, but that was
the extent of his commitment to the organization. He did not donate personally and did
not appear to have a connection to the cause of homelessness. And, perhaps because of
his lack of connection and commitment, as evidenced by his failure to attend, he would
not be perceived as authentic, either. These factors combined with the celebrity’s failure
to appear at his namesake event led to an unsuccessful celebrity/nonprofit partnership
whose deleterious effects may be impossible to quantify.
While, however, the majority of responses were positive, a number of limitations
to working with celebrities emerged from the responses. First, simply connecting with a
celebrity can be challenge. There are a number of gatekeepers surrounding any given
celebrity, including publicists, managers, and personal assistants; it may be impossible
113
for a nonprofit organization to reach a celebrity without a pre-existing contact or
relationship. Second, maintaining a relationship with the celebrity can be very costly and
labor-intensive, with an (as of yet) unproven return on investment (ROI). The nonprofit
organization must allocate resources of time, personnel, and in some cases, funds for
celebrity demands (such as a hairstylist before a fundraising gala). In addition, there is an
opportunity cost in pursuing and maintaining the celebrity relationship: if, for example,
the organization’s staff fundraiser is spending time pursuing the celebrity relationship,
they are not pursuing relationships with other potential sources of funding, such as a
major gift donor. These factors can present significant barriers to creating a
celebrity/nonprofit relationship, particularly with small organizations that have limited
contacts and resources.
A final limitation with this relationship is the amount of risk the organization
undertakes when creating a relationship with a celebrity. Once a relationship is
established, the organization is linked to the celebrity in the view of public. If the
celebrity commits or is accused of committing a crime, the nonprofit organization will be
susceptible to negative press and publicity. Indeed, as McCracken discussed with the
“meaning transfer model,” nonprofit organizations want consumers to transfer the best
parts of the celebrity and the celebrity world (such as authenticity, credibility, etc.) to
their organization. In the celebrity/nonprofit relationship, the nonprofit bears the risk of
the celebrity committing a crime and consumers “transferring” that new, negative
meaning associated with the celebrity to their organization. However, the greatest risk to
the nonprofit organization may simply be that they are wasting their time. The lack of
proven ROI and the high opportunity costs associated with pursuing and maintaining the
114
celebrity partnership point to the biggest risk and greatest limitation to the
celebrity/nonprofit partnership: the organization wasting time and resources on a fruitless
endeavor. Nonprofit organizations must take each of these potential limitations to
working with celebrities into account prior to pursuing a relationship.
Despite the limitations to working with celebrities, the risks involved, and the few
negative experiences shared by study participants, the responses to interview questions
and the themes and patterns that emerged indicate a strong perception of celebrity
influence within the nonprofit sector and a willingness on the part of the consumer to act
based on this influence. Although future research into this partnership is necessary, the
results of this study indicate that partnerships between celebrities and nonprofit
organizations can be beneficial to the philanthropic pursuit of the common good.
Implications of the Study
Based on the responses from the 60 interviews conducted, it is clear that there is a
perception on the part of the study participants that celebrities have an influence, and the
perception of this influence varies across organization and consumer. It is hard to
quantifiably prove this perceived influence, but certainly the perception of celebrity
influence drives decision making for many organizations interviewed. Respondents
overwhelmingly reported their perception that celebrities do have influence in the
nonprofit sector and that, of those with experience, celebrities had helped their
organization, with 98% of respondents perceiving celebrity influence and 86% reporting
the celebrity assisted their cause. As expected, a number of implications from the
research have emerged throughout the course of the interviews.
115
In terms of perceptions of influence, 59 of 60 interviewees stated that they
perceive celebrities do have influence in the nonprofit sector. With those numbers,
nonprofit organizations might see the potential value in creating a partnership with a
celebrity and utilize the following Best Practices that have emerged from this research in
creating and maintaining that relationship. Organizations that have already engaged in
celebrity partnerships could learn from the anecdotes, data, and Best Practices presented
in this dissertation, in order to create a sustainable, win-win relationship between the
organization and the celebrity.
In a similar vein, another implication from this study could be increased
involvement on the part of the celebrity. Seeing the overwhelmingly positive response to
perceptions of celebrity influence as well as the anecdotes of celebrity power being used
for good in the sector could inspire others to become involved in an organization
themselves or perhaps create their own nonprofit organization or foundations, such as
Matt Damon’s water.org.
A final implication could be the expansion of the study of celebrity in the
nonprofit sector by academia, to the point that celebrity in nonprofit is studied to the
same degree as celebrity product marketing and public relations, as led by scholar Grant
McCracken and discussed in Chapter 3.
Limitations of the Study
As with all social science research, there are limitations to this study of
perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector. One such limitation to the
study was geography. I was confined to the Southern California region due to work and
familial commitments, so the majority of interviews were held with organizations in the
116
greater Los Angeles area. I was able to conduct a few interviews over the phone with
organizations in Florida, Washington, and New York, but these were outliers to the rest
of the interviews. It would be very interesting to expand the geographic scope of this
research and include more organizations outside of the entertainment hub of Los Angeles.
On the other hand, however, it is possible that Los Angeles was an ideal location for this
study. Celebrity culture in Los Angeles is so potent that it was a perfect lab to study their
perceived influence across the nonprofit sector as well as to learn of past experiences
organizations had with celebrities. Indeed, it is quite possible that perceptions of
celebrity influence outside of Los Angeles could be very different, such as not raising the
same level of awareness or donations because celebrities do not garner as much attention
outside of Southern California. As consumer Thu Nguyen stated, “I feel like I know
Jennifer Aniston.” Nguyen was born and raised in California, growing up with daily
barrages of celebrity news. How much did Nguyen’s upbringing and geography
influence her perception of Jennifer Aniston? Further research could be conducted to
compare and contrast perceptions of celebrity influence in the entertainment hubs of Los
Angeles and New York versus perceptions in other large cities, smaller urban areas, and
rural towns to determine if the perceptions of celebrity influence are as broad as these
interviews indicated (however, the interview responses pointed to a consistent pattern of
celebrity involvement perceived in both positive and negative ways; this pattern suggest
that similar experiences may also be found in the rest of the country).
Another limitation to the study was the small number of individuals from
nonprofit organizations and consumers interviewed. According to the National Center
for Charitable Statistics, there are more than 1.5 million nonprofit organizations
117
registered with the IRS in the United States. Through the course of this study, I
interviewed individuals from 39 nonprofit organizations, an infinitesimally small fraction
of the nonprofit population. Again, expansion of the study to include further
representation from more organizations will enhance the depth and breadth of this study.
A final limitation to the study was the lack of evaluation measures employed by
the nonprofit organizations that worked with celebrities. Only two of the 22
organizations that worked with celebrities utilize an evaluation metric; the rest of the
respondents reported their own feelings and perceptions. As such, I was unable to
quantifiably measure any impact the celebrity involvement may have had on the
organization, or whether there was any impact at all beyond the interviewees’
perceptions. I had specifically included a question regarding evaluation in the semi-
structured interviews in the hopes of including the quantitative data from the
organization’s evaluation in this dissertation. Not having an evaluation metric to
quantitatively measure the impact of the celebrity’s involvement was a severe limitation
to the study. While the interviewees’ reported a strong perception that celebrities have
influence in the nonprofit sector, it is impossible to measure or quantify the impact
without appropriate evaluation measures in place, thus leaving an incomplete picture of
the impact of celebrity influence and involvement that further research could perhaps
complete.
Recommendations for Future Research Design Improvements
Throughout the course of this study, several avenues for improvements to the
research design were identified. These avenues have been organized into a number of
topics that could be added to the research design to further the work started in this study,
118
all of which will expand the depth and breadth of knowledge of the successful
involvement of celebrities in the nonprofit sector. These topics include:
1. Age: As the majority of the nonprofit organizations interviewed for this study did
not have a target audience for their campaigns involving celebrities, participants
in interview Category 3 had an expansive age set (from 18-55 years old). Future
research design could be improved by breaking up participants into age groups
with specific age-related questions.
2. Geography: As previously mentioned, there are over 1.5 million nonprofit
organizations in the United States, with over 40,000 in the greater Los Angeles
area. This study was primarily geographically focused on Southern California,
which created a limitation to the study. As such, future research design could
expand the geographic scope of the study and interview organizations throughout
the United States.
3. Size of Organization: Nonprofit organizations vastly range in size, from some as
small as $25,000/year in revenues to as large as $1billion/year or more, with
billions of dollars in endowments. Future research could attempt to determine
how an organization’s size affects their ability to a.) partner with a celebrity, and
b.) how successful that partnership will be.
4. Type of Involvement: Of the 22 individuals who have worked with celebrities
through their organizations, 19 reported that celebrities did help their organization
or campaign. As the interviews revealed, nonprofit organizations work with
celebrities in a number of different ways. Future research should be conducted to
determine which type of involvement yields the most positive results.
5. Evaluation Measures: Of the 39 stakeholders from nonprofit organizations
interviewed, only two reported their organization had evaluation measures in
place to assess the impact of the celebrity involvement. This lack of evaluation
metrics seriously impedes the ability of researchers, this author included, to
accurately measure the impact. This dissertation has studied the feelings and
perceptions of individuals about celebrity involvement, but evaluation tools would
allow further assessment of impact. A proper evaluation tool could provide a
quantitative measure to complement the qualitative study performed for this
dissertation.
6. For-Profit versus Nonprofit Marketing: A key difference in for-profit versus
nonprofit marketing is the exchange of goods and lack thereof, respectively. In
the celebrity/for-profit company partnership, the celebrity is attempting to use
their perceived influence to compel consumers to purchase the endorsed product.
At the end of this exchange, the consumer receives a tangible product in return for
their monetary purchase. In contrast, with the celebrity/nonprofit partnership, the
119
celebrity is again attempting to utilize their perceived influence to compel action
on the part of the consumers, but in the nonprofit sector, this action is typically a
donation of money or time with nothing tangible in return for the consumer. How
do these differing outcomes affect the marketing strategies employed in each
sector? Does the addition of an item in exchange for donation (such as a t-shirt or
water bottle with the nonprofit organization’s logo) affect outcome? Investigating
the differences in marketing strategies and outcomes between the two sectors
could be beneficial to understanding the celebrity endorsement process in the
nonprofit sector.
Overall, the findings of this study could be enhanced by including these research
design improvements in the future.
120
Chapter 5:
Conclusion
Celebrities are everywhere. The nightly news, social media, Capitol Hill, on our
televisions and in our streaming videos, celebrities are everywhere. It did not start out
this way: just over 100 years ago, the celebrities in America were the Rockefellers and
the Carnegies, the prominent, wealthy families. With the advent of the nickelodeon
followed by silent movies and then talkies, stars such as Mary Pickford and Buster
Keaton emerged, while widespread television usage throughout the 1950s and 1960s
created the TV star. As the movie and TV stars proliferated, companies began to take
notice and partner with the celebrities to sell their products. An entire field of academia,
led by Grant McCracken, arose to study the phenomena of celebrity endorsements in
marketing and public relations. Then, in the last 20 or so years, society has seen the rise
of a new kind of celebrity, the reality star. Meanwhile, as society was witnessing this
progression of celebrity as a cultural phenomenon, the nonprofit sector grew in size and
prominence as well. Perhaps then it was only logical that nonprofit organizations should
also look to partner with celebrities to support their organizations in a manner similar to
endorsing products in the private sector.
As a fundraiser in the nonprofit sector for my entire professional career, I am well
versed in the financial hardships nonprofit organizations frequently encounter and the
creative ways in which fundraisers try to raise money. With the proximity to Hollywood,
I knew many nonprofit organizations worked with celebrities, but I did not know the
impact of these relationships. Were they helpful? Did they raise money? Raise
121
awareness? Was there any impact from the celebrity relationship? I hypothesized that
yes, consumers do perceive that celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector, and
yes, celebrities do help nonprofit organizations when they work together.
I began with the literature review to determine if there were any gaps in the
scholarly literature on celebrity outside the entertainment sphere. While there was a
plethora of information and academic articles on celebrity in marketing and public
relations, there was a dearth of scholarly articles on celebrity in the nonprofit sector. A
few studies have emerged, such as a study on the “Katie Couric Effect” discussed in
Chapter 2, but the field has not been studied to the same extent as marketing and public
relations. After determining there was indeed a gap in the literature, I began to design the
three categories of semi-structured interviews and schedule the interviews.
I chose the semi-structured interview research design so that I could guide the
course of the interview to get the data I was seeking but also leave the questions open
enough to invite further responses. In addition, designing the questions in this manner
also allowed for follow-up questions that, for example, a survey instrument would not
allow. I believe the research design was effective for the purposes of this study; the
interview responses were rich and robust, issues that I had not considered were discussed,
and a number of avenues for future research design improvements emerged. The
interview subjects varied in age, race, and experience, and a wide-range of organizations
were represented, from United Way of Greater Los Angeles to Big Brothers Big Sisters
to the Peace Corps.
In total, I conducted 60 interviews: 22 interviews with stakeholders in the
nonprofit sector who have worked with celebrities; 17 interviews with stakeholders in the
122
nonprofit sector who have not worked with celebrities; and 21 participants who are the
target audience for the nonprofit campaign. Of these 60 interviews, 59 respondents
(98%) stated they believe that celebrities do have influence in the nonprofit sector. When
looked at by category of interview, 21 of 22 respondents (95%) in the first set
(stakeholders at nonprofits that have worked with celebrities) stated they believe
celebrities have influence, while all 17 of 17 respondents in category two (stakeholders at
nonprofits that have not worked with celebrities) and all 21 of 21 respondents in category
three (consumers who are the target audience for the nonprofit organization) stated they
believe in celebrity influence within the nonprofit sector.
As the interviews progressed, the respondents began to provide answers similar to
those of other respondents and a number of themes emerged from the responses. Once
the interviews were completed, I analyzed the 60 interview instruments to pull out these
similar answers and organize them into themes. Themes that emerged from the
interviews included the importance of a connection between the celebrity and the
nonprofit organization, the risk undertaken by both celebrity and organization when
working together, and celebrity partnerships as a fundraising strategy. These themes
were aggregated together, presented, and discussed in Chapter 4.
Finally, interviewees were also asked if they had any recommendations for nonprofit
organizations in creating and/or maintaining relationships with celebrities. The responses
to this question were analyzed and organized into a list of Best Practices for Nonprofit
Organizations Working with Celebrities. The list of Best Practices is intended to assist
nonprofit organizations in establishing and maintaining a relationship with celebrities for
the benefit of the organization and the people it serves. This list was compiled based on
123
the analyzed responses from 60 interviews with professionals within the nonprofit sector
and consumers who are the target audience for the celebrity/nonprofit organization
partnership.
Contribution to the Practice
This study has been designed for two outcomes: first, to provide results of the
investigation into my participants’ perceptions of celebrity involvement, and second, to
contribute to the practice of philanthropy through the nonprofit sector by discussing an
alternate stream of funding (the celebrity/nonprofit partnership) and the best practices in
establishing and maintaining this new funding stream. As previously discussed, one of
the primary challenges nonprofit organizations face is securing funding. Nonprofit
organizations are constantly engaged in the process of raising money, whether it be from
government sources, individual donors, foundations, or corporations. It is, however, the
individual donor that typically provides unrestricted funding, allowing the organization to
allocate the donation where it is needed most, and it is the individual donor that is the
target audience for the celebrity/nonprofit partnership.
Through the course of this study, the interview respondents have shown a strong
perception of celebrity influence within the nonprofit sector, with 98% asserting their
belief in this influence. Again, while this study has not proven celebrity influence, it has
shown that these participants overwhelmingly perceive celebrities to have influence in
the nonprofit sector. This response rate, coupled with the numerous examples of
successful celebrity/nonprofit partnership shown through the literature review and the
participants’ answers, suggest a viable funding stream for nonprofit organizations.
124
Participants’ responses have also pointed to the creation of a model representing
the factors necessary for a successful celebrity/nonprofit partnership: connection,
commitment, authenticity, and credibility. Finally, in analyzing the interview responses
and the information from the literature review, the following list of Best Practices was
created:
Best Practices for Nonprofit Organizations Working with Celebrities
1. Find a connection between the mission of the organization and the celebrity’s
personal interests/passions.
2. The organization must be prepared to make the commitment to create and
maintain the relationship with the celebrity. This relationship can be very time-
consuming and labor-intensive.
3. The organization must understand the celebrity’s personal investment with the
organization and link to the mission. This link determines how helpful and
meaningful the relationship and level of involvement will be.
4. The image and reputation of the celebrity are important. A thorough
investigation of their history is of paramount importance in order to ensure their
history will not harm the organization.
5. Invest in evaluation tools to measure the impact of the relationship with the
celebrity. Be sure to implement changes based on the results of the evaluation.
6. Personal connections are key to maintaining a beneficial relationship with the
celebrity. Remember, they are people, too…talk to them as humans!
7. Create a win-win relationship for the organization and the celebrity. Focus on
maintaining a mutually beneficial relationship.
125
8. Create a strategic plan for the relationship and communicate it to all
stakeholders.
9. Create clear lines of communication between the organization and the celebrity
and/or spokespeople, and establish one point person who will liaise between the
two.
10. Ensure that the new relationship with the celebrity complements the current
mission and work of the organization. Avoid creation of a new program just to
work with or appease the celebrity (these programs created under this type of
circumstance rarely succeed). There is a point at which to say “no.”
11. Create partnerships that are meaningful and have the potential for success by
using the celebrity’s strengths and minimizing their weaknesses (e.g., a basketball
tournament sponsored by Kobe Bryant highlights the abilities that make him a
celebrity).
12. Be patient! Celebrities are busy with numerous commitments.
13. Celebrity partnerships should be just one of an organization’s numerous
fundraising strategies. The partnership can be lucrative but must not be the only
fundraising strategy employed by the organization.
These components are intended to be consulted and utilized by nonprofit organizations in
their quest to raise money from this alternate stream funding, the celebrity/nonprofit
partnership.
Final Thoughts
While this study has not proven or quantified celebrity influence in the nonprofit
sector, it has attempted to show a strong perception of celebrity influence from the
126
participants. And, one could ask, is there a difference between influence and perception
of influence? If a consumer perceives that celebrity has influence, it is their reality the
celebrity has influence and subsequently the consumer acts on their perception, their
reality, does the celebrity not have influence? At a certain point, it is a question of
perception versus reality, but that topic is to be studied another day. In addition, whether
or not celebrities have actual, measurable influence in the nonprofit sector is a subject to
be studied in the future. For now, the results from the interviews of this study indicate
that celebrities possess a perceived influence in the nonprofit sector, and this perception
is borne out by the actions of both nonprofit organizations and consumers, as shown
numerous times throughout the interviews in this study. Stakeholders in organizations
such as the United Way LA, Big Brothers Big Sisters, and A Pet’s Life Rescue, perceive
celebrities to have influence in the nonprofit sector and act based on that perception,
pouring organizational resources into managing celebrity relationships and designing
celebrity fundraising events. Similarly, consumers such as Thu Nguyen, Jane Brumby,
and Charina De La Cruz, perceive celebrities such as Jennifer Aniston have influence and
act on that perception by joining the organization as donors. While this study has not
proven influence, it has attempted to show that consumers and nonprofit stakeholders
perceive celebrity influence within the nonprofit sector, and these groups are taking
action based on that perception. As such, nonprofit organizations can and should
formulate mutually beneficial relationships with celebrities in order to harness this
perceived influence.
Overall, the results of the interviews combined with the scholarly literature
regarding celebrity outside the entertainment sphere illustrate a strong perception of
127
celebrity influence by both nonprofit organizations’ stakeholders and consumers. In
addition, this perception of influence is leading both groups to action, with nonprofits
partnering with celebrities and with consumers donating, volunteering, and/or seeking
information. The perception of celebrity influence and subsequent action it inspires in
many consumers can be a tool utilized within the nonprofit sector, with nonprofit
organizations and celebrities partnering together for the common good.
128
APPENDIX ONE
GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Celebrity – a prominent figure in the public eye; may include actors, singers, athletes,
reality stars, and other entertainers
Consumer – a person who purchases goods and/or services for personal use
Humanitarian – a person who devotes their time, energy, and/or money to helping
others
Influence – the ability to have an effect on another individual’s thoughts, perceptions,
and/or actions
Nonprofit Organization – an organization with the primary purpose helping people
through the provision of services such as providing food, shelter, education, counseling,
etc.; any profits earned by the organization are returned to the organization in order to
expand services
Perception – a way of regarding, understanding, or interpreting something; a mental
impression
Social Issue – a negative aspect of society, such as poverty, homelessness, or lack of
access to clean water, that affects everyone in society, either directly or indirectly
129
APPENDIX TWO
Interview Instruments
Interview Instrument for Nonprofit Organizations with Previous Experience
Working with Celebrities
Date: ___________________________________________________________________
Organization: ____________________________________________________________
Interviewee Name and Title: ________________________________________________
Question 1: I would love to hear about your background in the nonprofit sector. How
long have you served as an Executive Director/CEO/President? Follow-up: How long
have you been with this organization?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 2: Can you tell about the ways in which your organization works with
celebrities?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 3: What is your target audience for your campaigns/events involving
celebrities?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
130
Question 4: Do you believe that the celebrity helped your campaign/organization? If so,
how (increased donations and/or memberships, increased volunteer time, lobbying
Congress, etc.)?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 5: How did you measure the celebrity’s impact on the campaign/event success?
Was there a specific measure or did you just “have a sense” that they were helpful?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 6: Were there any campaigns/events that were not successful or not as
successful as you had anticipated? If so, to what do you attribute the outcome?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 7: What has been your personal experience in working with celebrities?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 8: Given your experiences, do you believe that celebrities have influence in the
nonprofit sector? Follow-up question/s: If so, how much, and it what ways specifically?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
131
________________________________________________________________________
Question 9: If yes to Q5 - How can celebrities expand their influence in the sector and
inspire others to act for good? If no to Q5 - How can celebrities gain influence in the
sector?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 10: Do you have any recommendations for best practices in a.) establishing a
relationship with a celebrity endorser, and b.) maintaining a positive and beneficial
relationship with them?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 11: Do you have any recommendations for other people I could speak to about
celebrity involvement in the nonprofit sector?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
132
Interview Instrument for Nonprofit Organizations without Previous Experience
Working with Celebrities
Date: ___________________________________________________________________
Organization: ____________________________________________________________
Interviewee Name and Title: ________________________________________________
Question 1: I would love to hear about your background in the nonprofit sector. How
long have you served as an Executive Director/CEO/President? Follow-up: How long
have you been with this organization?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 2: With the close proximity to Hollywood and the entertainment industry, many
local nonprofit organizations work with celebrities on special events, fundraising
campaigns, etc. I understand that your organization has never worked with celebrities.
May I ask why not?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 3: Do you have colleagues in the sector who have worked with celebrities? If
so, what was their experience?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 4: Do you believe that celebrities have influence in the nonprofit sector?
Follow-up question/s: If so, how much, and it what ways specifically?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
133
________________________________________________________________________
Question 5: Would you be open to working with a celebrity in the future? Why or why
not?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 6: Do you have any recommendations for other people I could speak to about
celebrities in the nonprofit sector?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
134
Interview Instrument for Celebrity Nonprofit Campaigns’ Target Audience
Date: ___________________________________________________________________
Interviewee Name and Title (if applicable): ____________________________________
Affiliation, if any: ________________________________________________________
Interview set-up: Show the interviewee an example of celebrity involvement in the
nonprofit sector (Jennifer Aniston’s St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital endorsement) and then
proceed with questions.
Question 1: What is your reaction to the endorsement?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 2: How did it make you feel?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 3: To what extent would the celebrity influence your decision to get involved
with the organization or donate?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 4: Would the absence of the celebrity have lessened the likelihood of your
involvement or awareness of the nonprofit organization and/or their campaign?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
135
Question 5: In general, do you believe that celebrities have influence in the nonprofit
sector?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 6: Do you think that nonprofit organizations should work with celebrities to
raise money or awareness for their cause? Why or why not?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Question 7: Are you more or less inclined to support an organization with a celebrity
endorser? Why or why not?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
136
APPENDIX THREE
Best Practices for Nonprofit Organizations Working with Celebrities
1. Find a connection between the mission of the organization and the celebrity’s
personal interests/passions.
2. The organization must be prepared to make the commitment to create and
maintain the relationship with the celebrity. This relationship can be very time-
consuming and labor-intensive.
3. The organization must understand the celebrity’s personal investment with the
organization and link to the mission. This link determines how helpful and
meaningful the relationship and level of involvement will be.
4. The image and reputation of the celebrity are important. A thorough
investigation of their history is of paramount importance in order to ensure their
history will not harm the organization.
5. Invest in evaluation tools to measure the impact of the relationship with the
celebrity. Be sure to implement changes based on the results of the evaluation.
6. Personal connections are key to maintaining a beneficial relationship with the
celebrity. Remember, they are people, too…talk to them as humans!
7. Create a win-win relationship for the organization and the celebrity. Focus on
maintaining a mutually beneficial relationship.
8. Create a strategic plan for the relationship and communicate it to all
stakeholders.
137
9. Create clear lines of communication between the organization and the celebrity
and/or spokespeople, and establish one point person who will liaise between the
two.
10. Ensure that the new relationship with the celebrity complements the current
mission and work of the organization. Avoid creation of a new program just to
work with or appease the celebrity (these programs created under this type of
circumstance rarely succeed). There is a point at which to say “no.”
11. Create partnerships that are meaningful and have the potential for success by
using the celebrity’s strengths and minimizing their weaknesses (e.g., a basketball
tournament sponsored by Kobe Bryant highlights the abilities that make him a
celebrity).
12. Be patient! Celebrities are busy with numerous commitments.
13. Celebrity partnerships should be just one of an organization’s numerous
fundraising strategies. The partnership can be lucrative but must not be the only
fundraising strategy employed by the organization.
138
REFERENCES
Aaker, J., Vohs, K., & Mogilner, C. (2010). Non-Profits Are Seen as Warm and For-Profits as
Competent: Firm Stereotypes Matter. SSRN eLibrary. Retrieved from
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1540134
Adler, C. (2005, November 12). A vote of confidence money cannot buy. Financial Times, p.
10. London (UK).
Agrawal, J., & Kamakura, W. A. (1995). The economic worth of celebrity endorsers: An event
study analysis. The Journal of Marketing, 56–62.
Ahmed, S. (2005). Desired competencies and job duties of non-profit CEOs in relation to the
current challenges: Through the lens of CEOs’ job advertisements. The Journal of
Management Development, 24(10), 913–928.
Aldrich, T. (2004). Do-it-yourself DRTV: a practical guide to making direct response
television advertising work for charities. International Journal of Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Marketing, 9(2), 135–144. doi:10.1002/nvsm.240
Alexander, J. C. (2010). The Celebrity-Icon. Cultural Sociology, 4(3), 323–336.
doi:10.1177/1749975510380316
Alleyne, M. D. (2005). The United Nations’ celebrity diplomacy. The SAIS Review of
International Affairs, 25(1), 175–185.
Alpion, G. (2006). Media and celebrity culture—subjectivist, structuralist and post-
structuralist approaches to Mother Teresa’s celebrity status. Continuum, 20(4), 541–557.
doi:10.1080/10304310600988328
139
Aron, S. S. (2007). The lapsed donor syndrome: The journey to donor disengagement (Ph.D.).
Union Institute and University, United States -- Ohio.
Atkin, C., & Block, M. (1983). Effectiveness of Celebrity Endorsers. Journal of Advertising
Research, 23(1), 57–61.
Austin, E. W., Vord, R. V. de, Pinkleton, B. E., & Epstein, E. (2008). Celebrity Endorsements
and Their Potential to Motivate Young Voters. Mass Communication & Society, 11(4),
420–436. doi:10.1080/15205430701866600
Bailey, A. A. (2007). Public Information and Consumer Skepticism Effects on Celebrity
Endorsements: Studies among Young Consumers. Journal of Marketing
Communications, 13(2), 85–107. doi:10.1080/13527260601058248
Barron, L. (2009). An actress compelled to act: Angelina Jolie’s Notes from My Travels as
celebrity activist/travel narrative. Postcolonial Studies, 12(2), 211–228.
doi:10.1080/13688790902887189
Bartolini, W. F. (2005). Prospective donors’ cognitive and emotive processing of charitable
gift requests (Ph.D.). Kent State University, United States -- Ohio.
Basil, M. D. (1996). Identification as a mediator of celebrity effects. Journal of Broadcasting
& Electronic Media, 40(4), 478–495.
Bell, K. M. (2013). Raising Africa?: Celebrity and the Rhetoric of the White Saviour.
PORTAL Journal of Multidisciplinary International Studies, 10(1). Retrieved from
https://epress.lib.uts.edu.au/journals/index.php/portal/article/view/3185
Bennett, L. (2011). “If we stick together we can do anything”: Lady Gaga fandom,
philanthropy and activism through social media. Celebrity Studies, 1–15.
doi:10.1080/19392397.2013.813778
140
Biccum, A. (2011). Marketing development: celebrity politics and the “new” development
advocacy. Third World Quarterly, 32(7), 1331–1346.
doi:10.1080/01436597.2011.600107
Bridges, K. (2010). Between Aid and Politics: diagnosing the challenge of humanitarian
advocacy in politically complex environments—the case of Darfur, Sudan. Third World
Quarterly, 31(8), 1251–1269. doi:10.1080/01436597.2010.541084
Brooks, A. C. (2004). Evaluating the Effectiveness of Nonprofit Fundraising: [1]. Policy
Studies Journal, 32(3), 363–374.
Brooks, A. C. (2006). Efficient Nonprofits? Policy Studies Journal, 34(3), 303–308,310–312.
Brubaker, J. (2011). It doesn’t affect my vote: Third-person effects of Celebrity Endorsements
on College Voters in the 2004 and 2008 Presidential Elections. American Communication
Journal, 13(2), 4–22.
Bush, A. J., Martin, C. A., & Bush, V. D. (2004). Sports Celebrity Influence on the Behavioral
Intentions of Generation Y. Journal of Advertising Research, 44(01), 108–118.
doi:10.1017/S0021849904040206
Celebrities Making A Difference. (n.d.). Charity Awards. Retrieved October 28, 2013, from
http://charityawards.com/biographies/
Celebrity. (n.d.).Celebrity and Development. Retrieved October 29, 2013, from
http://celebrityanddevelopment.wordpress.com/celebrity/
Cha, M., Haddadi, H., Benevenuto, F., & Gummadi, P. K. (2010). Measuring User Influence
in Twitter: The Million Follower Fallacy. ICWSM, 10, 10–17.
141
Charbonneau, J., & Garland, R. (2006). The use of celebrity athletes as endorsers: views of the
New Zealand general public. International Journal of Sports Marketing & Sponsorship,
7(4).
Chiagouris, L. (2006). Nonprofits can take cues from biz world. Marketing News, 40(12), 20–
22.
Choi, S., & Rifon, N. J. (2007). Who is the celebrity in advertising? Understanding
dimensions of celebrity images. The Journal of Popular Culture, 40(2), 304–324.
Chouliaraki, L. (2012). The Theatricality of Humanitarianism: A Critique of Celebrity
Advocacy. Communication & Critical/Cultural Studies, 9(1), 1–21.
doi:10.1080/14791420.2011.637055
Cooper, A. F. (2007). Beyond Hollywood and the Boardroom: Celebrity Diplomacy.
Georgetown Journal of International Affairs, 8(2), 125–132.
Cooper, A. F. (2009). Celebrity Diplomacy and the G8: Bono and Bob as Legitimate
International Actors (Working Paper). Centre for International Governance Innovation
(CIGI). Retrieved from http://dspace.cigilibrary.org/jspui/handle/123456789/9997
Costanzo, P. J., & Goodnight, J. E. (2005). Celebrity Endorsements: Matching Celebrity and
Endorsed Brand in Magazine Advertisements. Journal of Promotion Management, 11(4),
49–62. doi:10.1300/J057v11n04-05
Cram, P., Fendrick, A. M., Inadomi, J., Cowen, M. E., Carpenter, D., & Vijan, S. (2003). The
impact of a celebrity promotional campaign on the use of colon cancer screening: the
Katie Couric effect. Archives of Internal Medicine, 163(13), 1601–1605.
Creswell, J. (2008). Nothing sells like celebrity. NYTimes.com, 22.
Currid, E. (2010). Starstruck: The business of celebrity. New York: Faber and Faber.
142
Daley, P. (2013). Rescuing African bodies: celebrities, consumerism and neoliberal
humanitarianism. Review of African Political Economy, 40(137), 375–393.
doi:10.1080/03056244.2013.816944
Davis, H. L. (2010). Feeding the World a Line?: Celebrity Activism and Ethical Consumer
Practices From Live Aid to Product Red. Nordic Journal of English Studies, 9(3), 89–
118.
Dolnicar, S., Irvine, H., & Lazarevski, K. (2008). Mission or money? Competitive challenges
facing public sector nonprofit organisations in an institutionalised environment.
International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 13(2), 107.
Domino, T. (2003). Toward an integrated communication theory for celebrity endorsement in
fund raising. Theses and Dissertations. Retrieved from
http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1356
Driessens, O. (2013a). Celebrity capital: redefining celebrity using field theory. Theory and
Society, 42(5), 543–560. doi:10.1007/s11186-013-9202-3
Driessens, O. (2013b). The celebritization of society and culture: Understanding the structural
dynamics of celebrity culture. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16(6), 641–657.
doi:10.1177/1367877912459140
Driessens, O., Joye, S., & Biltereyst, D. (2012). The X-factor of charity: a critical analysis of
celebrities’ involvement in the 2010 Flemish and Dutch Haiti relief shows. Media,
Culture & Society, 34(6), 709–725. doi:10.1177/0163443712449498
Erdogan, B. Z. (1999). Celebrity Endorsement: A Literature Review. Journal of Marketing
Management, 15(4), 291–314. doi:10.1362/026725799784870379
143
Finch, A. (2009, June). The Latest Trends & How to Master Them. Nonprofit World, 27(3),
18–20.
Foster, W., & Bradach, J. (2005, February). Should Nonprofits Seek Profits? Harvard
Business Review, 83(2), 92–100.
Furedi, F. (2010). Celebrity Culture. Society, 47(6), 493–497.
doi:http://dx.doi.org.libproxy.usc.edu/10.1007/s12115-010-9367-6
Gnewuch, T. L. (2002). Glitz or goodness: Assessing the comparative effectivenesss of
endorsements by celebrities vs. nonprofit organizations (Ph.D.). The University of
Wisconsin - Madison, United States -- Wisconsin.
Goldsmith, R. E., Lafferty, B. A., & Newell, S. J. (2000). The impact of corporate credibility
and celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and brands. Journal of
Advertising, 29(3), 43–54.
Gustafson, J. (2009). Encouraging donations. Journal of Business, 24(22), B9.
Hager, M., Rooney, P., & Pollak, T. (2002). How fundraising is carried out in US nonprofit
organisations. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 7(4),
311–324.
Hall, H. (2007, January 25). Celebrities Are Not a Big Draw for Donors. Chronicle of
Philanthropy, 19(07). Retrieved from
http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA158335379&v=2.1&u=usocal_main&it
=r&p=AONE&sw=w&asid=b8743cb9b2f4a4844128bfee0713bf36
Hammack, D. C. (2002). Nonprofit organizations in American history. The American
Behavioral Scientist, 45(11), 1638–1674.
144
Han, E., & Ki, E.-J. (2010). Developing a measure of celebrity reputation. Public Relations
Review, 36(2), 199–201.
Hollensen, S., & Schimmelpfennig, C. (2013). Selection of celebrity endorsers: A case
approach to developing an endorser selection process model. Marketing Intelligence &
Planning, 31(1), 88–102.
Huliaras, A., & Tzifakis, N. (2010). Celebrity Activism in International Relations: In Search
of a Framework for Analysis. Global Society, 24(2), 255–274.
doi:10.1080/13600821003626567
Inthorn, S., & Street, J. (2011). “Simon Cowell for prime minister”? Young citizens’ attitudes
towards celebrity politics. Media, Culture & Society, 33(3), 479–489.
doi:10.1177/0163443711398765
Islamabad, D. M. in. (2006, November 26). Now charity staff hit at cult of celebrity. The
Guardian. Retrieved October 28, 2013, from
http://www.theguardian.com/society/2006/nov/26/internationalaidanddevelopment.intern
ationalnews
Jackson, D. J., & Darrow, T. I. A. (2005). The Influence of Celebrity Endorsements on Young
Adults’ Political Opinions. The Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 10(3),
80–98. doi:10.1177/1081180X05279278
Jacobs, F. A., & Marudas, N. P. (2006). Excessive, optimal, and insufficient fundraising
among the Nonprofit Times 100. International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector
Marketing, 11(2), 105–114.
Jain, V., Roy, S., Kumar, A., & Kabra, A. (2010). Differential effect of national vs. regional
celebrities on consumer attitudes. Management & Marketing, 5(4), 121–134.
145
Kahle, L. R., & Homer, P. M. (1985). Physical attractiveness of the celebrity endorser: A
social adaptation perspective. Journal of consumer research, 954–961.
Kamins, M. A. (1990). An investigation into the “match-up” hypothesis in celebrity
advertising: When beauty may be only skin deep. Journal of Advertising, 19(1), 4–13.
Kamins, M. A., Brand, M. J., Hoeke, S. A., & Moe, J. C. (1989). Two-sided versus one-sided
celebrity endorsements: the impact on advertising effectiveness and credibility. Journal
of Advertising, 18(2), 4–10.
Keller, K. L. (1993). Conceptualizing, measuring, and managing customer-based brand equity.
The Journal of Marketing, 1–22.
Kennett, D. A. (1980). Altruism and Economic Behavior: II Private Charity and Public Policy.
American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 39(4), 337–352. doi:10.1111/j.1536-
7150.1980.tb01285.x
Kowalczyk, C. M., & Royne, M. B. (2013). The Moderating Role of Celebrity Worship on
Attitudes Toward Celebrity Brand Extensions. Journal of Marketing Theory and
Practice, 21(2), 211–220.
Lafferty, B. A., & Goldsmith, R. E. (1999). Corporate credibility’s role in consumers’
attitudes and purchase intentions when a high versus a low credibility endorser is used in
the ad. Journal of Business Research, 44(2), 109–116.
Laidler-Kylander, N. K. (2007). Brand equity in international nonprofit organizations: A
system dynamics approach (Ph.D.). Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy (Tufts
University), United States -- Massachusetts.
Littler, J. (2011). Introduction: celebrity and the transnational. Celebrity Studies, 2(1), 1–5.
doi:10.1080/19392397.2011.544152
146
Ma, Q., & Yoshikawa, M. (2008). Ranking People Based on Metadata Analysis of Search
Results. Web Information Systems Engineering–WISE 2008 Workshops (pp. 48–60).
Springer. Retrieved from http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-540-85200-1_7
Madianou, M. (2013). Humanitarian Campaigns in Social Media. Journalism Studies, 14(2),
249–266. doi:10.1080/1461670X.2012.718558
Markarian, M. (1993, December). Fund-raising tough times. Black Enterprise, 24(5), 76.
Marketing: Celebrity selling—part two. (n.d.). Retrieved October 23, 2011, from
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1123800/?log$=activity
McCracken, G. (1989). Who is the Celebrity Endorser? Cultural Foundations of the
Endorsement Process. Journal of Consumer Research, 16(3), 310–321.
McDonald, D. (2002). An examination on multiple celebrity endorsers in advertising. The
Journal of Product and Brand Management, 11(1), 19–29.
Mesch, D. J. (2010). Management of Human Resources in 2020: The Outlook for Nonprofit
Organizations. Public Administration Review, 70, S173–S174.
Misra, S., & Beatty, S. E. (1990). Celebrity spokesperson and brand congruence: An
assessment of recall and affect. Journal of Business Research, 21(2), 159–173.
doi:10.1016/0148-2963(90)90050-N
Mittelstaedt, J. D., Riesz, P. C., & Burns, W. J. (2000). Why are Endorsements Effective?
Sorting among Theories of Product and Endorser Effects. Journal of Current Issues &
Research in Advertising, 22(1), 55–65. doi:10.1080/10641734.2000.10505101
Moore, M., Keller, C., & Zemanek Jr, J. (2011). The marketing revolution of Tim Tebow: A
celebrity endorsement case study. Innovative Marketing, 7 (1), 17-25.
147
Mostafanezhad, M. (2013). “Getting in Touch with your Inner Angelina”: celebrity
humanitarianism and the cultural politics of gendered generosity in volunteer tourism.
Third World Quarterly, 34(3), 485–499. doi:10.1080/01436597.2013.785343
Müller, T. R. (2013). The Long Shadow of Band Aid Humanitarianism: revisiting the
dynamics between famine and celebrity. Third World Quarterly, 34(3), 470–484.
doi:10.1080/01436597.2013.785342
Mukherjee, D. (2009). Impact of celebrity endorsement on brand image. Social Science
Research Network Electronic Paper Collection. Retrieved from
https://usdr.us/usdrinc/downloads/Celebrity-Endorsements.pdf
Nownes, A. J. (2012). An Experimental Investigation of the Effects of Celebrity Support for
Political Parties in the United States. American Politics Research, 40(3), 476–500.
doi:10.1177/1532673X11429371
Nunn, H., & Biressi, A. (2010). “A trust betrayed”: celebrity and the work of emotion.
Celebrity Studies, 1(1), 49–64. doi:10.1080/19392390903519065
O’Mahony, S., & Meenaghan, T. (1997). The impact of celebrity endorsements on consumers.
Irish Marketing Review, 10(2), 15–24.
Ohanian, R. (1990). Construction and validation of a scale to measure celebrity endorsers’
perceived expertise, trustworthiness, and attractiveness. Journal of Advertising, 19(3),
39–52.
Ohanian, R. (1991). The impact of celebrity spokespersons’ perceived image on consumers’
intention to purchase. Journal of Advertising Research. Retrieved from
http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1991-26094-001
148
Okonkwo, U. (2010). Luxury brands & celebrities: An enduring branding romance. Retrieved
from
http://www.fibre2fashion.com/news/images/newspdf/luxury_brands_and_celebrities_ave
c_%20photo.pdf
Park, S.-Y., & Cho, M. (2011). Celebrity charities: Effect of celebrity motive attribution,
identification and issue involvement. American Academy of Advertising. Conference.
Proceedings (Online) (p. 22). Lubbock: American Academy of Advertising.
Park, S.-Y., & Choi, S. M. (2009). Celebrity endorsement for nonprofit organizations: The
role of experience-based fit between celebrity and cause. American Academy of
Advertising. Conference. Proceedings (Online) (p. 76). Lubbock: American Academy of
Advertising.
Pornpitakpan, C. (2004). The effect of celebrity endorsers’ perceived credibility on product
purchase intention: the case of Singaporeans. Journal of International Consumer
Marketing, 16(2), 55–74.
Raval, M. R. (2010). Brand Endorsement through Celebrity. International Journal of
Management (IJM), 1(2), 204–207.
Renton, K. (2009). Impact of athletic endorsements on consumers purchase intentions (Ph.D.).
The Florida State University, United States -- Florida.
Repo, J., & Yrjölä, R. (2011). The Gender Politics of Celebrity Humanitarianism in Africa.
International Feminist Journal of Politics, 13(1), 44–62.
doi:10.1080/14616742.2011.534661
149
Richey, L. A., & Ponte, S. (2008). Better (Red)
TM
than Dead? Celebrities, consumption and
international aid. Third World Quarterly, 29(4), 711–729.
doi:10.1080/01436590802052649
Rindova, V. P., Pollock, T. G., & Hayward, M. L. (2006). Celebrity firms: The social
construction of market popularity. Academy of Management Review, 31(1), 50–71.
Ross, R. P., Campbell, T., Wright, J. C., Huston, A. C., Rice, M. L., & Turk, P. (1984). When
celebrities talk, children listen: An experimental analysis of children’s responses to TV
ads with celebrity endorsement. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 5(3),
185–202. doi:10.1016/0193-3973(84)90017-0
Salamon, L., & Anheier, H. (1998). Social Origins of Civil Society: Explaining the Nonprofit
Sector Cross-Nationally. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, 9(3), 213-248. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/27927612
Samman, E., Mc Auliffe, E., & MacLachlan, M. (2009). The role of celebrity in endorsing
poverty reduction through international aid. International Journal of Nonprofit and
Voluntary Sector Marketing, 14(2), 137–148. doi:10.1002/nvsm.339
Schlegelmilch, B. B., Love, A., & Diamantopoulos, A. (1997). Responses to different charity
appeals: the impact of donor characteristics on the amount of donations. European
Journal of Marketing, 31(8), 548–560.
Silvera, D. H., & Austad, B. (2004). Factors predicting the effectiveness of celebrity
endorsement advertisements. European Journal of Marketing, 38(11/12), 1509–1526.
doi:10.1108/03090560410560218
St. Jacques, T. J. (2009). Celebrity: The embodiment of ideology (M.A.). Northeastern
University, United States -- Massachusetts. Retrieved from
150
http://search.proquest.com.libproxy.usc.edu/docview/304965614/abstract?accountid=147
49
Sternheimer, K. (2015). Celebrity culture and the American dream: Stardom and social
mobility. New York: Routledge.
Stevenson, N. (2012). Sociology in the Age of Celebrity. Contemporary Sociology: A Journal
of Reviews, 41(1), 52–56. doi:10.1177/0094306111430791a
Street, J. (2004). Celebrity politicians: popular culture and political representation. The British
Journal of Politics & International Relations, 6(4), 435–452.
Thrall, A. T., Lollio-Fakhreddine, J., Berent, J., Donnelly, L., Herrin, W., Paquette, Z.,
Wenglinski, R., et al. (2008). Star Power: Celebrity Advocacy and the Evolution of the
Public Sphere. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 13(4), 362–385.
doi:10.1177/1940161208319098
Till, B. D., & Shimp, T. A. (1998). Endorsers in advertising: The case of negative celebrity
information. Journal of advertising, 27(1), 67–82.
Tolson, A. (2001). `Being Yourself’: The Pursuit of Authentic Celebrity. Discourse Studies,
3(4), 443–457. doi:10.1177/1461445601003004007
Turner, G. (2010). Approaching celebrity studies. Celebrity Studies, 1(1), 11–20.
doi:10.1080/19392390903519024
Vemuri, K, & Madhav, T. (2004). Celebrity endorsement: Through the ages. IBS Case
Development Centre, MCS005. Retrieved from
http://www.ibscdc.org/Case_Studies/Marketing/Brand%20Marketing%20Communicatio
n%20Strategies/MCS0005.htm
Vermeersch, H. (2012). Celebrity endorsement. Retrieved from
151
http://dspace.howest.be/handle/10046/844
Via, S. (2013). Celebrity Humanitarianism: The Ideology of Global Charity. New Political
Science, 35(3), 529–532. doi:10.1080/07393148.2013.813708
Webber, D. (2004). Understanding charity fundraising events. International Journal of
Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 9(2), 122–134. doi:10.1002/nvsm.239
Westley, F. (1991). Bob Geldof and Live Aid: The Affective Side of Global Social Innovation.
Human Relations, 44(10), 1011–1036. doi:10.1177/001872679104401001
Wheeler, M. (2011). Celebrity diplomacy: United Nations’ Goodwill Ambassadors and
Messengers of Peace. Celebrity Studies, 2(1), 6–18. doi:10.1080/19392397.2011.543267
Wheeler, R. T. (2009). Nonprofit Advertising: Impact of Celebrity Connection, Involvement
and Gender on Source Credibility and Intention to Volunteer Time or Donate Money.
Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 21(1), 80–107.
doi:10.1080/10495140802111984
Yao, K. (2015). Who gives? The determinants of charitable giving, volunteering, and their
relationship (Unpublished master's thesis). University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved from
https://repository.upenn.edu/wharton_research_scholars/126/
Yrjölä, R. (2012). From Street into the World: Towards a Politicised Reading of Celebrity
Humanitarianism. The British Journal of Politics & International Relations, 14(3), 357–
374. doi:10.1111/j.1467-856X.2011.00476.x
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
One of the primary challenges facing nonprofit organizations is funding. Funding is necessary for all aspects of the organization, from providing client services to paying the electric bill. Although nonprofit organizations employ a number of diverse strategies to raise money, many nonprofits are still struggling to provide services to their clients. Aside from fees for goods and services (such as tuition, membership fees, etc.), individual donors are the greatest financial contributor to nonprofit organizations. The individual donor is the key to many organizations’ success, providing unrestricted funding for client services and facilities' costs, targeted funding for new programs, and endowment funding for long-term financial security. At the same time, the notion of “celebrity” is no longer bound by the confines of the literal and metaphorical Hollywood. Celebrity involvement has expanded to the nonprofit sector, from Hollywood legends like Paul Newman creating his own line of products with 100% of proceeds benefitting nonprofit organizations to modern stars like Jennifer Aniston partnering with St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital. Examples of celebrity involvement in the nonprofit sector targeting potential individual donors are easy to find, but research into the results of this involvement is in the nascent stages. As such, this study was designed to be a qualitative investigation utilizing semi-structured interview questions to ask participants about their perceptions relating to celebrity influence within the nonprofit sector with the explicit intention of impacting the practice of philanthropy for the greater good. The potential boost provided from the celebrity and nonprofit partnership, because of the celebrity’s perceived influence, could be highly beneficial to the financial status of the nonprofit, which, in turn, would enable the organization to benefit more people. This increased involvement from the world of celebrity could then translate to increased giving in the nonprofit sector, thereby assisting nonprofits in one of their greatest challenges of all: raising money.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
The institutionalization of nonprofit management: emergence, development, and legitimization
PDF
The functions of the middleman: how intermediary nonprofit organizations support the sector and society
PDF
A public sector organizational change model: prioritizing a community-focused, inclusive, and collaborative approach to strategic planning
PDF
Making an impact with high-net-worth philanthropists: understanding their attributes and engagement preferences at nonprofit organizations
PDF
Exploring what has led to the racial leadership gap within the nonprofit sector
PDF
An exploratory case study on the social viability of Alvarado Street Bakery’s employee-owned cooperative model
PDF
Improving post-secondary success for first generation college students through community partnerships: programming practices for charter high schools
PDF
County governance reform in California: introduction of the council‐executive model and the elected county‐executive
PDF
The nature of gang spawning communities: African American gangs in Compton, CA: 1960-2013
PDF
Intradepartmental collaboration in the public organizations: implications to practice in an era of resource scarcity and economic uncertainty
PDF
Supporting a high value maternity system of care: prioritizing resilience of and relationships with mothers to improve maternal and child health
PDF
The institutional context of Korean philanthropy and the role of government and (quasi-) community foundations
PDF
Tailoring philanthropic strategies to new generational cohorts
PDF
Education based incarceration: educate to change the organizational culture of corrections in the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department
PDF
Social capital and community philanthropy: the impact of social trust and social networks on individual charitable behavior and community foundation development
PDF
A time of crisis: the Australian experience and what can California learn?
PDF
Lessons from TAP implementation: obstacles and solutions to improve the transit users experience
PDF
Green healthcare, an environmentally sustainable methodology: an investigation of the ecological impacts of the healthcare industry and the role of green initiatives in sustainable medical services
PDF
Collaboration: is it worth it? The Magnolia Community Initiative from the perspective of initiative partner participants
PDF
Research to develop a manual for parents, caregivers, and volunteers to teach children from birth to five years of age with intellectual disability living in rural communities in the Dominican Re...
Asset Metadata
Creator
Barber, Erin Elizabeth
(author)
Core Title
Looking to the stars: perceptions of celebrity influence in the nonprofit sector
School
School of Policy, Planning and Development
Degree
Doctor of Policy, Planning & Development
Degree Program
Policy, Planning, and Development
Publication Date
12/07/2018
Defense Date
07/19/2018
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
celebrity,celebrity and nonprofit partnership,celebrity endorsement,celebrity partnership model,celebrity relationship,Fundraising,nonprofit organization,nonprofit sector,OAI-PMH Harvest,perception of influence
Format
application/pdf
(imt)
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Currid-Halkett, Elizabeth (
committee chair
), Natoli, Deborah (
committee member
), Sternheimer, Karen (
committee member
)
Creator Email
eebarber@usc.edu,erinbarber76@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-110257
Unique identifier
UC11676721
Identifier
etd-BarberErin-7002.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-110257 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-BarberErin-7002.pdf
Dmrecord
110257
Document Type
Dissertation
Format
application/pdf (imt)
Rights
Barber, Erin Elizabeth
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA
Tags
celebrity
celebrity and nonprofit partnership
celebrity endorsement
celebrity partnership model
celebrity relationship
nonprofit organization
nonprofit sector
perception of influence