Amie Schneider

The Strokes denounced U.S. foreign intervention during their set at Coachella this year. The moment ignited debate over whether the band had any right or reason to use their platform for political commentary. While well intentioned, this protest and others like it point to a more nuanced issue: An artist’s influence should not be conflated with expertise, and effective activism depends on recognizing that distinction.

Musicians should absolutely use their platforms to affect social change, but there is a caveat: Talent should not offer any guarantee that one’s political opinions ought to be heeded any more than the average citizen. However, when celebrities shout their opinions, it reaches an audience far wider and less scrutinizing than any policymaker or academic. Most notably on social media platforms such as Instagram, which reward reach and engagement over truth, artists present themselves as informed voices and reach a fanbase that trusts them based on familiarity, not accuracy. This contrast between efficacy and credibility poses a danger when artists speak out. Their outreach allows claims, well-intentioned or not, to permeate with a disregard for substance.

The remedy is for artists to use their influence not as a source of authority, but as a way to direct attention to those with expertise, using their platform to amplify those with the knowledge to facilitate beneficial change. In 2022, Rage Against the Machine did not simply display their support of immigrant rights, but donated $1 million to immigrant defense organizations. Similarly, on the climate crisis, Billie Eilish did not use her platform merely to act as an expert; instead, she partnered with REVERB, an experienced sustainability organization, to make her tours carbon-neutral. These artists acknowledged their role as bridges to connect the public with those equipped to help.

Being aware of this distinction allows for a vastly more accountable form of celebrity activism. Rather than foisting an opinion upon an all-too-receptive audience, an artist should incentivize informed engagement — for fans to make their own decisions — whether through voting, donating or other means. By using their platform as encouragement to be a well-informed and well-involved citizen, celebrity activists can produce legitimate and long-lasting benefits.

The Strokes’ protest at Coachella is a display of how well-intentioned activism can fail to induce action when it stops at expression. While not insignificant, speaking out without connecting their influence to a means of change detracts from the strength of their activism. If artists intend to meaningfully participate in bringing about social change, their purpose should not be to assume the role of an expert but to bring light to those who do have expertise. Only through this combination of influence and information can celebrity activism truly contribute to lasting change.