“It’s not part of your job. It’s like maybe you can cook, but it doesn’t mean you should start a restaurant.” – Ryan from The Office
In 2016, the impossible happened. Leonardo DiCaprio won an Oscar. He started out his speech with the usual thank-you’s.  He used the rest of his time to talk about climate change. This raises an important issue in entertainment. Should entertainers use their careers to advance their ideological agendas?
Many were furious about Leo’s speech. Others thought it wasn’t enough. Before taking a side, it’s important to understand the entertainer’s vocation. It’s a source of private earnings. It means experience in entertainment, and it’s public by nature. It comes with certain privileges and responsibilities.
Like any other worker, an entertainer has the freedom to use his private earnings for any legal purpose. Leo’s fame is something he’s earned. Outside of whatever contracts he’s signed and laws he has to obey, he can use it how he pleases. Nobody can stop him from talking about climate change at The Oscars. That’s his moment, his fame, his audience. But should he use it that way just because he can?
No one can doubt that he has experience in entertainment. He’s been acting since he was a child. Leo is also an environmental activist, but being an activist doesn’t make him an expert. He doesn’t have a degree or years of serious research behind him. No matter how influential and involved he is, he does not have the qualifications to be a credible source on environmental issues.
It is also an inappropriate setting for the subject of his speech. The Oscars is a ceremony for honoring merit in the film industry. It’s a time to be gracious, to recognize exceptional productions, and to pay respect to an art form.  Since he received the award for Best Actor, it would’ve been a good time to talk about acting. Then again, that doesn’t receive as much coverage.
Many have argued that since they have a large audience, entertainers have an obligation to use award ceremonies for activism. I would counter that entertainers have an obligation to honor their audience and the setting before their personal agendas.  Leo’s speech makes the audience captive to his agenda instead of allowing them to participate in the purpose of an award ceremony.
It’s not that entertainers should never pursue their own agendas. It’s important to be active outside of your career and to dedicate yourself to other vocations. There is a proper time and place for that. The time and place is not in an acceptance speech at The Oscars.
Leo had the best intentions, but publicity doesn’t grant entertainers qualifications or an appropriate setting for their personal agendas.  It wasn’t his job to bring up climate change during his speech. Furthermore, it didn’t open the floor for discussion or convince anyone of anything. It divided and distracted his audience at a ceremony meant to bring people together to honor the arts.
But still, congratulations on the award Mr. DiCaprio! I loved The Revenant, and I’m looking forward to more of your works.
Let me know what you think. Was Leo out of place? Should entertainers be more or less active in ideological agendas, and how? I’m looking forward to your responses!
Thanks for reading!
