Don't Let Clooney and Company Fool You: Hollywood Isn’t Merely Shallow
How industry groupthink warps our culture
Next time you’re scrolling through your Netflix queue on a Friday night, consider an unsettling thought: Those buff and botoxed bodies shimmering in the movie posters help shape public opinion.
Is America irredeemably racist?
Is climate change a threat on par with nuclear war?
Are capitalists villains?
The Leonardos, Reeses, Meryls, and Clooneys help your friends, your neighbors—probably even you—answer such questions, as well as many others.
Hollywood helped turn public opinion on issues like legalizing marijuana and same-sex marriage. The entertainment industry even influences our political leaders. In 2012, then-Vice President Joe Biden cited Will & Grace as a factor in his decision to support same-sex marriage.
“I think Will & Grace probably did more to educate the American public than almost anything anybody has ever done so far,” Biden said on “Meet the Press” in 2012. His statements would force Democratic party leaders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to come out in support of the issue as well …
Those in the entertainment industry might not persuade with arguments and evidence, but that’s not a weakness because arguments and evidence usually aren't very persuasive. Instead they use something more powerful—storytelling.
A story well told, especially a moving picture story, seduces viewers.
They find themselves immersed in characters, plot, music, and more, and in this immersive state they’re far more persuadable than if producers had thrown pie charts at them. Ebay co-founder Jeffrey Skoll knows this and that’s why he founded a motion picture studio, Participant Media, to advance his progressive beliefs.
The entertainment industry exhibits about as much intellectual diversity as a sociologist convention, but that’s not big news. Everyone knows that progressivism dominates Hollywood. What is less appreciated is just how oppressive the groupthink is.
If you’re fed up with groupthink in entertainment, media, and more, maybe it’s time to subscribe to Shiny Herd.
Last week I provided a sample of political dissidents in the entertainment industry. I also listed some various cases in which the dissidents incorporated their heterodox views into movies and shows.
If my sample is at all representative, we may draw some conclusions:
Most dissidents hold off on speaking out until they’ve amassed lots of fame and fortune.
Dissidents rarely incorporate their heterodox views into films or shows. Perhaps they worry about backlash, and if they don’t, they know they can’t go it alone. Even if a successful actor or director happens to be a dissident, he or she will still need the support of many others in the industry to bring the project to a wide audience. Those “others” probably aren’t eager to step out of line.
In the rare cases when dissidents do incorporate their heterodox views into their work, those productions rarely reach mainstream audiences. If they’re mainly preaching to the converted, the projects probably won't persuade many people.
Speaking out doesn’t provide much upside. It doesn’t seem to propel careers to new heights. After they come out of the closet, the careers of these prominent figures seem to plateau or dip downward.
Speaking out provides lots of downside. Jim Caviezel has starred in hugely profitable films like The Passion of the Christ and Sound of Freedom, yet many producers and casting directors shun him. There is roughly zero chance he will ever win an Oscar. Even some of the most successful figures (think J.K. Rowling, Dave Chappelle, and Jerry Seinfeld) lose opportunities and friendships for speaking out. They become targets for bad press, bad reviews, threats of violence, and occasionally actual violence.
Industry groupthink is stronger than the sum of its parts.
Many yearn to speak out (I’ve spoken with plenty of them), but there are things they yearn for even more, like having a career. Closeted dissidents look at the lives of their outspoken counterparts, and decide to keep their mouths shut. They know speaking out is a bad career move.
Those on the outside looking in see the same dynamic.
Hollywood’s intolerant monoculture makes it less likely that young heterodox artists will pursue careers in the industry. So we shouldn’t expect an influx of refreshing heterodox projects anytime soon. Yes, new platforms have emerged that cater to different points of view, but most will likely remain siloed off from mainstream audiences. These platforms probably won’t generate much mixing of ideas either.
Some artists will still pursue those paths, but by doing so they risk being shut out from mainstream success, which almost always delivers more fame, fortune, and influence than catering to niche audiences.
But our monoculture doesn’t just affect actors, producers, writers, and directors.
Related:
George Clooney: Now Who Will Fund Social Justice Movies! The Shuttering of Participant Media Sparks Needless Worry Among A-Listers
Hollywood Thinks You Need More Movies About Climate Change: Is the issue really underrepresented?
Make it Stop! Hollywood’s Irritating Addiction to Big Pharma Villains
“The World Won’t End” — World’s Top Climate Official Criticizes Climate Alarmism: Will it matter to Hollywood and the media?
If Movie Reviewers Rip Jim Caviezel, They Should Rip These Celebs Too
Selective Outrage Over “Sound of Freedom”
Seinfeld vs. the Shout-Down Protesters — How Will This Episode Unfold?
Why J.K. Rowling Isn’t As Controversial As You Think: The authors’ defenders include some prominent transgender people
J.K. Rowling: "The attempt to intimidate me is meant as a warning to other women” — They myopic cancel culture take that won’t go away
America Wants Problematic Comedy: Ricky Gervais and Dave Chappelle Keep on Winning
Industry groupthink affects all of us anytime we scroll through Netflix, tune in to some other popular platform, or haul ourselves to a theater.
So many of today’s artists tell tedious stories that endlessly rehash the same themes (got it, pharmaceutical companies exist only to kill their customers), cast the same kinds of villains and heroes (even Emily Blunt is bored by strong female leads), and highlight injustice and atrocities only when they overlap with Eight Percenter prejudices (most of the best anti-communist films seem to come from far outside Hollywood).
The monoculture will serve up countless climate change films, but good luck finding one that strays from the “correct” point of view. Even New York Times columnist Ezra Klein and the Chairman of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change would likely be regarded as “right wing extremists” at the typical film industry panel on climate change.
And don’t expect flicks designed for escapism to let you escape. Fans of big budget superhero movies and animated films know how the thought-policers lard up those movies with monoculture messaging.
Don’t let all the technologically enhanced actors and actresses fool you into thinking Hollywood is nothing but glitz.
The intellectually homogenous entertainment industry shows viewers a redacted view of the world and pelts them repeatedly with gatekeeper-approved cliches. That does more than sap the fun out of movie night. It invites viewers to fear the wrong things, overlook bigger threats, and misunderstand the world.
Hollywood might be shallow, but its cultural impact runs deep.
Ted Balaker is a filmmaker, and former network newser and think tanker. His written work has appeared in many publications including The New York Times, USA Today, Reason, and The Washington Post. His recent film work includes Little Pink House starring Catherine Keener and Jeanne Tripplehorn, Can We Take a Joke? featuring Gilbert Gottfried and Penn Jillette, and the new feature documentary based on the bestselling book, The Coddling of the American Mind, by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. Stream the very first “Substack Presents” feature documentary here.
They are just results-oriented.
“We need a better lead. Have you thought about changing the gender?”
I checked out your link. Film producers, you say? Check out my political novel (The leftists I know gave it the cold shoulder) I’ve been told it’s very cinematic. 🥴 I’m not that familiar with Substack and haven’t figured out how to add links yet, so if you’re want to see it, I’ll send the link separately.