This question came my way today: Is there any good thing about gossiping about celebs? When does being a fan go over into being too fanatical? Some people say the only thing they have in common with others is discussing celeb gossip — what does that mean about the relationship?

Celebrity gossip isn’t that different from reality TV.  Some people call it voyeurism, but I think we have to readjust our perspective based on the way technology is integrated into everyday life.  A lot of technology gets designed for one purpose and then used by the public quite differently.  I don’t have a moral issue with this kind of hacking (both technologically and philosophically.)  How it gets used tells us a lot about people.  Cameras probably weren’t invented for exposing people’s private lives any more than TV was designed to watch people subjecting themselves to humiliation (although humiliation is one of the eye-of-the-beholder things.)  The same is true for celebrity gossip and reality TV.  I include Reality TV because often, the subjects become celebrities, or in some cases, such as Kathy Griffin “My Life on the D List”, Paula Abdul and Farrah Fawcett’s “Chasing Farrah,” the show is essentially streaming celebrity gossip.  Celebrity gossip may be the new media version of vaudeville.

It is important to point out that gossip isn’t reality any more than “reality TV.”  They are contrived and controlled through editing, scripting, framing and other visual, psychological or semantic stunts to elevate the conflict and emotion by editors, writers, photographers, producers, and the participants themselves.  It’s also true that gossip isn’t a new phenomenon; it is the human way of grooming to create bonding (see Robin Dunbar’s Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language).

It’s also important to recognize that “going too far” can happen with many activities, not just related to celebrity-watching and media. Truly going too far is more aptly defined as addictive behavior and should be diagnosed carefully by a professional and treated accordingly. When an activity is negatively interfering with the rest of someone’s life, it is time to seek a consultation. This does not mean a slam-dunk diagnosis–there are many degrees and many approaches to get someone back on track to positive life choices. Most behavior does not fall into the addiction category and it’s VERY important that the media (and all of us) do not present extremes as normal or frequent occurrences.

New definition of private:  Whether you are a “regular person” who appears on Dr. Phil or Jerry Springer or a celebrity shopping on Rodeo Drive, in a connected world, appearing in public can be digital or physical and there are new definitions of public and private.  What gets said and done is no longer ethereal—once digitized, it is around forever.

Rapid technological advancement has created a huge amount of new places and avenues for distributing information in a very short amount of time. This has had two effects: 1) an information vacuum to fill up all this new “space,” and 2) increased attention on celebrity in its own right rather than as a by-product of a skill or profession. The reasons that celebrity “pays” is because there is a place to show it.  Being a celebrity also allows you to monetize your notariety—in money, opportunities or popularity.

The attraction of media and celebrity is often written off as a manifestation of Andy Warhol’s “in the future everyone will be famous for 15 minutes.” That fifteen minutes of fame, however is serving a purpose. There are many people that feel powerless and unvalued in their lives, in their jobs and in their relationships. The attention—good or bad—provides validation; all those people are willing to watch so what you have to say must be important. Sitting next to a cultural-icon like Oprah outweighs the costs because it changes that person’s self-definition. But this isn’t new. My grandmother, who once danced with the Prince of Wales, told and retold this cherished story. It made her feel valued and important.  The more celebrities we make, the more chances someone will have to dance with them. If we can’t dance with them, we can talk about them.

Who we talk about also helps define us.  People who are interested in American Idol hang out together at the Water Cooler, another version of “How about those Yankees?”

Why do people watch or read or follow?

If you can get past the content, much of the gossip and celebrity exposure is about hope; regular people can become important, famous and ‘successful’ as defined by a media-saturated environment. It is like the ‘Lana Turner discovered at Scwab’s soda fountain’ myth. It is about how regular people can beat the odds.  New media, like YouTube, is elevating people to celebrity status with fan following.  The ability to become a celebrity means you have increased interest in existing celebrities.

Sometimes celebrity-watching is inspiring, like when Kirstie Alley lost a bunch of weight (and then, of course, she went on to shill for Weight Watchers, monetizing her own celebrity.)

Shared experiences enhance tribal bonding—discussion of American Idol gives you something to talk about to co-workers around the water-cooler.  Shared experiences create connections.  If someone tells me “the only thing they have in common with others is discussing celeb gossip,” I would suggest that there is probably something else going on too.  It doesn’t have to be negative.  I would ask, “what is it about this story you follow that attracts you? What happens when you share the experience with your friend.  How does that story compare or have meaning to your life?”  If someone is incapable of having more intimate relationships, it would be great if they entered therapy.  But if not, isn’t having a friend over to dish about “The Hills” better than no friend at all?

People evaluate and define themselves in comparison to others. Celebrity news provides a context to evaluate our own lives in a positive way. “I am like this, but I am not like that. I’m better than that. Boy and I thought my life was bad. Even successful people have trouble.”  Now to be fair, sometimes we make comparisons that make us feel worse. There is a lot of concern, for example, about body image and the continual shrinkage of prime time women. (They all get blonder, too, have you noticed?)

People have strong attachments with the personalities in the media—especially people who appear on a regular basis. The immediacy of media—big faces in your face, showing up in your living room frequently, some of them every day–creates a strong response because these are the characteristics of friends—they show up on a regular basis.  On a visceral, limbic level brains processes this information as if there were no mediation.  If that process creates a positive effect, why would you want to cognitively talk yourself out of it?

There is also a redemptive quality to a lot of the gossip narrative and reality shows. The conversion format is seen in shows like Dr. Phil (the good father) or following the Britney Spears saga where an errant person comes forth, confesses, does penance, and is forgiven and welcomed back into the fold. Prodigal son stuff.

There is a commonality to all gossip formats in a Bettleheimian kind of way – they are the “Grimm’s fairy tales” of a media-saturated culture with all the basic plot lines: jealousy, family conflict, deceit, resolution, villains and heroes. Bruno Bettelheim saw fairy tales as existential dramas in which children confront their own problems and desire on the path to adulthood. In some way, celebrity gossip and reality TV are narratives that forces people to address their own conflicts and moral understanding. When someone behaves badly, the tabloids dish, and people boo, confirming the social inappropriateness of the behavior and restoring a sense of order.

And then there is the current zeitgeist, a climate of fear. People feel afraid and it’s hard to get away from it with Homeland Security x-raying everything and people losing jobs and watching their pension funds and savings shrivel away in the stock market. So there is both comfort and escapism in watching others. Their lack of control makes our sense of control stronger. As I have mentioned before, in the depression era, instead of ‘Survivor,’ there were Dance Marathons, endurance contests that lasted weeks. We didn’t have the Internet and TV then, so we had to get our entertainment in person. For 25 cents, people could come in and watch for as long as they wanted as couples struggled to stay on their feet. At that time, the marathons were considered disrespectable, repugnant, and were one of the most popular forms of entertainment.

As psychologists, we want to understand why people follow celebrity gossip, not make moral pronouncements. We need to understand how people experience it. We need to understand why people find watching the the trials and tribulations of others.  “Will Jen find happiness after Brad?” may also be the same as ”Will I find happiness?”  There is a tendency to demonize gossip shows, reality shows, and celebrity in general.  If we suppress aspects of popular culture, we are losing an opportunity to understand what need it serves along with our ability to address it if something “more positive” is possible. It will also pop up somewhere else in some other form. We don’t want to hide the manifestations of our public psychology. We need to understand the phenomenon to make changes. As long as there is an audience, there will be content delivered, somewhere, somehow.

As psychologists we can identify the social problems mirrored in popular culture. We can create media literacy programs that teach active and critical media use; we can develop curriculum and programs that address some of the needs that are being filled celebrity gossip. Do people feel helpless, powerless, unimportant, and unvalued? We can teach resiliency and provide opportunities to develop competence.

We also can recognize that the rapid changes in technology mean rapid changes in content. Maybe celebrities are having their 15 minutes of fame. We do know that what is popular today won’t be tomorrow. Or, as Heidi Klum says on Project Runway, “One day you’re in, the next, you’re out!”