Policy Brief
This study provides an analysis and evaluation of how celebrity engagement impacts civic participation in the United States. When and why do celebrities decide to use their influence to encourage civic engagement? What difference do their actions make?
A healthy democracy can be measured in many ways, with a core marker being the level of engagement in the process of electing public representatives. Unfortunately, despite record-breaking voter participation levels in recent elections, the United States still ranks 31st out of 50 developed nations in terms of eligible voter participation. Lagging voter engagement and rising distrust of political institutions weaken our democracy.
Today, many celebrities are involved in efforts to help boost civic interest, engagement, and participation while building goodwill with their fans. Celebrities, defined broadly as famous people, are distinctively positioned to tackle this critical issue because of their ability to garner media coverage, attract large crowds, reach their fans, and influence society.
This study focuses specifically on what celebrities are doing and can do, to promote voter participation, including voter education and mobilization efforts. However imperfectly, the impact of these efforts can be measured by examining whether they lead people to take actions related to voting, such as registering to vote, requesting a ballot, and casting a ballot.
Book
Empowering Affected Interests explores the radical implications of the All-Affected Principle—the idea that all those impacted by collective decisions should have a say—by bringing together leading theorists to debate how democracy can address the interdependence of states, markets, and peoples on issues like immigration, climate change, and labor markets.
Article
In this study, the authors use nine months of trip planning data to understand how travelers engage with multiple transit options in real-time.
Feature
From global election trends to inflation anger, swing state performance, and failed voting reform initiatives, Harvard election law experts break down last week’s presidential election and what it might mean for the future of American democracy.
Commentary
As the dust settles from the U.S. presidential election, the American public can celebrate that the election process was largely nonviolent and smooth. However, it is important that the public not be lulled into thinking this signals the end of election administrators’ problems.
Commentary
Roughly 80 percent of the population who do not live in “swing states” lack a clear notion of what they “need to do” to actively support their candidates.
Q+A
