<\/p>\n
Students and professors discuss the double-edged sword of privilege and viewership\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n By VRITI SHAH \u2014 features@theaggie.org<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n The widespread ecosystem of catered advertisements and trends in the media largely comes from celebrity and influencer culture, according to Forbes<\/span><\/a>. Amidst the influencer and celebrity universe of brand deals<\/span><\/a> and paid, pushed microtrends<\/span><\/a>, there have been numerous moments where content creators have made out-of-touch<\/span><\/a> statements, colloquially known as \u201clet them eat cake\u201d moments<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n Although many believe that the statement \u201clet them eat cake\u201d<\/span><\/a> was famously said by Queen Marie-Antoinette after being told that her starving peasants could not afford bread, Julia Simon, a professor of French at UC Davis, detailed that its true origins are not from the French Revolution \u2014 rather, the quote may have been from a previous queen. Whether or not \u201clet them eat cake\u201d can be attributed to Marie-Antoinette, the statement became an anecdote that followed out-of-touch influencers<\/span><\/a>, as Claire Goldstein, a professor of French, described.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cRegardless of whether or not Marie-Antoinette said, \u2018let them eat cake,\u2019 which she probably did not, the truth is that she was probably one of the first […] kind of influencer[s],\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cThere\u2019s a scholar called Caroline Weber<\/span><\/a> who wrote a book called \u2018Queen of Fashion<\/span><\/a>\u2019 [that] documented how Marie-Antoinette sort of made her luxurious life more available to the public than previous generations of rich people.\u201d<\/p>\n UC Davis students and staff have their own varying opinions on the \u201clet them eat cake\u201d moments celebrities have had. For example, Coachella \u2014 a \u201conce-scrappy\u201d<\/span><\/a> music festival in Southern California \u2014 is now one of the most<\/span><\/a> popular events of the year for influencers, even having been described as the “influencer Olympics”<\/span><\/a> by the New York Times. In fact, the 2026 festival had 125,000<\/span><\/a> attendees per weekend and over 160 performers.\u00a0<\/p>\n Coachella\u2019s ticket prices range between $549 and $649 for the weekend, as well as additional fees for shuttle passes ($130 to $180), on-site camping ($150 to $400+), service fees ($50 to $100), travel, lodging and food which can roughly range from around $800 to $2,000+ per person, according to the Los Angeles Times<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n Although the high prices make it so that Coachella has become unattainable<\/span><\/a> for most individuals, many influencers are paid<\/span><\/a> to attend Coachella through fully-funded brand trips. During the festival, they film content<\/span><\/a> for their sponsorships and network<\/span><\/a> with one another.\u00a0<\/p>\n However, some Coachella attendee influencers are under fire<\/span><\/a> for displaying their privilege during an economic downturn<\/span><\/a>. For example, influencer and TV personality Kylie Jenner shared a video showing off her Palm Springs mansion<\/span><\/a> that she stayed in during the three-day music event.\u00a0<\/p>\n While some fans applauded her wealth, others argued that the boasting of her home during an economic decline<\/span><\/a> was “tone-deaf” and even \u201cdystopian,” according to Cosmopolitan.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n Another example is actress Vanessa Hudgens<\/span><\/a>, also known as the “Queen of Coachella,”<\/span><\/a> who took to an Instagram livestream to object Coachella’s cancellation<\/span><\/a> due to the COVID-19 global pandemic<\/span><\/a> in 2020.\u00a0<\/p>\n “Even if everybody gets it, like yeah, people are going to die, which is terrible, but inevitable?\u201d Hudgens said on the livestream<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n The comment immediately spurred backlash<\/span><\/a>, with fans claiming that the statement was tone-deaf, considering that the virus had already reached 8,000 deaths<\/span><\/a> and 200,000 confirmed cases<\/span><\/a> worldwide, according to BBC News.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cWell, the tone deafness, I think, really relates to the bubble that these people are in,\u201d Simon said. \u201cAnd particularly, if they\u2019re influencers to some degree, [they] must believe that they represent a certain segment of the population. Certainly, political folk believe that they represent […] the population. And to feel the tone deafness when they make these remarks makes that bubble clear […] that there\u2019s this enormous gulf between the life that they lead and the life that the rest of us lead. And I think those remarks are helpful.\u201d<\/p>\n \tThe influencer \u201cbubble,\u201d as Simon detailed, creates a barrier between viewers and content creators. However, when that \u201cbubble\u201d becomes visible, there is an open gate to the backlash from social media users, as explained by Goldstein.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s a really apt parallel,\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cSo the Internet gives the public more access into the lives of influencers and that\u2019s how influencers are making bank on this. And at the same time, it\u2019s their weakness because it can be targeted as hateful […] and we can see their lack of empathy.\u201d<\/p>\n Goldstein also pointed out the differences between celebrities and wealthy people, highlighting the influence each has on society.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cAlthough the income gap has accelerated in the recent decades, there have always been very, very wealthy people,\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cBut the difference with influencers is that they are inviting the public into their lives as a way of kind of, like, leveraging some sort of public identity \u2014 which financially serves them, right? They\u2019re making money off of the products that people buy or the clicks that people make.\u201d<\/p>\n An influencer magnet similar to Coachella, the Met Gala<\/span><\/a>, an annual charity event for The Metropolitan Museum of Art\u2019s Costume Institute, gathers roughly 500 celebrities and influencers<\/span><\/a> to dress in high fashion brands<\/span><\/a> with a different, extravagant theme<\/span><\/a> every year. Although the gala is centered around charity for the arts, some have emphasized its tone-deaf quality for being exclusively for the rich \u2014 with many comparing it to the excessive fashion shown in the dystopian Hunger Games’ Capitol<\/span><\/a>.<\/p>\n More of these claims followed after billionaire and founder of Amazon, Jeff Bezos<\/span><\/a>, donated $10 million<\/span><\/a> and became an honorary Met chair member<\/span><\/a>. With a history of employee abuse<\/span><\/a>, Bezos was met with backlash<\/span><\/a> for his involvement in the Met Gala. In protest, an anti-billionaire<\/span><\/a> group projected video interviews of Amazon workers sharing their stories on the Empire State Building, the Chrysler building and Bezos’ own penthouse.\u00a0<\/p>\n One projection read, \u201cIf You Can Buy the Met Gala, You Can Pay More Taxes,\u201d according to the New York Times<\/span><\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n Simon explained how public rallies were significant in the French Revolution, contrasting from present reactions of celebrity insensitivities.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe context of that [\u2018let them eat cake\u2019 remark] is, I mean, a little different from the Met Gala or even with [what] you see from influencers,\u201d Simon said. \u201cBecause the price of bread was rising, and people are actually demonstrating getting into riots, doing a march out to Versailles and demanding bread, right? They\u2019re demanding to be fed. And they understand the king as providing like a father that would provide bread to the family.\u201d<\/p>\n \tAt the 2024 Met Gala, Haley Baylee<\/span><\/a> wore a Marie-Antoinette-themed dress and filmed a TikTok quoting the infamous “let them eat cake”<\/span><\/a> statement. Prior to the event, Israel carried out airstrikes on Rafah<\/span><\/a> amidst the genocide in Palestine<\/span><\/a>, leading to many viewers calling out the content creator\u2019s out-of-touch behavior.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cI wonder if the woman at the Met Gala [Haylee Baylee] is being satirical,\u201d Simon said. \u201cWas this a parody? Did she not understand? I mean, Marie-Antoinette for sure didn\u2019t understand. She had, at Versailles, this big farm that she played on, and she pretended to be like a shepherdess and so she really [\u2026] led a really super sheltered life. She really had no awareness of what [was] going on.\u201d<\/p>\n Some students, like Jazelle Jarmon, a first-year molecular and medical microbiology major, argued that everyone should be held accountable to move forward and create a genuine impact.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cChange needs to happen,\u201d Jarmon said. \u201cAnd if we\u2019re just going to allow this to happen, then what\u2019s the point, right? There\u2019s also this side where it\u2019s people like, \u2018Oh my god, I don\u2019t care because it\u2019s my favorite influencer\u2019 [so] they don\u2019t really address it. Or, it might not be as prioritized to them.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Goldstein expressed the similarities between present day influencer tone-deafness and Marie-Antoinette\u2019s out-of-touch downfall.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cI mean, people follow [influencers] because they have these extraordinary lifestyles, which are fake and performed,\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cBut, although the media was different, the context of the French Revolution [was] the availability of print media [that] really was exploding in the years prior. So that, in a similar way, made the royals more accessible to [the public] and also allowed [a] whole genre of vilifying depictions of Marie-Antoinette that circulate[d] before the revolution.\u201d<\/p>\n Goldstein also detailed how influencer privilege and viewership can serve as both the rise and downfall of influencers.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cOne of the things that brought Marie-Antoinette down was the very same dynamic that created her popularity with the public,\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cWhich was the availability, in her case, [of] prints<\/span><\/a>, like engravings that circulated, or just her changing fashions or her availability as a public icon. [That] was the thing that allowed people the access to critique her and vilify her.\u201d<\/p>\n In the end, the press was a tool to greatness for Marie-Antoinette, but also her own double edged sword \u2014 similar to influencers on social media platforms, according to Goldstein.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cSo, [Marie-Antoinette\u2019s] power and her mystique are created by the press,\u201d Goldstein said. \u201cLike these press images that show her fabulous lifestyle, but also the thing that brings her down are these really vilifying images that […] circulate. So it\u2019s very similar [to] the Internet.\u201d<\/p>\n Written by: Vriti Shah \u2014 <\/strong>features@theaggie.org<\/strong><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n