Stage actors with little to no social media- Page 3

[Elegance101]

Posted: 11/19/18 at 6:29am

When using the term “social media,” I was referring to the public profiles that anyone can follow or view, not personal profiles like private accounts or personal Facebook profiles. Messaging someone on Facebook is like email to me in a way.

But bwayIvsong, it’s interesting you bring that up. I hadn’t thought about how one could literally get cast over social media instead of through the normal agents/managers and auditions. Keeping contact with people is hugely important and I guess social media is a big part of that now. Thanks for contributing!

[greensgreens]

Posted: 11/19/18 at 12:21pm

A LOT of people don't even manage their social media anymore. There are more than a few actors who've been mentioned in this thread as being on Twitter, but they are certainly not doing it themselves at all. They probably don't even know how to login! And I know a fair number who've been mentioned here as well that are on social media - just under a pseudonym/nickname as theirs isn't a "public facing" account. With fan behavior continuing to be an issue, it's just common sense nowadays!

[bwaylvsong]

Posted: 11/19/18 at 8:04pm

@dramamama and elegance, I consider my personal page to be my "professional" page, since I frankly think it would be silly for someone at my level to even have a "fan page." Yes, I do have several peers who have separate "professional" pages, but they all only have a handful of "fans" who are all just friends and family members who would see their personal pages, anyway. It's just not the sort of thing I would even consider doing until I book a project that warrants it. I post a lot of professional things on my personal page and don't post anything that I wouldn't want a Casting Director to see. It's all up to the individual actor of course, but I think that what I'm doing is the best approach for someone of my stature.

[Paterson]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 12:01pm

Dave28282 said: "Paterson said: "In the name of balance, I should add that I know of some famous actors whose social media absence only encourages some of the more stalkerish fans to assume that they are hiding something in their personal life, and the absence of daily breakfast updates allows them to imagine that their marriage is a sham etc."

That mystery is the difference between a star and a real life soapattention seeker to me. Every star I used to look up to lost a bit of my interest as soon as they did a real life soap or posted daily things about their personal life, opinions, etc.

"

And that's fine for people like you and me. We respect actors more who resist the temptation to go down that route. But my point is that if you are a big star, fans will speculate on your private life regardless, and can a certain sort of fan with a sense of entitlement will not interpret an absence of social media presence as having a bit of dignity, but as something suspicious. In other words, there are weirdos out there, and if you are a big star, not having a public twitter or facebook doesn't protect you from them. But this probably only applies to actors who are also known for film and tv work and have a media profile.

In defence of social media, it is very handy, and I can see how useful it would be for actors to use to connect with other industry people, and to stay in touch with those you've worked with.  As you become a bit more famous, it's arguably a lot safer to be 'friends' with loose acquaintances on social media than to hand out your phone number or email address. 

I'm not going to judge those who were using social media before they had any level of fame from continuing to use it, and while I can see the perils of its use, I think it's a lot more nuanced than dividing actors into those who avoid it and focus on their craft, or those who use it, and therefore automatically become lumped in with reality tv stars.

I'm sure there is a happy medium that will vary for each person's circumstances. Fair play to those who manage to achieve that, I just know that I'd struggle! 

 

[Dave28282]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 5:39pm

Great points Paterson.

Yes, those kinds of fans do exist. They will turn that mystery into something negative because it prevents them from "getting a grip" on them, so to speak. To me, preventing that puts the star in question in different category. I understand that most fans want to claim their star of choice and dm with them all day and see how they make a sandwich, but ultimately that star does not gain more respect in my opinion. 

What you describe is exactly what happened to Meghan Markle. She used to be very active on social media, which made her very accessible, but a bit cheaper. Now she had to shut everything down (understandably) and now the gossip starts, bad marriage, demanding woman, etc. And yet, every picture or glimpse that appears from her speaks to the imagination and the mystery makes her much more legendary in the end.

I agree that there is more nuance in different users for networking etc, and some stars having private accounts for family and friends etc. But because the very accessible reality stars/influencers seem to get big followings, it seems that actors with a real craft are sometimes striving to be "vloggers" too, which more often than not doesn't suit them at all. In the past regular people wanted to be like actors, now actors want to be like regular people.

I would definitely struggle too, because I'm way too straightforward and not politically correct enough in the way I package the truth, which could cost me my career. Instead, I rather keep quiet and play the game my way.

Updated On: 11/20/18 at 05:39 PM

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 5:58pm

George Salazar had a really good conversation about social media on Rory O'Malley's podcast.

https://roryo.podbean.com/e/george-salazar-episode-75/

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 6:09pm

To be honest, I respect stars who communicate with their fans via social media more than what, say, Patti Lupone does which is call up reporters and come up with the same nasty complaints every time. Or what Diana Rigg did re: the Lauren Ambrose situation. There's nothing more honorable in calling up Michael Reidel to bitch about a colleague than to post dog pix on social media. 

[Elegance101]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 6:25pm

poisonivy2 said: "To be honest, I respect stars who communicate with their fans via social media more than what, say, Patti Lupone does which is call up reporters and come up with the same nasty complaints every time. Or what Diana Rigg did re: the Lauren Ambrose situation. There's nothing more honorable in calling up Michael Reidel to bitch about a colleague than to post dog pix on social media."

Yes, but those aren’t mutually exclusive. There’s always pettiness in this business, whether social media is involved or not.

[LizzieCurry]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 6:36pm

poisonivy2, why does it have to be one or the other?

[poisonivy2]

Posted: 11/20/18 at 6:49pm

LizzieCurry said: "poisonivy2, why does it have to be one or the other?"

Because when Patti does one of her umpteenth interviews ranting about ALW or Diana Rigg called up Michael Reidel, people on here always praise them for their candor, honesty, blah blah blah and say that since they're legends they can say whatever they want.

But B;way stars who post pictures of their dog or backstage shots are somehow cheapening the art?

[Dave28282]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 11:18am

Being too accessible for the crowds and show your private life/backstage life in pictures and video's, to abolish the mystery of showbusiness is what is cheapening the art.

 

Updated On: 11/21/18 at 11:18 AM

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 11:23am

"Or what Diana Rigg did re: the Lauren Ambrose situation. There's nothing more honorable in calling up Michael Reidel to bitch about a colleague than to post dog pix on social media. "

Except Rigg didn't do that. Reidel somehow go access to a private email and published it.

[givesmevoice]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 11:37am

poisonivy2 said: "LizzieCurry said: "poisonivy2, why does it have to be one or the other?"

Because when Patti does one of her umpteenth interviews ranting about ALW or Diana Rigg called up Michael Reidel, people on here always praise them for their candor, honesty, blah blah blah and say that since they're legends they can say whatever they want.

But B;way stars who post pictures of their dog or backstage shots are somehow cheapening the art?"

No, I think Laura Benanti posting pictures of herself on the toilet are somehow cheapening the art. 

 

(And fwiw, I don’t think anyone should be posting pictures of themselves on the toilet.)

[Kad]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 11:43am

The idea that actors using social media "cheapens the art" is absurd. These are people, and people behaving as people cheapens nothing.

If actors want to connect to fans and fans want to connect to actors on social media, more power to them. It's 2018, for goddsake; social media is an intrinsic part of culture now, and one need only not to opt into following notable people if they feel it's cheapening something.

 

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 12:01pm

There's nothing wrong with managing a social media account. It's just another form of communication and conducting publicity. As a fan, I actually appreciate a lot of the social media posts. I also respect those who do not partake because they value their privacy to an extent where they don't want to share anything. Even before SM, we had stars that were more willing to do publicity while others who were not. It's the same thing.  Not everyone who uses SM puts themselves in bad situations. Some people who have social media are just careful people in general and only share simple things and don't run into trouble. As someone with an Instagram, Twitter, and FB (which I haven't used frequently in like two years), I wasn't always on the social media boat, but now that I am, I find it to be very useful and nice to have and share with loved ones. Of course there are negatives, which is why I don't go too deeply on Twitter and stopped using FB regularly, but that's with everything. Control your usage.

Also, I think most people are aware people present their best selves on SM and it's not the complete the truth. The ones who want to emulate SM stars and wish they were like them would do that without SM. They'd just buy whatever Tiger Beat or whatever magazine is selling to them. With social media, there's also a chance for stars to not be so careful unlike with PR managing firms controlling every output. There's obviously a pro and con to that as well.

Updated On: 11/21/18 at 12:01 PM

[ghostlight2]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 1:02pm

"The idea that actors using social media "cheapens the art" is absurd. These are people, and people behaving as people cheapens nothing.

If actors want to connect to fans and fans want to connect to actors on social media, more power to them. It's 2018, for goddsake; social media is an intrinsic part of culture now, and one need only not to opt into following notable people if they feel it's cheapening something."

I agree with you, Kad, but what I take issue is management pressuring actors into promoting shows through social media, and I can tell you that that is happening - a lot. That is not an actors job.

[smidge]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 3:02pm

Dollypop said: "Bobby Steggert

I considered him one of the finest actors around but he's left acting and closed down all his social media accounts--even his e-mail."

Steggert still posts on Instagram. I really wish he would return to the theater.

[Elegance101]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 3:13pm

ghostlight2 said: ""The idea that actors using social media "cheapens the art" is absurd. These are people, and people behaving as people cheapens nothing.

If actors want to connect to fans and fans want to connect to actors on social media, more power to them.It's 2018, forgoddsake; social media is an intrinsic part of culture now, and one need only not to opt into following notable people if they feel it's cheapening something."

I agree with you, Kad, but whatI take issue is managementpressuring actors into promoting shows through social media, and I can tell you that that is happening - a lot. That is not an actors job."

If a show wants their actors to promote it, that’s one thing, but if agents and managers are forcing their clients to get social media even if they don’t want it, that’s something I don’t like. I guess the world is changing, but actors should be allowed to make their own choices with stuff like this, especially because social media can blur the lines between personal and professional life.

[Babe_Williams]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 3:34pm

Laura Osnes and Corey Cott are two who come to mind that use IG live quite a bit and are both delightful on their social media presence. Like with any industry, there are those who don't want to do social media. who do it, but not well and who fully engage. I don't think you can draw generalizations about any actor based on whether they use social media or not.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 4:03pm

ghostlight2 said: "I agree with you, Kad, but whatI take issue is managementpressuring actors into promoting shows through social media, and I can tell you that that is happening - a lot. That is not an actors job."

True. Also, being "likable" as a person on social media has nothing to do with the talent of an actor. It's 2 opposite careers. This cheapens the craft because audiences (youngsters) would rather see a movie with someone in it who posted a picture of himself sitting on the toilet with a peanut butter sandwich in his hand instead of an actual good actor and basing the urge to see someone on that.

[Dave28282]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 4:18pm

Elegance101 said: "managers are forcing their clients to get social media even if they don’t want it, that’s something I don’t like. I guess the world is changing, but actors should be allowed to make their own choices with stuff like this, especially because social media can blur the lines between personal and professional life."

True. After thinking about it, this is exactly the point, the very blurred line between personal and professional life on social media. I think there should be 2 platforms, one for professionals/networking and one for personal/private stuff. At the moment it is one big ant nest where everyone is crawling over eachother. For fans wonderful as they can get close to their celebrity crushes, but the disappearing of this line is not safe or really beneficial for the artists in the long term. It even reached a point where people don't see the difference anymore and actually think people are stars by just having an instagram as a career. I see that as private stuff. I really feel that many real artists should have a more separated place on these platforms.

[Jay Lerner-Z]

Posted: 11/21/18 at 4:39pm

Would you say this about Bette Midler, Donna Murphy, Lin Manuel Miranda, Audra McDonald, Laura Benanti, etc? All of them are fairly active on social media."

1) Midler comes off as a shrill lunatic on twitter, not the best example.

 

I'm pretty sure Bruce Vilanch writes and posts all of "Bette"s tweets. He has written her jokes for decades, why would twitter be any different? If she's that witty, what did she need him for to begin with?

The truth is out there.