‘Russell Brand’s a joke, right?’ Contrasting perceptions of Russell Brand’s legitimacy in grassroots and electoral politics

Abstract

Russell Brand’s interventions in the political field have taken multiple forms since he famously told Jeremy Paxman in October 2013 that he had never voted. The following year Brand joined the campaign to save the New Era estate in East London, seeking to ‘amplify’ the voices of residents by attracting positive mainstream media coverage and promoting their cause to his large social media audience. This audience, supposedly outside the ‘empty stadium’ of the mainstream campaign, was Labour leader Ed Miliband’s justification for being interviewed and endorsed by Brand during the 2015 election campaign. While the attention Brand received in both cases demonstrates his celebrity capital in the United Kingdom, he also faced contestation. Brand’s wealth complicated his claims to represent housing campaigners, while during the election his background as a working-class comedian conflicted with formal political norms. Using Saward’s theory of representative claims, this article explores how Brand made claims to represent citizens in each context and how these were evaluated. Brand’s negotiation of his status and the response he received in different political contexts is analysed drawing on fieldwork, Brand’s social media and YouTube content, and media coverage of his interventions. I argue that while Brand’s celebrity capital allowed him to work across the fields of entertainment and politics with ease, his status in the political field is dependent on successfully making claims to represent citizens.