On Sept. 17, “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” was taken off the air by the Walt Disney-owned ABC network after Kimmel made a comment about Charlie Kirk’s assassin. The comment, which was quite tame, angered President Donald Trump so much that the head of the Federal Communications Commission threatened ABC, saying on a podcast that “we can do this the easy way or the hard way.”

People were immediately concerned by this threat to freedom of speech, something Kirk himself stood for in life. Among those concerned were other famous people.

About 400 celebrities signed on to a letter organized by the American Civil Liberties Union condemning Kimmel’s removal from airwaves. Signees included big names, such as Robert De Niro, Jennifer Aniston and Michael Keaton.

“Regardless of our political affiliation, or whether we engage in politics or not, we all love our country,” the letter reads. “We also share the belief that our voices should never be silenced by those in power – because if it happens to one of us, it happens to all of us.”

I’m not sure that this letter is what led to Kimmel’s return on Sept. 23. While I’d like to think that individual voices have just as much power as the federal government to sway executives, the decision from ABC probably had more to do with its bottom line than unhappy actors and musicians.

At the same time, I'm fearful that we are becoming a country that suppresses dissent. If Kimmel can be punished for a comment that's hardly controversial, how will the rest of us be punished for what we say?

We are less than a century out from the Red Scare, during which celebrities accused of being communists were blacklisted from Hollywood. There’s a real possibility that we continue to see censorship, whether it be self-imposed or directed by the government, in the next several years. And if the rich and famous are unable to speak their minds, where does that leave the rest of us?

Celebrities supporting Palestine have turned the tide

This wasn’t the first time in September that actors and musicians had made a large-scale statement about an issue affecting the United States. During the annual Emmy Awards, several stars made statements in support of the Palestinian people as Israel continues its war with Hamas. Several people wore red Artist4Ceasefire pins on the red carpet. Comedian Megan Stalter carried a purse with a sign that read “Ceasefire!” attached to it. “Hacks” star Hannah Einbinder, a fan of the Philadelphia Eagles, ended her acceptance speech for winning supporting actress for comedy with the line, “Go birds, (expletive) ICE and free Palestine.”

This outpouring of support for Palestinians followed a statement signed by more than 4,000 people in the industry, stating that they would not work with Israeli institutions and others complicit in “genocide and apartheid against the Palestinian people.”

In this instance, celebrities are clearly invested in the issue beyond internet clout. They actually care about the cause and are doing something actionable to stand up for what they believe in.

I don’t know if it moves the general public to care more about what’s happening in Gaza, but it does make it more socially acceptable to speak on a topic that was formerly considered too complicated to touch. It's a bellwether for what we're willing to talk about in the mainstream, and it provides a sense of safety for the regular American who wants to speak out in support of Palestinians.

Does the public care about celebrity statements? Not so much.

On the other hand, it doesn’t seem like the public cares about what celebrities say or do in support of causes.

Celebrity endorsements, for example, seem to carry very little weight in the grand scheme of things. If they did, Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris in the 2024 election would have made more of a difference last November. Other celebrities who endorsed Harris didn’t seem to make a splash, either. Even Oprah Winfrey's endorsement of presidential candidate Barack Obama prior to the 2008 election had little impact on the race – only 30% of people surveyed by the Pew Research Center said that her endorsement would influence their vote.

At the same time, celebrities who are able to put money behind their verbal support seem to have some influence. Elon Musk, for example, heavily influenced the 2024 election by spending more than $290 million on pro-Trump messaging. And of course, Trump's own celebrity and public perception as a "self-made" billionaire can't be understated as an influence on his popularity.

When I began writing this column, I felt completely different about the impact of celebrity opinions. But upon seeing the Kimmel controversy play out and the way celebrities possibly influenced that, I feel very strongly that celebrities expressing their opinions is important for our democracy.

I’m still skeptical that they can achieve real change. I also fear a world where celebrities are afraid to speak out for what they believe is right out of fear of losing career opportunities.

Even if they don’t achieve real change, celebrities have a right to speak out just like any of us do. And, like the rest of us, these declarations are best paired with action.

Follow USA TODAY columnist Sara Pequeño on X, formerly Twitter: @sara__pequeno

This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: 'Hollywood elites' aren't controlling anything. But they can change the conversation. | Opinion

Reporting by Sara Pequeño, USA TODAY / USA TODAY

USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect