Why Celebrity Scandals Fill the Void When Real News Slows Down
When the world is in crisis, celebrity news fades
One thing I have always found fascinating about the news cycle is how it shifts depending on what else is happening in the world. When there is a war, a political crisis, or a major global event, the usual churn of celebrity scandals, PR disasters, and influencer controversies slows down. It is not that these stories stop happening, but they become filler news rather than front-page material. Unless a celebrity story is massive, something that shifts culture or involves a serious crime, media outlets are not going to prioritise it when real-world events demand attention.
And yet, some people will always actively seek it out, prioritising a headline about a pop star’s new relationship over, say, an escalating conflict that could affect millions.
This pattern is particularly noticeable in August, which has long been known as the "silly season" in news. It is a time when politics slows down, courts go into recess, and many journalists, politicians, and decision-makers take time off. Without the usual stream of government policy, legal drama, or high-stakes financial news, media outlets scramble for content. And when there is nothing substantial to report, celebrity stories suddenly feel more important. If you start noticing an overload of celebrity news in the summer months, it is not because there is suddenly more scandal, there is just less competition for attention.
Why people love a downfall
Celebrity news is an escape for many. It is light. It is digestible. It does not require much emotional investment beyond fleeting outrage, admiration, or mockery. It gives people something to discuss, something to have an opinion on, something to joke about. And, in a way, it makes people feel better about their own lives. More often than not, people are jealous of celebrity lifestyles, the money, the houses, the privilege, so when something goes wrong, when shit hits the fan, there is a sense of schadenfreude. The same way some love to pick apart their friends’ relationships or gossip about people they know, celebrity scandals provide that same sense of superiority but on a much larger scale.
If there is a messy divorce, an alleged cheating scandal, or a feud, people will take sides with absolute conviction, even when they know very little about the situation beyond a few headlines and tweets. It does not matter how private the public figures try to keep it. If there is even a sliver of information out there, people will run with it. There is this strange entitlement to celebrity lives, as if the second someone becomes famous, their personal struggles become fair game for public dissection. The irony is that if the same level of scrutiny were applied to the average person’s relationships, finances, or family issues, they would crumble under it. But when it is a celebrity, people feel no guilt weighing in, convinced that fame makes someone immune to normal human emotions.
Public vs private: the trade-off in celebrity PR
This is something I tell my clients all the time. No one in the general public has a right to their private life, but if they choose to voice their private life in a public domain, they are inviting opinions and discussion. That is the trade-off. You cannot expect silence when you are the one starting the conversation. The moment a statement is made, whether it is a personal revelation, a social media post, or a tell-all interview, the door is open. That does not mean the level of scrutiny is fair or justified, but in PR, perception is reality. What you say publicly dictates how much room you leave for speculation.
I have sat with public figures feuding, whether it is colleagues at war or a couple fresh from a breakup, trying to outdo each other in damage. They want to go full die-hard, drag the other publicly, expose every flaw, every betrayal, and make sure they come out looking like the righteous victim. In that moment of peak anger, it feels like the only option. It is natural to want to destroy someone’s life when you feel like they have destroyed yours. But my job is to get them to take a step back, to look at the long-term consequences.
When you go scorched earth, you do not just burn the other person, you set fire to yourself in the process. They also set fire to family, children, friends, and anyone else caught in the crossfire. The satisfaction of a well-placed hit fades quickly, but the damage it does to your own reputation, your credibility, and how you are perceived lingers. I walk my clients through the risks, helping them understand that even if they are in the right, the way they handle a crisis will shape their career for years to come.
Why people engage with scandals while ignoring real crises
People love a downfall, and celebrity scandals offer that in a way that feels both entertaining and oddly reassuring. There is a strange comfort for people in seeing the rich and famous make terrible decisions because it reinforces the idea that wealth does not guarantee wisdom, stability, or happiness. When you spend your life watching people live in multimillion-pound houses, take private jets, and holiday in the Maldives, it creates a natural sense of imbalance. There is almost a subconscious belief that if someone has all that privilege, they should at least have to suffer some consequences along the way. Public scrutiny becomes the price they pay.
This is why scandal and humiliation feel like a form of social levelling. If their highs are unreachable, then their lows must be extreme too. It is not about actively wanting to see someone suffer, it is about the illusion of fairness.
Media priorities: what is easiest to consume wins
Meanwhile, real crises unfold in the background, mostly unnoticed. Right now, Palestinians are being massacred in a genocide. Sudan is under attack. Yemen has been in crisis for years with little Western media coverage. The Democratic Republic of Congo continues to experience violence, displacement, and humanitarian disaster. These are not distant, abstract issues. They are unfolding in real time, affecting millions of lives. And yet, some people know more about the latest influencer drama than they do about these conflicts. That is not accidental.
Major news outlets rightly prioritise war, political crises, and global events. But at the same time, there are entire media ecosystems built for escapism… publications like The Daily Mail and TMZ that thrive on celebrity drama because they know that is what their audience engages with most. Their priority is entertainment, not hard news.
This is why, when you see wall-to-wall coverage of a celebrity scandal, it depends on where you are looking. More serious news sources will still focus on war, politics, and global issues, while entertainment-focused outlets will continue pushing celebrity drama because they know it generates clicks. The problem is, for many people, those escapist outlets are their main source of information. If you rely on them, you will naturally see more celebrity news than global crises.
What this means for public attention
This is something I see play out in real time. I often commentate on crisis PR for the news, and I have been rightly dropped last minute multiple times when something actually serious happens in the world. When a story is needed to fill airtime, I get the call. When a major crisis unfolds, I do not. I have gone from being prepped to speak about the PR strategy behind a celebrity controversy to receiving a last-minute cancellation because a war, a political scandal, or an unfolding disaster has rightly taken over the agenda. That is how I know, firsthand, that these stories are space fillers. They are only the priority when nothing else is demanding attention.
So here is the real challenge: when do we stop letting these stories take over? When do we start making conscious choices about where we direct our attention? If you find yourself more concerned about a celebrity’s PR disaster than the real crises happening globally, it is worth asking why. The media can only serve what people are willing to consume. And while escapism is valid, it should never come at the cost of ignoring reality.