Borkowski Media Trends: Liam Payne & Toxic Fame | More...
PLUS: Tuchel & the FA's Foreign Policy | Russell's re-Brand | Victoria's Secret Identity Crisis
Liam Payne and Toxic Fame
The world was shaken this week by the tragic, untimely death of Liam Payne, famed worldwide for his work with boyband One Direction. Payne, who had long battled mental health issues and substance abuse, fell from a hotel balcony in Buenos Aires.
A guest at the star’s hotel told the Daily Mail “there was something a bit desperate about him” before the series of incidents that led to his death.
Payne's passing appears to be yet another lesson about the toxic nature of fame (especially at a young age) and its potentially destructive effects on lives.
One Direction, formed in 2010 on reality singing contest X Factor, consisted of five teenage boys—Harry Styles, Niall Horan, Zayn Malik, Louis Tomlinson, and Liam Payne—who were between the ages of 16 and 18 when they joined the group. Under the guidance of Simon Cowell, the band quickly achieved international fame.
The tragic death of Payne offers a glimpse into the dark side of fame that many celebrities face. While social media has made it easier for stars to share their lives and interact with fans, it has not eliminated the pressure or the harassment that often comes with being in the public eye.
Tiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
Rising star Chappell Roan recently spoke out about the downside of her own fame, sharing her experiences on TikTok. Some critics argued that fame inevitably comes with a loss of privacy. However, her case, like Payne's, highlights how fame can quickly become overwhelming and dangerous when there isn’t sufficient support for those navigating it.
Payne’s death is a stark reminder of the entertainment industry's responsibility to its stars. While many celebrities experience fame on their own, how they cope is often influenced by the people around them—managers, PRs, family, band members and other professionals who may or may not prioritise their well-being.
Already the recriminations in the wake of Liam Payne’s tragedy have started, former X Factor judge Sharon Osbourne turning on the music industry (and her old frenemy Cowell), summarising: “we all let you down”.
Many commentators are now calling urgently for the industry to reassess how it supports the mental health and safety of its stars. While Payne’s untimely death is a tragedy, it could also serve as a wake-up call for the entertainment industry and the public.
Will the FA’s Foreign Policy Pay Off?
The furore surrounding the FA's decision to appoint Thomas Tuchel, a GERMAN manager, to the ENGLAND managerial post was, despite this allegedly being the year of our lord 2024, to be expected.
You don't need to follow football to know it's a tremendously difficult job; fans' expectation creates an immensely hostile environment for the manager and their coaching staff, and a significant part of Tuchel's job will be protecting the players from the noise.
We saw this immediately with ‘Rule Englandia’ culture warriors, chief among them Nigel Farage, calling for an English manager; an issue we'll see develop in the media around Remembrance Day over the next set of internationals. Simply put, there'll be no shortage of criticism coming Tuchel's way just for his nationality.
So, was this the right decision? Unsurprisingly, football is a results business. It's a cliche that scratches the surface of how brutal management can be, especially international management. A club manager can make a few mistakes throughout the domestic season and ride the variance over a 38-game cycle. But the England manager has a measly seven games at a major competition to go for glory. An unfortunate red card, a refereeing mistake, untimely injuries or a missed penalty are often the margins that break a nation's spirits. These factors are more relevant than usual given the FA's decision to award Tuchel only an 18-month contract - the pressure is on.
The good news for England fans: these conditions are perfect for a Thomas Tuchel smash-and-grab.
Tuchel's record in knockout competitions is exceptional, winning over 70% of his matches. He won the Champions League with Chelsea and was unfortunate not to go all the way with PSG - the timing of Covid severely disrupted his side's momentum.
He's a brilliant tactician, a motivator and a big personality. The latter has often landed him in hot water - falling out with other coaches, his players and his higher-ups in squabbles over transfer policy - the latter at least he won't have to worry about for the national team.
So while no World Cup-winning team has done so with a 'foreign' manager, Tuchel is primed to take one of England's most talented squads ever all the way. He usually builds teams around his no.10s - the attacking position behind the striker, occasionally opting for two, e.g. playing Neymar and Di Maria in similar positions at PSG. One of his first challenges will be deciding how he unleashes Foden, Bellingham, and Palmer.
The coverage surrounding this appointment is just noise to fill the gap until Tuchel takes charge of his first game. He will be judged on his team's performance, and from then on, it'll all come down to the World Cup. If he wins it, his nationality will be nothing more than a small footnote and a cheap headline. Game on!
Russell’s latest re-Brand
Celebrities broadly fall into three categories: those in the first see fame as an unintended downside of their treasured work, and skirt the spotlight; those in the second see fame as a means to the end of unlocking opportunities for the career they desire (and don’t mind the lifestyle that comes with it!); those in the third see fame – and a luxury lifestyle- as the end in itself.
So, to which of these categories does Russell Brand belong? Few who remember his rise to fame as a comedian, television presenter, Hollywood actor and left-wing activist would have predicted that before his 50th birthday he’d be hawking amulets that protect the wearer from “evil energies” including wi-fi signal for nearly £200.
Tiktok failed to load.Enable 3rd party cookies or use another browser
Brand’s transformation has been less of a Kafkaesque metamorphosis and more of a series of lurching Cronenbergian mutations of his public persona. These include his shift to the political right, accelerated thanks to his status as an anti-vaxxer during COVID, and his born-again Christianity which came in the wake of allegations of sexual misconduct.
Brand once told the Cambridge Union that fame tasted “like ashes” in his mouth but ironically his tectonic shifts of conscious and ideology have come at low points in his career. Whether just a natural drift from centre stage, or the threat of criminal proceedings against him, Brand’s transformations often feel calculated to retain the adulation of the crowd – even if it’s a smaller and less mainstream crowd each time.
For better or worse Brand understands something of modern celebrity: fame in a niche is still fame, and the fandom that comes with it can plentiful and lucrative if you’re cynical enough to grab it.
But Brand’s foray into the social media equivalent of an infomercial to plug his amulet draws unfortunate parallels with Milo Yiannopoulos, another one-time darling of the online right who turned to Christianity as his career faltered. When Milo’s demagoguery went too far, and he was effectively cancelled, he attempted to reinvent himself as a Christian influencer, which led to the much mocked nadir of his career before he bottomed out of public life altogether, selling Virgin Mary statues on the Christian fundamentalist equivalent of QVC.
Brand’s reinvention appears to be going a bit better, but he faces the reputational danger that his willingness to lend his public persona to the sale of a novelty product gives the impression that fame and lifestyle are the be-all-and-end-all, as opposed the means of advancing his career and purpose.
Victoria’s Secret Identity Crisis
Millennials can rejoice—Victoria's Secret's beloved fashion event has made its much-anticipated return. The Victoria's Secret Fashion Show, once named the fashion event of the year, was back this week in New York after a six-year hiatus. However, the revival failed to live up to expectations, leaving many to wonder whether it was necessary to bring it back at all.
The Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show was a cultural phenomenon in the 2010s. Performers begged to be part of the show, models dreamed of becoming “Angels,” teenage girls (and boys!) stayed up to live-stream the runway, and celebrities flocked to watch in person. The entire brand celebrated push-up bras, cleavage, thongs, and body positivity —but only if you were a size 0. 2010 was the era of thin models with shiny hair and abs strutting down the runway in angel wings. But fast forward to 2024, and it seems like the once “cool” views have now become “cancelled” views.
A fitting comparison can be made with Abercrombie & Fitch (A&F). The brand faced a PR crisis after being criticised for promoting an exclusionary image and sexualising teenage employees and models. Following the release of the 2022 documentary White Hot: The Rise & Fall of Abercrombie & Fitch, the brand’s reputation crumbled. In the aftermath, A&F reinvented itself, shifting its focus to quality denim and inclusive marketing. The transformation has been positive, showing how a brand can successfully evolve by learning from its past. This does not happen overnight, but after enough time the A&F brand now seems fresh and modern again.
This brings us to Victoria's Secret. The attempt to resurrect the Fashion Show was marked by a desperate bid to regain relevance, enlisting the help of icons like Kate Moss, her daughter Lila Moss, Tyra Banks, and even Cher. The big names, however, were not enough to salvage the show from the deeper problems that plagued it.
Despite the celebrity endorsement, the designs fell short. Critics observed that the use of cheap materials was all too obvious, with even Tyra Banks struggling to elevate the look of what appeared to be knock-off Shein glitter leggings with a cape. If a supermodel can’t make these clothes work, how is the average customer supposed to wear them with confidence?
The show reflected a brand struggling with an identity crisis. In its heyday, Victoria's Secret sold a dream—a fantasy of beauty and glamour. Today, with cheap designs and materials, it feels more like a confusing nightmare. The company seems to be forgetting that its biggest supporters are now the women who watched the original shows in the 2010s, and they’ve grown up. So must the brand.