What can I say – I like her. Lady Gaga’s level of comfort with who she is definitely makes her worthy of being noticed. And noticed she has been – amongst other accolades, Lady Gaga made it to number 44 on the New Statesman’s list of “People Who Matter in 2010”. This list recognizes individuals “with global influence and the power to change our world.”

Lady Gaga definitely has global influence: she has her record breaking sales and digital achievements, but also has embraced her role as “champion and heroine” to millions of Little Monsters who consider her “the ultimate self-professed freak.”

The article notes, “While she is mainstream enough to sell huge quantities of records and duet with Beyoncé (on the nine-minute song ‘Telephone,’ whose video features prison bondage and lesbian kisses), she has established herself as an ambassador for the marginalised, the lonely, the misunderstood.”

My question is: is Lady Gaga, just by being Lady Gaga, doing enough for the marginalised, the lonely and the midunderstood, when she exists within a society in which “passivity is bred”, within which “a desire to be entertained is nurtured from childhood”, thus “cultivating generations willing to  be led by whoever proves skillful at appealing to superficial emotions”?

Read the full article at NewStatesman.com