Justin Timberlake is named most high-impact celebrity for charity

wenn5406625

Quick: which celebrity is the first to come to mind when you think of charitable causes? I know for me, that person was Angelina Jolie. But according to The Daily Beast, when it comes to actual dollar amounts and awareness raised, the number one high-impact celeb is none other than Justin Timberlake. Sure, Angie is on the list, but she’s taking a back seat to Justin, Madonna, and even Pamela Anderson in terms of actual funds and awareness raised. Who knew?

For those to whom much is given, much is required. That explains why every celebrity from George Clooney to Jessica Simpson has a pet cause.

But how much is a celebrity’s affiliation really worth? How much impact, other than their own Q rating, do they have on the good causes they promote?

In a month in which 62 percent of Americans are planning to support charities, The Daily Beast undertook what we believe to be the most exhaustive study ever on the effects of celebrity on charities. We kept score using the only system that matters to those seeking the resources to help others: dollars. Celebrity, after all, has unique economic value. Famous faces are used to sell everything from magazines to movie tickets to Mazdas.

Here’s how we calculated our rankings. First, we chose 50 of the biggest celebrities in the world who are allied with a nonprofit, either as a member of its board or advisory committee, an ambassador, or the face of a campaign. These names represent a healthy cross-section of fame and influence. While many celebrities support more than one charity, we only judged the primary charity for each celebrity—this exercise is designed to see how much impact a celebrity has on a specific nonprofit, rather than how charitable they are overall, or how much they contribute awareness to a more all-encompassing cause.

From there, we tallied how much awareness they produced for their favored nonprofit in print, television, and online, and also calculated any personal donations to the charity, since cash is the most direct impact of all.

Specifically, VMS, a leading media-monitoring firm, pulled broadcast television mentions of each celebrity and associated charity in the last two years and calculated the corresponding value of the mention or segment. We then averaged those years to determine similar impact. Similarly, using Lexis-Nexis, we pulled all newspaper and magazine clips over the last two years that mentioned both the celebrity and the charity. Another top news-monitoring company, BurellesLuce, provided estimates for the value of each clip as follows: Newspapers with daily circulation over 600,000, $35,000; newspapers with daily circulation between 600,000 and 200,000, $25,000; and newspapers with circulation under 200,000, $15,000. Magazines were designated with similar benchmarks. Magazines with circulation greater than 2 million, $35,000; magazines with circulation between 1-2 million, $25,000; magazines with circulation less than 1 million, $15,000. We then averaged that figure. Lastly, we considered Google results within the last year to measure online presence. Each result was valued at $1.

While many celebrities donated anonymously, we reached out to the publicists, lawyers, and agents of the celebrities on our list to accurately reflect the personal donations to the charity. We also combed media reports, The Giving Back fund’s annual list of the 30 largest celebrity donors, and NOZA’s database of charitable gifts.

There are some considerations to take into account regarding the results. We only valued broadcast television and press in American markets. Many of the charities and celebrities included in our list have significant international presence, but the values only attempt to measure impact in the U.S. Additionally, some relationships between celebrities and charities have spanned longer and shorter terms, but only the last two years of the partnership are reflected in our data.

The results are fascinating. Celebrities like Justin Timberlake, Madonna, and Angelina Jolie deliver millions of dollars of value each year to their pet causes. Other big names like Paris Hilton, though, barely make enough of a dent to justify sending a limo over. The bottom line: A famous face isn’t enough—true impact requires a commitment.

1. Justin Timberlake
Charity: Shriners Hospital for Children
Annual Impact: $9,262,381
2. Madonna
Charity: Raising Malawi
Annual Impact: $5,540,068
3. Pamela Anderson
Charity: PETA
Annual Impact: $4,840,168
4. Oprah Winfrey
Charity: Oprah’s Angel Network
Annual Impact: $3,973,870
5. Bono
Charity: ONE Foundation
Annual Impact: $3,598,313
6. Angelina Jolie
Charity: UNHCR
Annual Impact: $3,015,070
7. Rihanna
Charity: UNICEF
Annual Impact: $2,305,743
8. George Clooney
Charity: United Nations
Annual Impact: $2,184,500
9. Salma Hayek
Charity: UNICEF
Annual Impact: $1,620,959
10. Shakira
Charity: UNICEF
Annual Impact: $1,284,431

[From The Daily Beast]

Rounding out the Top 20 are Charlize Theron (for PETA), Brad Pitt (for Not on Our Watch, the organization he co-founded with George Clooney), Orlando Bloom (for UNICEF), Sharon Stone (for AmFAR), Denzel Washington (for Boys & Girls Clubs), Scarlett Johansson (for Oxfam), Jessica Simpson (for Operation Smile), Sarah Jessica Parker (for UNICEF), Harrison Ford (for Conservation International) and Jessica Alba (for Declare Yourself). Were there some on this list that surprised you? I have to admit, I had no idea Justin Timberlake was so involved with the Shriners. And I thought Jennifer Aniston would be higher on the list, because she’s been very active with St. Jude Children’s Hospital. But I suppose it’s not just about who is the most famous- it’s about how much money and awareness their famous face can actually draw.

Note By Kaiser: The only thing that caught my eye was the figure listed for Madonna and Raising Malawi. Many different news sources have investigated Raising Malawi and whether the money people think they’re donating to that “charity” is actually going to it, or whether it’s going straight into Kabbalah coffers. Raising Malawi isn’t even listed as a charity status, and there any many indications that millions of dollars raised for the “charity” have gone M.I.A.

Justin Timberlake announcing the Golden Globe noms on December 15, 2009. Madonna at the ‘Nine’ premiere on the same day. Credit: WENN.

wenn5407037

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

17 Responses to “Justin Timberlake is named most high-impact celebrity for charity”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. snowball says:

    Hmm. Some I didn’t expect at all, some I thought would be there are at the bottom and some ranked higher than I’d imagine. You really would think St. Angie’d be higher up. Well, congrats Justin – and thanks, the Shriners Hospital is a good one.

    In other breaking news, Justin Timberlake has been named “Cutest Guy Who Turned Into Super Nerd.”

  2. Firestarter says:

    This proves the point that you do not have to have your mug all over the place and headlines trumpeting your good deeds every other day.

    I am really surprised that Justin Timberlake is number one. I had no idea he was that active. That to me, shows he is not concerned with the amount of press he gets, he just cares about the causes. While I applaud others who do raise money and donate their time and funds to charities, I also think that they also enjoy the press it gives them in the process, particularly in the case of (yes, I will be slammed for this) the Pitt/Jolies. I believe they are passionate about their charities, but I also have noticed that we hear much more about their charitable causes when a series of negative stories comes out.

    I am sure there will be those that insist this is all wrong, but in the end, just be happy with the fact that so many celebs do as much as they do. It doesn’t matter who numero uno is, just that people are helping. It’s nice to see someone get recognition for their work that they do fairly under the radar.

  3. BitterBetty says:

    Good for him, but… has he always been this ugly?

  4. WTF?!? says:

    “Other big names like Paris Hilton, though, barely make enough of a dent to justify sending a limo over. ”

    Point well taken, but this is a list of the celebs who are spokespeople/helping to draw attention to a cause or charity, not a list of the biggest celebrity donors and/or fundraisers.

    Not that Paris Hilton would be on that list, either.

    @BitterBetty
    Yes. Yes, he has.

  5. Lantana says:

    I was surprised that Jenny McCarthy wasn’t on the list. She’s the 2nd person I thought of after AJ.

  6. LolaBella says:

    @Firestarter: Spot.On.

    @BitterBetty: No he hasn’t. He’s going through this fug ubergeek phase and it has really killed his Pretty (I blame Jessica Biel). LOL.

    Oh and BTW, Justin, this affected ‘serious actor’ persona you are trying to cultivate isn’t going to convince us that you are a good actor. An Emmy Award for a song called ‘D*ck in a Box’ is NOT an Oscar.

    Get back in the studio and make another album like FutureSex/LoveSounds, that is where your true talent lies.

    Good on you for your charitable activity.

  7. lucy2 says:

    That’s great that Justin is so active and has such a positive impact. I’ve never heard much about it either, he must keep it fairly quiet but very efficient. And there’s a huge difference between him and the next highest person.
    I don’t think I would donate to Madonna’s charity, sounds like there are too many unanswered questions and I prefer charities that are independently rated. I also wouldn’t donate to PETA – I support other animal welfare charities, but not them.
    I’ve heard a number of very positive things about Shakira and charity work.

  8. princess pea says:

    How on earth is Pam Anderson on this list? Having her attached to a cause seems like it would scare money away, frankly.

  9. Samantha says:

    I still think he is hot, after 10 years of oogling. So far he has done no wrong, appearance wise.

  10. Sumodo says:

    JT? What a surprise! This made my holidays brighter.

  11. Su says:

    OMG Firestarter, you took the words right out of my mouth!!!
    ‘headlines trumpeting good deeds’ is exactly how i feel when it comes to the you-know-whos, so it feels nice to see someone who isn’t necessarily immediately identified with charity, come out on top (not suggesting that its a competition or anything…)After all, as stated, it is the most money made, that counts.

    btw Justin is NOT ugly, he just prefers to dress that way, dont ask me why…

    and ANOTHER thing MAJOR lolz at lolabella’s comment, you are sooo right, get back in the studio Justin!

  12. Liz says:

    Firestarter and Su, this actually DOES prove people need to have their mugs out there every day, that is the main part of the methodology.

    “Specifically, VMS, a leading media-monitoring firm, pulled broadcast television mentions of each celebrity and associated charity in the last two years and calculated the corresponding value of the mention or segment. We then averaged those years to determine similar impact. Similarly, using Lexis-Nexis, we pulled all newspaper and magazine clips over the last two years that mentioned both the celebrity and the charity. Another top news-monitoring company, BurellesLuce, provided estimates for the value of each clip as follows: Newspapers with daily circulation over 600,000, $35,000; newspapers with daily circulation between 600,000 and 200,000, $25,000; and newspapers with circulation under 200,000, $15,000. Magazines were designated with similar benchmarks. Magazines with circulation greater than 2 million, $35,000; magazines with circulation between 1-2 million, $25,000; magazines with circulation less than 1 million, $15,000. We then averaged that figure. Lastly, we considered Google results within the last year to measure online presence. Each result was valued at $1.”

  13. Emily says:

    @princess pea, she’s been a face of PETA for years. And they apparently calculated how much awareness they bring to the cause as well.

  14. Diane gillan says:

    Good for him. As for raising malawi..it’s madonna’s so she ABSOLUTELY HAS AN AGENDA and if it was registered, she’d have to fork over some of that green she so loves. She doesn’t belong on any charitable lists

  15. Kylie says:

    Wow. Thanks for this posting. I always thought he was an arrogant twat but maybe Im wrong.
    Sorry Justin. 🙂

  16. Lee says:

    I think it says a lot about personal prejudices when someone rags on Angelina for having FIVE whole people give more money to charities than she does. because, I mean, she should be listed as first, not sixth. clearly, this means she’s a fake attention-whore that isn’t as charitable as she seems.

    isn’t it better to be photographed and followed while doing charity work than be photographed and followed while getting starbucks or dressing well?

  17. Jasmine says:

    Why the hell is Matt Damon not even mentioned?He pops up first on my list. :/