The internet has changed the definition of celebrity. When the world has a forum to complain about everything, can you be neutral on anything? Ed Sheeran is an interesting case study. Because in the 2010s, he was simply a nice guy who wrote love songs. There was nothing that complicated about him.

But, in an age where you can scroll through social media and see people being bombed, then pass by someone’s interview for a movie premiere, being a celebrity—not even just a celebrity but an entertainer—has become something different.

Long gone are the days of the 2000s stars where you could just be famous for being famous. In a world that seems like it cares less and less, people want to know that the people they follow actually stand for something instead of being completely out of touch when it comes to real world events.

Sheeran notoriously doesn’t have a phone and stays off social media. This seems to be a reoccurring theme with celebrities who wish to remain “A-political.” That way, they can claim they don’t know what’s going on based on that.

Except, if you aren’t keeping yourself appraised of world events when you have access to it immediately, it doesn’t come off as neutral anymore. It comes off as out of touch. The modern fan wants a celebrity that actually stands for something.

Which, interestingly enough, is something that celebrities have always done. As much as people would like to claim that they didn’t. Many of the people we think of as legends didn’t become legends simply because they had talent.

Often, they were using their talent to draw attention to causes they cared about.

And that’s how they became legends and not just another footnote in pop culture that ends up largely forgotten.