In October 2023, Forbes declared that Taylor Swift had officially become a billionaire thanks to the earnings from her Eras tour and the value of her music catalog. No one disputes that she got where she is because of her unparalleled talent, relentless work ethic, and passionate support from millions of Swifties. But does this justify her fortune? Maybe not, say some philosophers concerned over whether any individual, including Swift, should be able to amass such wealth. They question the fairness of a system that permits vast wealth accumulation and argue that luck and systemic advantages often play a role. Those who take the opposing viewpoint point to philosopher Robert Nozick, who says if someone acquires wealth through just means without violating others' rights, they are entitled to that wealth. To that way of thinking, Swift's and similar fortunes are a deserved reward for their societal contributions. On March 5, award-winning debate series Open to Debate (formerly known as Intelligence Squared U.S.) will tape a virtual debate on the question: “Does Taylor Swift Deserve Her Billion Dollar Fortune?”
Arguing “YES” is University of Richmond Political Philosopher and Chair in Ethics and Democratic Values Jessica Flanigan, author of the paper "Wealth Without Limits: In Defense of Billionaires” and an upcoming book about the philosophy behind Taylor Swift’s music. Arguing “NO” is Utrecht University's Ethics Institute Chair Ingrid Robeyns, author of the book Limitarianism: The Case Against Extreme Wealth.
While the debate will not be released widely until March 15 via public radio, video and podcast, press are invited to attend and ask questions at the live virtual taping on Tuesday, March 5 at 12:00 PM ET. Media can email raypadgett@shorefire.com for virtual access.
|
|
For more information on Open to Debate, please contact Ray Padgett (raypadgett@shorefire.com) or Mark Satlof (msatlof@shorefire.com) at Shore Fire Media.