As the children of famed Gen Xers age into adolescence, a prevalent discourse has aged alongside them. The media’s fascination and accompanying conversation surrounding ‘Nepo Babies’ are at a current peak. ‘Nepo Baby’, the short-hand nickname for an individual who has achieved their status, wealth, or career solely through nepotism, is an almost inescapable idea on the internet. The term references the more well-known topic of nepotism, where the kin of people in positions of power receive advantages, killing healthy competition among eligible candidates. Yet, despite being one of the least studied and most ineffectively comprehended topics, nepotism remains a point of conversation. In December, New York magazine announced that 2022 was the “Year of the Nepo Baby.” But nepotism is not a new concept, begging the question of what is catalyzing such an extreme fascination with the privileged birth of Hollywood royalty.
The conversation around nepotism babies is often determined by a new show gaining mainstream relevance or a new actor receiving a lead role with little to no experience. In February of 2022, the conversation was sparked by Leslie Mann and Judd Apatow’s daughter Maude Apatow, who received a breakout role in Euphoria; in March 2022, it was about Zoe Kravitz, daughter of Lenny Kravitz and Lisa Bonet, who was cast in The Batman. There seems to be an observable trend where a new role is handed to a child of an industry-connected individual, inspiring “outrage and self-righteousness over who gets opportunities in the entertainment industry.” The conversation surrounding nepotism babies is often a superficial analysis of a problem that permeates every industry–yet is too often only referenced regarding celebrities. Possibly, we are fascinated with Hollywood nepotism because it simply reflects the larger system of generational wealth and inherited privilege in modern society.
Studies from the Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation found that, by age 30, about 22% of sons will be working for the same employer at the same time as their fathers. A 2021 report found that dynastic families control a staggering amount of wealth in the United States. In 2020, America’s 50 wealthiest billionaire family dynasties held $1.2 trillion in assets. This figure is illuminating when compared to the $2.5 trillion held by the bottom half of all U.S. households, a staggering 54 million families. Moreover, dynastic family wealth has grown ten times the rate of ordinary families. It is a persistent system that has only become increasingly persistent over time. Of the top 50 wealthiest billionaire family dynasties on the 2020 Forbes Billion-Dollar Dynasties list, 27 also made the list in 1983. Only four of the top twenty family wealth dynasties are new to the list since 1983. These statistics display that nepotism and generational wealth are symptoms of an American society that prioritizes economic inequality over social mobility.
Further, the problem is larger than billionaire families maintaining their inherited wealth over the past half-century. Dynastically wealthy families wield a great deal of political and philanthropic power and have used it to further their interests. There is an inherent danger with inequitable and consistent power imbalances, where entrenched wealth dynasties combined with stagnant social mobility pose significant challenges to the reality of opportunity in American society. When families are entrepreneurial in nature, build companies, and employ workers, they contribute positively to American economic and social mobility. However, when these entrepreneurs and their descendants use their resources to consolidate wealth and create monopolies, they become dangerous. In fact, companies and individuals that work to preserve existing systems rather than create new wealth often become extractive and exploitative rather than supportive. This is a system that exists across all industries, so why are we specifically attracted to the Hollywood microcosm?
Perhaps Hollywood nepo-babies simply get the worst media scrutiny because they are accessible. We recognize famous last names, see the resemblance of our favourite actors in their children, and spot on the red carpet, parents with their children. Hollywood nepotism is not different from the nepotism that permeates any other high-paying, high-power industry–Maude Apatow is not at an advantage unequal to children who receive jobs at Goldman Sachs because their parents worked there. We only focus on her specific nepotism because it is undeniable. And while there might not be anything specifically wrong with children following their parents’ career paths, when the oversaturation of nepotism in industries creates barriers to entry for those without connections, we risk the descent into a society that resembles an oligarchy more than a democracy. Casting directors and hiring managers must therefore be held to a standard that rewards talent over connections.
Edited by Sabrina Nelson
Claudia Velimirovic is in her fourth and final year at McGill University pursuing a major in honours International Development and a minor in Social Entrepreneurship. This is her third year writing for Catalyst and she is particularly interested in politics, gender inequality, and women’s health.