In light of the many surprising and saddening deaths of 2025, many people have begun to critique the impact of legacy on Earth as opposed to legacy after death. In reference to famous celebrities, the ethical concern is posed as follows: Why are people more likely to follow social media accounts and listen to the work of people after they have passed away?

For starters, legacy is defined by Google as “the long-lasting impact of particular events, actions, etc. that took place in the past, or of a person’s life.” Under this definition, legacy commonly alludes to the impact after someone has passed away. In this sense, the idea of people gaining more followers after they have died showcases respect. It commemorates their work and attracts people to view what they have done during their life. Although people are aware that the deceased’s social media accounts will never be used by them, it keeps their posts alive and often overflows with comments that express grief of their absence.

However, on the other hand, the idea of gaining more followers after death seems a bit eerie. Whether people are just discovering them due to the announcement of their death or checking back to someone who they once loved, they are all accustomed to coping differently.

Therefore, I believe that this discourse should not even be up for debate. Although social media is a touchy subject that often leads to conversations about parasocial relationships, following someone once they are gone does not equate to that conversation. To find someone and keep their memory alive once they have died is solely the point of pursuing passions in the public eye.

These celebrities put themselves in the public eye, vulnerably sharing their fascinations, to be remembered and congratulated for pursuing their dreams. Death is inevitable and taking the opportunity to remember someone after their departure is a beautiful sign of memory transcending further than a person ever.