Zero Gravity, Mixed Reviews: What Americans Think of Celebs in Space

Nothing says 2025 quite like a pop star strapping into a space capsule. In April, Katy Perry, along with Gayle King, Lauren Sanchez, Aisha Bowe, Amanda Nguyen, and Kerianne Flynn, climbed aboard the Blue Origin space capsule and took a suborbital flight. While the all-female crew made history, we asked people in our latest round of research-on-research about their awareness of the trip and how they truly felt about it.

Let’s dive into what we found.

Awareness

Overall

Overall, 60% of respondents said Yes, they were aware of Katy Perry’s flight, while 40% said No. This indicates a solid majority had at least heard about the event, reflecting strong public visibility.

Age

Awareness held steady across most age groups. Among those aged 18 to 34, 54–57% were aware of the flight. That figure remained at 60% for those aged 35 to 64. Awareness peaked among seniors 65 and older at 69%, the highest of any group. As age increases, so does recognition of the event, showing a modest age-based knowledge gap.

Income

Income levels show a steady increase in awareness as earnings rise. Those earning under $20,000 were the least likely to be aware of the spaceflight, at 42%, while those making $100,000 or more had the highest awareness, at 71%. Awareness increased in consistent steps across income brackets, indicating that higher-income individuals were more attuned to the event.

Perceptions

Overall

The following section explores how people who were already aware of Katy Perry’s Blue Origin flight feel about celebrities participating in space missions. These insights come from the respondents who said they were familiar with the event. To streamline analysis and clearly show sentiment trends, responses have been grouped into three categories: top-two-box (T2B) support, bottom-two-box (B2B) opposition, and neutral responses.

Among those who were aware, 19% were strongly opposed to celebrity space missions, calling them wasteful or out of touch. Another 14% were somewhat opposed, viewing them as unnecessary. A third of respondents were neutral, while the remaining were supportive: 17% somewhat and 17% very supportive. These figures show a balanced split between enthusiasm, skepticism, and indifference.

Gender

Support varied sharply by gender. Women who were aware of the mission were more than 70% neutral or supportive, with 41% saying they supported it. In contrast, only 24% of men felt the same. Among men, nearly half (46%) opposed the idea, compared to just 24% of women. This gender divide highlights a more favorable view among women toward celebrity involvement in space travel.

Age

Younger adults showed stronger support. Those aged 25–44 reported the highest levels of support, ranging from 45% to 46%. By contrast, only 26% of those aged 45–64 and 19% of those 65 and older were supportive. Among the oldest group, neutrality was the dominant view at 45%. Opposition increased with age, from 27% among 25–34 year-olds to 36% among those 65 and older.

Income

Income levels shaped support in noticeable ways. Among those earning $100,000 or more, support reached 47%, the highest of any group. Neutral views dropped to 27% for this income tier, and opposition was the lowest at 26%. As income declined, support tapered off, with lower earners under $40,000 showing support in the low 30s and neutrality climbing to the mid-30s. Interestingly, the lowest-income group also posted one of the highest opposition rates at 33%.

Political Affiliation

Political affiliation shaped sentiment notably. Republicans were the most likely to support celebrity space missions, with 42% in favor. Democrats followed at 34%, while Independents and those identifying as “Other” showed lower support at 28% and 16%, respectively.

Opposition levels were highest among “Other” political identities at 47%, compared to 29% for Republicans and 34% for Democrats. Neutrality remained relatively steady across the board, hovering around 30% to 37%, indicating a range of reactions but clear partisan differences.

Region

Support differed by geography. Respondents in the South were most supportive at 38%, followed by those in the Northeast at 36%, the West at 30%, and the Midwest at 28%. Neutral responses were most common in the Midwest at 36% and least common in the South at 29%. Opposition was highest in the West and Northeast, at 38% and 27% respectively. The South had the lowest level of opposition.

Ethnicity

Ethnicity also played a role. African American and Hispanic/Latino respondents were the most supportive at 46% and 43%, respectively. Caucasian respondents showed lower support at 32%, while Asian or South Asian individuals stood at 29%. Neutrality was highest among Asian/South Asian respondents at 42%. Meanwhile, opposition peaked in the “Other” group at 41%, underscoring a broader range of attitudes across ethnic groups and highlighting where skepticism may be stronger.

Panel

Support varied significantly by panel, with a wide 39-point gap separating the highest and lowest performing groups. Panel H stood out with the strongest support at 57%, followed by Panel F at 47%. At the other end of the spectrum, Panels K and N showed the least enthusiasm, both reporting support levels under 21%. Panel B fell closer to the middle but, along with Panel K, also showed high opposition rates, each exceeding 40%.

This large spread conveys the importance of blending multiple panels. Individual panels can produce skewed or inconsistent outcomes, but when strategically blended, they create a more balanced and reliable snapshot of public sentiment.

Learn more about EMI’s strategic sample blending approach.