Jeff Duntemann's Contrapositive Diary Rotating Header Image

Was 2016 Really That Deadly?

John Glenn. Carrie Fisher. Debbie Reynolds. Zsa Zsa Gabor. Gene Wilder. Lots, lots more. OMG! Worst year evah!

I wonder. And because I wonder, I doubt it.

It’s certainly true that a lot of famous people died in 2016. However, we didn’t have any plagues or natural disasters that would raise the death rate significantly, so we have to assume that these deaths are unrelated to one another, and that we can’t finger any single cause or groups of causes. First, some short notes on mortality itself:

  • Plenty of ordinary people died too. We had one death in our extended family. Several of my friends lost parents this year. A quick look back shows such deaths happening every three or four years. There was a peak circa 2000-2010 when extended family in the Greatest Generation were dying. Those individuals were in their 80s, mostly, which is when a great many people die.
  • There are a lot of Baby Boomers, and Baby Boomers are hitting a knee in the mortality curve. The oldest Boomers are crossing 70 now, and the curve goes up sharply after that.
  • Basically, there are lots more old people now than in the past, and old people die more frequently.

All that is pretty obvious, and I list it here as a reminder. Humanity is aging. That’s not a bad thing, if living longer is better than dying young. In truth, I thought Zsa Zsa Gabor died years if not decades ago. She lived to 99, so she stood out in my mind, as does anyone who lives well into their 90s.

Which brings us to the issue of fame. There are different kinds of fame. Three types come to mind:

  • Horizontal fame falls to people who are very famous and generally known to the population at large.
  • Vertical fame falls to people who are well-known within narrower populations.
  • Age cohort fame is vertical fame along a time axis: It falls to people who are generally known but by people in a narrower age cohort, like Boomers or Millennials.

John Glenn had horizontal fame. Zsa Zsa Gabor had age-cohort fame: She had been out of the public eye for quite some time, so while Boomers mostly knew who she was, I’ll bet plenty of Millennials did not. Vertical fame is interesting, and I have a very good example: David Bunnell was a tech journalist, so as a tech journalist I knew him (personally, in fact, if not well) and know that he was well-known in tech journalism and very much missed. The fact that another well-known and much-loved tech journalist, Bill Machrone, died only two weeks later, gave us the impression that tech journalism had a target on its forehead this year. The fact that both men were 69 at the times of their deaths just made the whole thing stand out as “weird” and memorable in a grim way.

Most people have a passion (or several) not shared by all others. We can’t pay attention to everything, but all of us have a few things we pay attention to very closely. I’m not a medical person, so when Donald Henderson (the man who wiped out smallpox) died, I had to look him up. Those in science and healthcare probably recognized his name more quickly than people who focus on music or NASCAR. The point here is that almost everyone falls into some vertical interest bracket, and notices when a person famous within their bracket (but otherwise obscure) dies. This multiplies the perception of many famous people dying in any given year.

The proliferation of vertical brackets contributes to another fame issue: We are making more famous people every year. Vertical brackets are only part of it. With a larger population, there is more attention to be focused on the famous among us, allowing more people to cross the admittedly fuzzy boundary between obscurity and fame.

The key here is mass media, which creates fame and to some extent dictates who gets it. The mainstream media may be suffering but it’s still potent, and the more cable channels there are, the more broadly fame can be distributed. I doubt we’re producing as many movies as we used to, but the movies that happen are seen and discussed very broadly. I confess I don’t understand the cult of celebrity and find it distasteful. Still, celebrity and gossip are baked into our genes. (This is related to tribalism, which I’ll return to at some point. I’m starting to run long today and need to focus.)

Over the past ten years, of course, social media has appeared, and allows news to travel fast, even news catering to a relatively narrow audience. Social media amplifies the impact of celebrity deaths. I doubt I would have known that Zsa Zsa had died if I hadn’t seen somebody’s Twitter post. I didn’t much care, but I saw it.

There is another issue that many people may not appreciate: More people were paying attention to news generally in 2016. Why? The election. The profound weirdness and boggling viciousness of this year’s races had a great many people spending a lot more time online or in front of the TV, trying to figure out what the hell was actually happening, and why. I think this made the celebrity deaths that did happen a lot more visible than they might have been in a non-election year.

Finally, averages are average. There are always peaks and troughs. In fact, a year in which celebrity death rates were simply average would be slightly anomalous in itself, though no one but statisticians would likely notice. I’m guessing that we had a peak year this year. Next year might be kinder to celebrities. We won’t know until we get there.

To sum up: This past year, for various reasons, more people were paying attention, and there were more ways to pay attention. These trend lines will continue to rise, and I have a sneaking suspicion that next year may also be seen as deadly, as will the year after that, until the curves flatten out and we enter into some sort of new normal.

Grim, sure, but not mysterious. There may well be reasons to consider 2016 a terrible year, but thinking rationally, the number of celebrity deaths is not among them.


  1. Tony says:

    My feeling is there were more LARGE name deaths, people with the horizontal fame, than in previous years. Some were to be expected because of age and others because of other factors.

    Because of this there was more awareness of their passing and as more media piled on, it make for more news which drove the cycle even more.

    Do I feel more people died in 2016 than 2015. Not really. Just more visibility to those with some form of fame or name recognition.

  2. Michael Brian Bentley says:

    Sure, population went up a while ago, the US’s fortunes increased, and now deaths are up. Makes for a bad year.

  3. RH in CT says:

    What is the average age at which famous people become famous? My pure guesswork is 25 to 30. That leaves about a 60 year window for them to die. If one in 60 famous people die each year that is 1.67%. And there are lots of famous people.

    My impression is that this comes up every year. There might be small statistical variations, but there is never a year when people say “Boy, not so many people died this year.”

  4. Orvan Taurus says:

    I’ve seen for sale, a few days ago, a t-shirt the text of which reads, “I SURVIVED 2016” which seemed just a bit premature then. But yeah, looks like trends are trending is all. For many of the famous, I saw people react with pictures (sans saying who they were of, as that was supposed to be obvious) and I was wondering “Alright, who IS that?” much of the time.

    1. You and I are of an age, I think, and this is a frequent problem I have. When the crackpots started hurling insults at Jackie Evancho, I had absolutely no idea who she was. (At least she didn’t die this year–she’s only 16.) Three quarters of the people in popular culture are a total mystery to me. I don’t watch TV, I don’t see a lot of movies, and I don’t follow the gossip sites online. I didn’t pay a great deal of attention to Milo until my turd sandwich of an alma mater (DePaul) shut down his presentation. There’s a great deal in this world that I do want to pay attention to and learn, so at 64 I have to ration my time and energy. Gossip and filthy rich spoiled brat celebrities are out with the first cut.

      1. TRX says:

        Ooh! Ooh! I know the answer to that one!

        Milo is a grain-based hot drink, popular in Australia.

  5. Larry Nelson says:

    I saw this link just minutes after reading the blog. Sometimes the media is just a bit much:

    And this is the Washington Post, no some supermarket tabloid.

  6. TRX says:

    The thing that struck me about the “dead celebrities” lists was that, of the ones I’d heard of, I would have figured they would have died ten or twenty years ago.

    Instead, many of them appeared to have lived to a ripe old age and passed by the usual reasons.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *