5 ms·

Who cares? "I don't give a rip whose money it is, mate" - Steve Irwin, when asked about accepting money from "unethical" groups and using it for conservation.

Who cares? "I don't give a rip whose money it is, mate" - Steve Irwin, when asked about accepting money from "unethical" groups and using it for conservation. https://youtu.be/-1gVkTFam1w?t=753 https://youtu.be/-1gVkTFam1w?t=753 If it helps a good goal, what does it matter?

jonny_eh 7y ago
What matters is if the accepting of the money outweighs the good of turning it down. It's not always an easy equation.
- lghh 7y ago
  But that money is going to exist whether you accept it or not. You not accepting the money doesn't mean the way it was acquired stops happening.
  - pmyteh 7y ago
    Some philanthropic donations are kinda prestige-for-cash deals. My employer, Oxford University, accepted a large chunk of change from Wafic Saïd to endow their business school. If they hadn't taken it, he'd certainly still have the money. But we wouldn't have lowered our own reputation by associating ourselves with a... not spotless businessman. If it's done anonymously, then sure: you're quite right. But if it isn't then there is, in fact, a price. And it's not always a great deal.
  - jonny_eh 7y ago
    > But that money is going to exist whether you accept it or not But by accepting the donation you may be signaling that you're ok with how the donor made their money. By turning it down, you may also have a PR opportunity to spread a positive message.
a_t48 7y ago
Source on that quote?
- ngngngng 7y ago
  Updated to slightly correct quote and post source
nyokodo 7y ago
If accepting the money implies or enforces certain favors in return even if that is just silence, then it matters. If making the donation is used as a PR smokescreen to advance or obscure other unethical behavior, then it matters. That doesn't mean the money shouldn't be accepted it just means organizations should not allow donations to change their behavior and if a donation has a detectable nefarious ulterior motive then they should think twice about accepting the cash.

jonny_eh 7y ago

What matters is if the accepting of the money outweighs the good of turning it down. It's not always an easy equation.

lghh 7y ago
But that money is going to exist whether you accept it or not. You not accepting the money doesn't mean the way it was acquired stops happening.
- pmyteh 7y ago
  Some philanthropic donations are kinda prestige-for-cash deals. My employer, Oxford University, accepted a large chunk of change from Wafic Saïd to endow their business school. If they hadn't taken it, he'd certainly still have the money. But we wouldn't have lowered our own reputation by associating ourselves with a... not spotless businessman. If it's done anonymously, then sure: you're quite right. But if it isn't then there is, in fact, a price. And it's not always a great deal.
- jonny_eh 7y ago
  > But that money is going to exist whether you accept it or not But by accepting the donation you may be signaling that you're ok with how the donor made their money. By turning it down, you may also have a PR opportunity to spread a positive message.

a_t48 7y ago

Source on that quote?

ngngngng 7y ago
Updated to slightly correct quote and post source

nyokodo 7y ago

If accepting the money implies or enforces certain favors in return even if that is just silence, then it matters. If making the donation is used as a PR smokescreen to advance or obscure other unethical behavior, then it matters. That doesn't mean the money shouldn't be accepted it just means organizations should not allow donations to change their behavior and if a donation has a detectable nefarious ulterior motive then they should think twice about accepting the cash.