Is it possible that Twitter is not the best source to go to for ethical guidance? I kinda get it. My son watches lots of videos from MrBeast and tells about ho

Is it possible that Twitter is not the best source to go to for ethical guidance? I kinda get it. My son watches lots of videos from MrBeast and tells about how much money he gave away to completely random people, and I've often wondered what to think of that. He has a successful Youtube channel that apparently revolves around involving random strangers in mad schemes that make MrBeast look good. Is he an attention seeker? A narcissist even? Or has he found a way to help people and monetise it in a way that enables him to keep helping people? No matter how much I turn this around in my head and search for some nefarious explanation, the end result is always that MrBeast helps a lot of people. Sometimes random people who might not really need it, but often people who really do need it. And in this particular case, 1000 people who were blind can suddenly see again. People have been worshipped for less. Let's reserve our criticism for people who hurt others for attention, not for those who help others. I think it's reasonable to assume MrBeast has found a way to help people in such a way that he can continue helping as many people as possible, which is great. But even if he's doing it for different reasons, it's better to do good for the wrong reasons than not to do good at all. (I feel like that's a Bible quote, but I can't find it.)