21 ms·

MrBeast has become a viral sensation for his acts of altruism

• miles 3y ago
  Related HN thread from last year: On Mr. Beast and being alone in a circle for 100 days https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33016185 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33016185
• NoPicklez 3y ago
  people are blowing this out of proportion. How is this any different to people being filmed on a game show where they can win millions of dollars if they answer questions correctly or complete challenges in a specific time. Those shows generate revenue by people watching them in the hope that people win against all odds or revel in the fact that they missed out on national television. The difference here, is that this guy is doing it on Youtube and is a much larger impact on individuals lives.
• cm2012 3y ago
  I found this article very informative and evenhanded.
  • apetresc 3y ago
    I found this article paywalled.
    • labster 3y ago
      I found a link to bypass the paywall few comments up.
• no_wizard 3y ago
  I find it interesting that people are upset that this, for lack of a better term, philanthropy achieved by MrBeast, while yes, its for the likes, the YouTube popularity, its a cottage industry of "feel good" that he's producing, is somehow bad? I wonder how sustainable this will be ultimately, but it seems like he's able to just give all this stuff away and help people, and yes, they have to agree to be being filmed participating in some manner, but seriously, he's helping folks who need it. Every day people. He also makes other content, but this seems to be the "bread and butter" of what makes MrBeast famous. I'm not seeing an obvious downside to what he's doing, seems like a net win for many people
  • vkou 3y ago
    > I find it interesting that people are upset that this, for lack of a better term, philanthropy achieved by MrBeast, while yes, its for the likes, the YouTube popularity, its a cottage industry of "feel good" that he's producing, is somehow bad? It depends on how it's done. It's one thing to be broadcasting what is essentially, poverty porn, where you, the hero of the world, come in to paradrop money on the problem. It's another thing to, well, be doing meaningful charity, and promoting it. And just like art versus pornography, the distinction is one of 'I'll know it when I see it'. Unsurprisingly, people have legitimate disagreements on where that line is.
    • no_wizard 3y ago
      Unfortunately, the US is just completely broken in respect to treating people with dignity if they fall on hard times. I'm willing to say that as long as things are (and they seemingly are, so far anyway) transparent, and agreed to, up front, by all parties involved, I can't say I'm against this. I understand the "poverty porn" aspect might be a sour taste, but this is the state we exist in, unfortunately, where these random acts of charity are really meaningful to so many people.
    • teaearlgraycold 3y ago
      To Jimmy’s credit, a lot of his charity work is done without a camera. He runs a legit food pantry year-round. He doesn’t farm it for views. I think it’s only in one or two videos.
    • Invictus0 3y ago
      Are TV game shows (Jeopardy?) also poverty porn? How do you even know the contestants are poor and not participating just for fun?
      • kortilla 3y ago
        No, it’s not poverty porn if it’s not showing the poverty. Poverty porn requires the demonstration of how life changing it is.
      • 3y ago
• xrd 3y ago
  My kids love Mr Beast. I'm uncomfortable with it and can't put my finger on it. It feels like he makes life look like you stand a good chance of having someone walk in and give you $100,000. Maybe there is no harm in thinking that? But it feels like the same thing as buying a lottery ticket. I guess YouTube is free? But is the time spent on that channel worth it over doing other things? I admire the approach he takes with his craft but I don't really enjoy or respect the work.
  • paintman252 3y ago
    >But is the time spent on that channel worth it over doing other things? Now apply same standard to literally any other Youtube channel
  • zik 3y ago
    I'm also uncomfortable with it. There's nothing inherently wrong with philanthropy but what I'm seeing is a very successful business with an enormous and very expensive campus. MrBeast himself is very rich. So what I'm seeing is a corporation claiming to do everything for the benefit of others while actually taking a lot of the money very visibly for themselves. His channel made $54m from youtube in 2021, and probably a lot more from corporate sponsors. Make no mistake, this is big business - not charity. And some of his side businesses are downright shady. His burger chain is run out of ghost kitchens which make food for multiple virtual chains like MrBeast's. The burgers are apparently a crapshoot - it depends on which ghost kitchen made your burger as to what you get. Quality control is zero. Yet they charge top dollar for the MrBeast name.
    • a-user-you-like 3y ago
      It can be and is both a business and philanthropic.
      • citizenkeen 3y ago
        That was my takeaway as well. As a parent, I vet everything my kids watch and will for a few more years. I have no idea how you don't.
• dieulot 3y ago
  https://archive.is/LXwH7 https://archive.is/LXwH7
• PradeetPatel 3y ago
  The biggest risk of exposing youth to MrBeast is that it devalues the concept of money and hard work. But there's no denial that he's doing some good work for those who are in need.
  • gonzo41 3y ago
    Don't worry, when they learn about billionaires, hereditary wealth and the global south. They'll have to reconcile sometimes all the hard work in the world leads to what you have now.
  • wahnfrieden 3y ago
    Sounds great
  • vore 3y ago
    Gotta start them early so they're not surprised later!
  • paulpauper 3y ago
    not so sure about that. I think most kids see it as fun and nothing more .
  • luisgvv 3y ago
    Pretty much any influencer/YouTuber you can find across social media... The successful ones make it look like it's an easy work, and while some of them might have put up the hours tk grow their brand, a bunch of them are still chasing their dream of breaking through. At the end of the day I'd say it's luck + marketing/attention grabbing. If the algorithm doesn't show your content and the content itself is boring or doesn't have a market you won't make it through
  • sircastor 3y ago
    This may be unpopular, but maybe there’s something to be said for devaluing money and hard work? “Hard Work” is an inherited ethic from Puritanism in the western world. It is often implied that hard work will reap benefits, but the benefits are hit or miss and the rewards are sometimes promised salvation or riches in an afterlife. While I won’t comment on the latter, I think the ethic of hard work is often oversold, and benefits those in power rather than those who issue the effort. And before someone cries wolf here, this isn’t advocating for laziness or hedonism. I think humans need work. We need to put effort into something whether that’s tilling a field, painting a canvas, or writing a program for a computer. I think everybody needs to experience real challenges to their understanding of life and how other people live. But I don’t think there’s an obvious measuring stick for what that looks like. As for devaluing money, people need to know how to manage a household, but I think fewer worshippers at the alter of money is a net win.
• graphe 3y ago
  Don't forget that fact that popular = bad. Anything popular is immediately seen as too "mainstream" or "forced" and consistent success begets accusations of favoritism, deceit or it's undeserved.
• jwond 3y ago
  I've never seen a MrBeast video, but today I saw this video parodying him, which I thought was a little funny: https://youtu.be/n-tQXZCEi54 https://youtu.be/n-tQXZCEi54
  • Ygg2 3y ago
    My favorite parody is https://youtu.be/HV7ef2Y0bcE https://youtu.be/HV7ef2Y0bcE Very on the money.
• 4d66ba06 3y ago
  [flagged]
  • Invictus0 3y ago
    Good luck organizing a bunch of people to do literally anything in 60 seconds. Also don't see what the point was of having everyone on their knees. The whole story is just really dumb.
  • animal_spirits 3y ago
    You can’t use chatgpt as an anecdote generator. If you can’t find the source don’t even bother posting anything this sentence machine generates
• ErikAugust 3y ago
  No paywall: https://trimread.org/articles/38959 https://trimread.org/articles/38959
• keithnz 3y ago
  I think MrBeast is fantastic, this is what he wanted to do, he made it happen, he's worked out how to run his organization, he's scaled it out. His content is really well done and fun. He gets to help people, he's very explicit about how he makes money, he's not making out he's a charity, he's directly promoting things and starting his own spinoff businesses. Good stuff.
• spencerchubb 3y ago
  In my mind, Mr Beast is like CGP Grey (in the sense that they both do high quality videos). Except Mr Beast is far more hedonistic. Maybe it's my immaturity as a 21 year old, but I love Mr. Beast videos. Whenever I remember he exists, I go to his channel and watch a few videos. The videos are super high quality. Instead of spamming like a lot of YouTubers do, he invests a lot into each video.
  • KeplerBoy 3y ago
    imo cgp grey was a lot better 5-10 years ago, before it got too clickbaity.
• andrewstuart 3y ago
  His latest video has 66 million views. That's like every single person in Australia X 3 watched the video. Nutso.
• bitcurious 3y ago
  Two reasons I find this distasteful. It might be a net good still, I’m not sure. It’s not obvious however. One downside is that it competes for the same “feel-good” feeling which much more effective charities compete for. Someone engages with Mr.Beast, feels like they did good. Later they walk by a food shelter in need of volunteers and thinks “I already did my part.” As we have parasocial relationships, we have paraphilanthropy. I suspect it ultimately makes people less compassionate and caring. This is hinted at here: > For Miller, what makes Donaldson remarkable is that he essentially asks his audience to see themselves as a commodity, and to therefore see their views and likes and shares as a force for good: “MrBeast is actually telling people that they’re entering a marketplace, by saying, ‘If you watch this, this is worth so much money, I can raise this much money and I can spend it on good causes.’” As Donaldson says in one video for his philanthropic sub-channel: “Beast Philanthropy is literally funded by your eyeballs. Not even joking.” Truth is, watching hours of YouTube isn't doing good. At best it’s entertainment, at worst it’s hours of human potential wasted. The other downside is that it normalizes the extrinsic reward to doing good. Kindness done for the “thank you” breeds resentment. The vulnerable can be thankful, but they can also be angry, frustrated, confused, hurt, mentally ill, etc. Sustainable kindness is done for oneself.
  • Invictus0 3y ago
    > One downside is that it competes for the same “feel-good” feeling which much more effective charities compete for. Talk about grasping at straws. Seriously?
    • bitcurious 3y ago
      100%. Everything is in competition for attention. That’s the market world we live in.
  • freddie_mercury 3y ago
    > One downside is that it competes for the same “feel-good” feeling which much more effective charities compete for. [...] Later they walk by a food shelter in need of volunteers and thinks “I already did my part.” The exact same argument is made against government programs. And there's a long history of research showing just how much government grants crowd out charitable giving because tax payers feel like "I already did my part". But I don't see how you can consistently argue against Mr. Beast without also arguing against government funding, if crowding out is the issue you're concerned about.
• Invictus0 3y ago
  I enjoy watching Mr. Beast's videos, like millions of other people. His videos have a wonderful childlike playful energy, where contestants play schoolyardesque games for the chance of big rewards. The losers usually still walk away with thousands of dollars. He does massive amounts of philanthropy in addition to the mainstream content. Are there really any criticisms of Mr. Beast other than get-off-my-yard snobbery?
  • brvsft 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • andelink 3y ago
      Wow man chill. Your aggression doesn’t belong here.
      • brvsft 3y ago
        Funny you didn't have a problem with the comment parent to mine summarizing all dislike of Mr Beast as snobbery.
• jojobas 3y ago
  Never understood the appeal. Hey I'm rich, watch my videos where I do stupid shit and burn money so I get richer!
• woodruffw 3y ago
  (I haven't watched his videos; I only know about MrBeast from this article and passing conversations.) I think the moral discomfort that's being identified here is a reasonable one, and stems from the same basic (and intuitive) source as the familiar "billionaire philanthropist" thought experiment: many people have a strong intuition that publicized philanthropy is in some ways less praiseworthy than the contents of its actions would otherwise imply. That source, in turn, is something like our recognition of other self-legislating agents: we know that the actions taken by others are done with independent ends in mind, and it's reasonable to think less of an action when we have a good reason to believe that the person's ends are not themselves free from inclination (desire for praise, fame, etc.). In other words: people like MrBeast intuitively inspire distrust and "ick" reactions because they give the the impression that the observer is being had in some way.
• renewiltord 3y ago
  MrBeast has a higher philanthropy rate than the mega-non-profits in the US: Harvard et. al. Good for him for having elevated doing good things to an art form. Though I did enjoy this dark gory horror version of him https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV7ef2Y0bcE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HV7ef2Y0bcE (a genre that is surprisingly popular and snowcloned)
  • prepend 3y ago
    How do you determine this? He’s not a charity so isn’t forced to file data so charitynavigator can determine his payout rate. What percent does he give to charity? And how is it audited? How does he compare to top charities?
    • renewiltord 3y ago
      Clever move since Charity Navigator rates you very highly if you spend almost all your charity money on growing yourself like the Harvard Management Company does. I don't outsource my moral judgment so I can safely conclude that HMC isn't a "good charity" as CN calls it.
      • brvsft 3y ago
        Clever move since you didn't even attempt to prove your assertion at all.
        • renewiltord 3y ago
          Proof is alpha. No one gives that for free. Believe whatever you desire.
          • prepend 3y ago
            Step 1) make claim Step 2) provide no evidence Step 3) ask others to provide evidence This seems to be “the bullshit way” that just squirms the conversation forward and I think encapsulates what makes me dislike MrBeast and YouTube culture overall.
• maximus-decimus 3y ago
  I think a reason why people are uncomfortable about him is that boasting about giving to charity is very unchristian. "Be careful that you don't do your charitable. giving before men, to be seen by them, or else. you have no reward from your Father who is in heaven." Matthew 6:1 If you're not allowed to even tell people you give to charity, I can't imagine what God in the old testament would do to you if you profit from it.
  • reureu 3y ago
    This is what makes me uncomfortable -- if you have to be seen giving something away then you're not really doing it for altruistic purposes. Also, this isn't strictly a Christian concept, but similar ideas exist in Judaism: https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/256321/jewish/Eight-Degrees-of-Giving.htm https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/256321/jewish... Buddhism: https://www.learnreligions.com/perfection-of-giving-449724 https://www.learnreligions.com/perfection-of-giving-449724 Islam: https://www.quranexplorer.com/blog/Education-In-The-Light-Of-Sunnah-And-Qura'an/Best-Level-of-Charity https://www.quranexplorer.com/blog/Education-In-The-Light-Of... Hinduism: https://www.hindupedia.com/en/Ideals_and_Values/Charity_and_Gratitude#What_are_the_different_grades_of_Charity https://www.hindupedia.com/en/Ideals_and_Values/Charity_and_...?
    • Invictus0 3y ago
      Mr. Beast's philanthropy is specifically enabled by his audience (sponsors contribute to the philanthropy in exchange for short ads), his videos bring awareness to the issue he is donating to, and his philanthropy is amplified by viewers donating their own money in kind to the cause. None of these things could happen (neither the large donations nor the awareness nor the amplification by ordinary viewers) without making the videos. I don't see how you can conclude that a gift only made possible by this process (thousands of people regaining their sight) is not altruistic merely because some ancient books said you have to be quiet about your donations.
      • reureu 3y ago
        My point in mentioning that all major religions frown on making a show of your giving was more to point out how ubiquitous and culturally cross-cutting that belief is than to say "some ancient books" should dictate our values or beliefs. Regardless of what you believe, hopefully you can acknowledge that there's a meaningful signal in Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, and Buddhism all agreeing about a particular point. Mr. Beast doesn't do _philanthropy_, he makes entertainment videos. His niche is giving money away in exchange for challenges or stunts. This gets him views, and has created a profitable business for him. That's not altruistic at all, it's just a business guy who is quite good at knowing his audience and executing his trade. "thousands of people regaining their sight" is a glorified marketing campaign. Yes, money goes to causes; but the fact that money wouldn't otherwise go there is a policy decision that we've collectively made. We could tax billionaires and use the revenue to fund health, education, housing, infrastructure, research, or whatever. I'd much prefer to see us do that than wait around until we see Mr. Beast's Children's Hospital pop up somewhere.
• amanzi 3y ago
  I don't mind MrBeast, but what I really hate is how every other YouTuber has decided to copy his "screaming face" thumbnail strategy. My YouTube home page is full of screaming faces and bright text with some clickbait title. Even middle-age woodworkers (the polar-opposite audience to MrBeast) fall prey to this strategy, and I've started to unsubscribe from channels that insist on doing this.
  • andersrs 3y ago
    [flagged]
    • brvsft 3y ago
      Also known as "poggers"
  • dharmab 3y ago
    They do it because it measurably improves viewership. Linus Tech Tips made a video about why they started doing it. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DzRGBAUz5mA&pp=ygUMbHR0IHRodW5ibmFp https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DzRGBAUz5mA&pp=ygUMbHR0IHRodW5...
    • 0x0203 3y ago
      I suspect that so many do it because it's so often repeated and taught that it works; but they figured out it works when looking at the whole of youtube videos, which percentage wise, is mostly targeted to a younger, less mature audience, and the content is made to match. When a channel's target audience is a similar demographic to the "average youtube viewer," it works very well. But I'd wager it doesn't work very well when the target audience doesn't match the average youtube viewer. I'd love to know if the people that measured and promote these bright, astonished-face, click-bait thumbnails ever bothered to test their effectiveness with different target demographics. My guess would be no. I really wish the people making videos on subjects like science/physics, engineering, woodworking, etc... would stop putting thumbnails and titles on their work that target an audience that isn't going to care/enjoy/understand the subject of the video. And maybe even keep some of the intended audience away.
• richardanaya 3y ago
  He does it selfishly and he does it well. People are bitter when capitalists find ways to profitably help people.
• chimen 3y ago
  It's not altruism if it's your source of income. Sorry but I don't buy this bs. He's doing it to generate income, that's all. Altruism is "unselfish regard for or devotion to the welfare of others" but we have quite the opposite here - a selfish way of milking poor people for emotions in order to generate income. Real altruism is hard and done only by a few. Literally EVERY man/woman/child on this planet will say yes to receiving millions of dollars annually with the sole condition that they have to let go some part of it. The money he spends are just fuel for a marketing engine. While I see he seems like a nice guy overall, his actions do more good than harm. His impact is very low, his "philanthropy" is localised down to the individual level and his impact is absolutely none on the actual problems that people who he targets face. The more negative side of this is that he inspires the next generations to only go by extreme things on Youtube and other social media platforms and these extreme things are, more often than not, on the negative side (stupid and dangerous pranks, throwing stuff at people from 20th floor etc). He chose this path because his viewers were probably reacting to it the most. I'm not a hater but I feel like the real altruistic people doing good stuff on a much grander scheme don't get any recognition at all while this money making business man selling snake oil to children is getting everything from the table. Despite throwing millions and millions, his impact is absolutely ZERO. I find it quite predatory.
  • scrollaway 3y ago
    This is a lot of unsourced, completely gut feeling statements about someone’s philanthropic impact to essentially just have an excuse to shit on them. I wonder how much your own life has impacted the world out there. Look I don’t know mrbeast, beyond the team trees stuff from a while back. But YAWN at claiming someone’s actions do more harm than good just because your gut says it’s inspired pranksters. Put your comment in context.
  • kagevf 3y ago
    > his actions do more good than harm I feel like you meant the opposite. . .
  • edmundsauto 3y ago
    Iono, this is definitely a grey area… but he definitely impacted the lives of peoples who sight restoring cataract surgery he paid for. I agree there is something icky (discussed in the article) but it’s weird to say zero impact.
• modeless 3y ago
  I think it's hilarious that he found a way to make a business out of giving his friends millions of dollars.
• DropInIn 3y ago
  [flagged]
• wahahah 3y ago
  Altruism really has been getting its name dragged through the mud recently huh
• paulpauper 3y ago
  People will always find some reason to complain. As it's said, no good deed goes unpunished. He is not a rich guy using poor people as props. Rather, his entertainment value allowed him to become rich while benefiting those who he helps.
• pavlov 3y ago
  It’s not altruism, it’s just the cost of goods sold for his entertainment brand. If he could have the same viewership by feeding $100 bills to crocodiles at lower cost, he’d do that.
  • kcb 3y ago
    Right, if you give away $100,000 then post a video about it that makes $200,000, I call this a 50% margin not altruism of philanthropy,
    • Gigachad 3y ago
      At least it doesn’t seem to be a net negative on the world. He could be using $100,000 to market crypto scams, or “prank” videos. Giving it to poor people, even if not from pure generosity, is far from the worst thing he could be doing.
      • prepend 3y ago
        It’s definitely not the worst thing.
    • mynameisvlad 3y ago
      He has said on multiple occasions that he puts all revenue towards future videos. There is no margin. The money eventually ends up in the hands of people that wouldn’t have otherwise had it.
      • memefrog 3y ago
        He might do so for now, at the moment. That doesn't mean he will do so forever. How long did Amazon run with no margins to build up its business before it made money? How long has reddit been running unprofitably? He still has room to grow his business. And he can cash out quite easily. If he goes a year keeping just 20% of the revenue from his videos he'd make an absolute ton of money.
        • 3y ago
• jd24 3y ago
  Is it altruism or is it business expense
• sashank_1509 3y ago
  It isn't often that I can say that a New York Times Article was written well. By written well I don't mean that I agree with its conclusions or that what it has to say is important in some societal context. I simply mean that the author put his thoughts very eloquently and helped me understand the depth of his ideas with beautiful prose. This article was written well in a very fundamental writers skill kind of way!
• deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
• irishloop 3y ago
  Is he kind of a bullshit artist? Sure. Can I think of a thousand worse ways that people make money every day? I sure can.
• ipnon 3y ago
  Mr. Beast has to be one of if not the most charitable YouTubers. He’s an effective altruist fever dream, curing disease and easing poverty through free entertainment. There are many worded YouTubers for the world. Perhaps it’s just his ostentatiousness that rubs people the wrong way. Do we want our saints to keep things low key?
  • brvsft 3y ago
    > free entertainment It's not free. Like anything else, there is an opportunity cost for watching garbage. Mr. Beast and content-creators like him are precisely the reason my children won't have free access to YouTube if not smartphones entirely. He creates mindless garbage content that helps rots peoples' brains. Yes, plenty of other content on YouTube is no better, but this stuff actually gets marketed to people including children, and its aggregate millions if not billions of manhours of people mindlessly staring at this shit is not at all a good thing. The fact that some of it happens to result in people having an affliction cured doesn't reverse any of the wastefulness.
    • lotsoweiners 3y ago
      My kids love Mr Beast and I have no real problem with it. I feel more comfortable with his channels than I do with some of the other crap I see them watching. I also think that it is ok for kids to get a sense of kindness and optimism from the content they consume. They have plenty of years in the future to become jaded and cynical.
• Solvency 3y ago
  Wait what? I thought Mr Beast was that guy from the Banksy documentary..
• nocontextpls 3y ago
  [flagged]
• iamleppert 3y ago
  He isn’t genuine. In his origin story you’ll notice he talks about trying lots of different strategies to maximize his views and engagement. That’s his only real goal. He stumbled upon his current formula by accident after significant iteration. It strikes me that he could have just as easily be producing any kind of harmful content if the rules of what’s acceptable to society and YouTube were different. It just so happens that in his case the content is self-reinforcing and easily defensible. He is the same as the people who film themselves giving flowers to lonely elderly people. Such people do not feel good about doing good acts because of the actual act, they crave the attention and praise that doing good often brings, and they need it in great quantity. The act itself is just a vehicle for vulnerable narcissism and wouldn’t exist or have been done in the first place without these outlier personality traits enormous investment.
  • _9omd 3y ago
    But if he’s honest in telling his origin story about figuring out how to optimally drive engagement, doesn’t that actually make him genuine? There’s no lie here. He’s upfront about how he’s optimizing content for views and using profits to drive further content, grow the business, and donate to charity. I don’t really find his content very interesting, but he seems like a decent guy and you can definitely make an argument he’s doing some good in the world.
    • iamleppert 3y ago
      It may make him honest but he doesn’t deserve the type of praise people give to him. He never set out to help people, that isn’t the root of his motivation, and never has been. He is motivated to create content that gets a lot of views and “wins YouTube”. The content isn’t the point in his mind, it’s getting as many views as possible. So that’s what I mean when I say he isn’t genuine, because the content is only there to get the views, and he’s only doing it because it’s what works.
  • chrisbolt 3y ago
    > He stumbled upon his current formula by accident after significant iteration. Wouldn't many people call this "learning"?
• ardkf 3y ago
  I'm surprised at the negative view here. He had a very interesting interview with Joe Rogan a while back where he explains his business model. He does crazy expensive stuff on the main channel that might break even but often loses money. But this funnels viewers into the other Mr. Beast channels, like gaming or reacts, that are much cheaper to produce and do make money. The flywheel turns and he makes more money which goes to his philanthropy efforts or bigger videos on the main channel. At the end of the day he's given away more money than I'll ever be able to by finding a glitch in the system that seems to be working out, at least for now. If kids like it and it inspires them to be charitible themselves in the future then I can't see how that's a bad thing. I will say that I find some of the videos uncomfortable to watch when it's him just giving out money. But it's not any worse than what's been shown on regular TV for decades. The videos where he bought out entire grocery stores to fuel the food banks his company runs or the car lot where the cars were a dollar each are much better than straight up handing out cash.
  • prepend 3y ago
    > crazy expensive stuff on the main channel that might break even but often loses money I remember him bringing this up in the interview and it’s an odd statement. “Often loses money.” It makes more money than it loses, obviously. So it’s weird to call out how some videos lose money. Yes, that’s how the world works. And some make make money. More make than lose, that’s just how everything works. And then he donates some profits to charitable causes. Im not sure if he’s not sure how business works or his audience doesn’t. Im not sure why this line about “often loses money” irks me.
    • ardkf 3y ago
      I'm not sure why either. My understanding is that the main channel videos are big and flashy but expensive, basically acting as a loss leader that increases the population that watch the rest of his channels. So they make money indirectly I guess.
• lazyasciiart 3y ago
  Wow. Cataract surgery? Australia provides cataract surgery free under socialised healthcare. The big concern is that some patients wait up to 2 1/2 years after diagnosis for the surgery, and that indigenous Australians lack access to medical care for even diagnostics. But to just say, we know what's wrong, and how to fix it, and have available doctors nearby, but nah the kid just gets to grow up blind? What the fuck.
  • throwaway742 3y ago
    That's America for you.
    • mynameisvlad 3y ago
      And like half the rest of the world. Did you even watch the video in question? It was very much not based entirely in the US.
  • memefrog 3y ago
    >and that indigenous Australians lack access to medical care for even diagnostics. If it is anything like the situation in New Zealand, there is no lack of access but a lack of uptake. You cannot infer from lower rates of uptake that there is a lack of access.
    • lazyasciiart 3y ago
      It is lack of access. Unlike New Zealand, Australia is very big. Many Australian indigenous people live very remotely where there are no medical facilities at all.
  • Dig1t 3y ago
    Well for poor people in the US, there is Medicaid. For old people there is Medicare. Most people have health insurance in the US (92.5% of Californians have health insurance, for example). Things are not as bad in the US as people often claim.
• httpz 3y ago
  It's appalling some people are more upset that his motives were not altruistic than being happy for the people who got their eye sight back. Are we going to start criticizing doctors next because they're saving lives to get paid?
  • _9omd 3y ago
    Exactly. Anyone who’s ever done something good for someone else partly did it because it felt good. This is what drives humans to help others, and society would fall apart without this basic urge to help others.
  • kcb 3y ago
    > Are we going to start criticizing doctors next because they're saving lives to get paid? A doctor is a profession, unless doing charity work, the act of being a doctor is not philanthropy.
    • httpz 3y ago
      Mr. Beast is a content creator creating content. It's pretty obvious he's doing it for content and he doesn't deny it either. I guess the sprinkle of "philanthropy" flavor is rubbing some people the wrong way but he seems far less dodgy than some celebrity philanthropists or evangelists.
  • memefrog 3y ago
    I would feel uncomfortable if a doctor did pro bono work just for attention or for YouTube views instead of out of the goodness of his heart, but acted like he was a wonderful and charitable person for doing so.
  • scoutt 3y ago
    I don't think people are't happy for those who got eye sight back, but the article mentions "altruism" when it may not be and I think that is what is being debated here.
• tflinton 3y ago
  Say what you want about the guy, but his burgers are terrible, and have 950 calories to add insult to injury.
• TheAceOfHearts 3y ago
  The MrBeast video where he pays for people's eye surgery felt icky to me and it took me a while to really figure out why. On one hand, I think it's great that people in need were able to receive assistance. On the other hand, why is it that it took some rich YouTuber to pay for their surgeries in the first place? As I understand it a lot of these eye surgeries have been fairly standard for decades, so why isn't there already a government program that pays for this? No paperwork or other bullshit, you just go to an eye doctor and they give you the surgery. It seems like such obvious low-hanging fruit, and it would be a massive political win. Maybe manufacture one fewer jet to pay for thousands of surgeries? Maybe Medicare For All and these big medical reform programs are too ambitious and unlikely to go through. But maybe we could at least help raise the floor for what medical conditions Americans are treating by default. If you're reading this, consider calling up your representative and telling them: "Hey, I think it's kinda crazy that we have a safe and proven surgery that lets people see, and I think it should be available for anyone that needs it, figure out how to make it work." How many people even need these eye surgeries? I bet that raising enough money to pay for this surgery for every single American wouldn't even cost that much (in relative terms). So going the charity path would probably also be viable. However if it's something that enough people agree is worth doing, why not just use your tax dollars to pay for it? Who's going to seriously oppose a bill for giving people the ability to see? You know what would be a win? Tuning in to the State of the Union next year and hearing: we eliminated this form of blindness from the USA.
  • NoZebra120vClip 3y ago
    The article says the kid tried looking into Social Security for the Blind, but "couldn't figure it out". And I guarantee you that plenty of entitlements and government grants of all sorts, especially welfare type ones, go unclaimed, because the would-be beneficiary doesn't even know about it, can't figure it out, or attempted and failed on some paperwork technicality. I've been on federal entitlements of various types for over 20 years, and let me tell you, the paperwork and reporting requirements are onerous, and they advertise extremely punitive penalties if you don't comply. It's basically a part time job to gather up all the necessary proof of income, assets, employment, medical records, etc. and fill out the necessary forms, and then get it all filed in the right place at the right time before the deadline. And the agencies will do their best to lose all that and mess it up on their end, so you need to constantly be second-guessing them. I'll tell you, it's far easier to go beg what you need from a charity like the St. Vincent de Paul Society. Technically, they also have income limits and other qualifications, but they're not going to put you through a scene from Brazil just to get your rent paid in an emergency.
• libraryatnight 3y ago
  He's a greedy snot manufacturing consent for some kind of hunger games dystopia. He's only charitable in the eyes of gullible idiots
• deafpolygon 3y ago
  This is an income stream for him- is it really altruism if you make money off doing it? His "altriusm" doesn't really impact society at all. It is more targeted to individuals so he can make money off the videos going viral. I mean, as an example - Keanu Reeves (IMO) is also altruistic and probably has had a far greater impact on society for the greater good than MrBeast, but no one ever talks about him. This is because Keanu doesn't talk about it, advertise it, or monetize it in the form of 'viral' videos.
  • noahtallen 3y ago
    It's the other way around for Mr. Beast, though. Keanu happens to have a huge load of money from doing other things like acting. And as a side note, he is widely talked about on various internet communities like Reddit and gets a huge amount of respect for being an awesome person. (I see much more about him on the internet than Mr. Beast to be honest -- Mr. Beast is mostly confined to the Youtube world.) Mr. Beast, on the other hand, uses this charitable content creation model to make money to give away. If you remove the advertising, monetizing, etc., Mr. Beast has nothing to give away. That's the genius of the model. Whether Mr. Beast is altruistic is the topic of 90% of this HN thread, and yet we'll never be able to answer it without knowing his true internal intentions. IMO, whether he's altruistic is irrelevant. He does so much more good for people than the vast majority of individuals or business that it seems odd to critique it. To me, it's pretty awesome that someone found a way to hack the (often morally dubious) content creation business model into giving away a vast amount of the ad/sponsor income. Any other creator, that money funds the creator and production of content. And we don't typically complain about that, as long as we get entertaining/educational/artistic content we enjoy. (Some of our capitalist senses might even say it's totally fine to get rich off this model.) Mr. Beast works within the exact same business model while also giving a huge amount of money away, in a way that a lot of people (though obviously not the HN crowd) enjoy. And yet we're complaining about that use of the content creator business model. But when no money is given away, it's fine? What are we even critiquing!? I'm not even sure Mr. Beast himself would say that this model is truly altruistic. He has always been very transparent and honest about how it works.
• jraby3 3y ago
  His business seems like a wonderful one. He’s figured out how to make money but also help people. Seems like most businesses make money but are either a net neutral or negative on the world. I remember years ago raising money for a company called the AIDS Ride. Every participant had to raise around $2500 to participate. The aidsride kept around half to support the bike riders (a trip from NY to Boston), and they gave half to an aids charity. Seemed like a wonderful business to do so much good in the world and also make money (and as a rider I felt like I also got a lot out of the experience). This seems similar. It’s not a charity. It’s a business. But one that takes advertising money, keeps some of it, and uses the other portion to help thousands of people.
• seydor 3y ago
  A lot of people seem to agree that "the end justifies the means" with his charitable acts. That's what rubs people off imo. Imagine a porn star making vids to give to charity. Would people give equal praise to her? This kind of attention-seeking is considered too easy, and too easy is usually not considered ethical. I wonder how many will imitate his deeds?
  • andelink 3y ago
    > Imagine a porn star making vids to give to charity. Would people give equal praise to her? The only difference is the audience viewers don’t see the direct benefit of the charitable acts/contributions. I don’t see what the point of this comment/comparison is.
    • seydor 3y ago
      i meant "to give the profits to charity"
• jdprgm 3y ago
  I think it's a reflection of the complete monopoly Youtube has on E, pg, pg-13, and R (basically nonexistent on Youtube) content. Video on the internet is basically Youtube with all its restrictions or porn. Mr. Beast is basically the channel a bunch of marketing managers won't get fired for giving a bunch of money to. It's all the pretty fucked up result of our complete failure to innovate anything in-between ad based media and cable subscriptions.
• fodkodrasz 3y ago
  Even the name is telling. A false prophet.
• car 3y ago
  Philantroporn. For a country with a social net called GoFundMe.
• shaman1 3y ago
  Not religious but I remember Jesus's words (lol): > Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them. If you do, you will have no reward from your Father in heaven. > So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full. > But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing > so that your giving may be in secret. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%206%3A1-4&version=NIV https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew%206%3A1... I agree with this, it all depends on your motivations of your acts. If you give to be seen you're just seeking attention but of course for the receiver it's not less valuable. It seems he gives some money to make more money (views), is that something altruistic? I don't think so.
  • dymk 3y ago
    The Bible also says being gay is a sin, so I’d say it’s not a great source of morality in general. Arbitrary at best.
    • shaman1 3y ago
      Can understand why some primitive people were not big fans of gay people, they would not 'multiply' the tribe. I wouldn't describe it as arbitrary, after all it was compiled by 'learned' scribes but more like based upon the needs of those times.
    • deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  • em-bee 3y ago
    the problem is that he isn't doing it to show of his generosity, but that doing what he does is the way he gets the money in the first place. he is not independently wealthy and bragging about how he spends his money, but he figured out how he can earn money that allows him to give it to others. so denying him publicity would deny him the very means to do good in the first place. he gives some money to make more money or he makes money in order to give money. in the end, what matters is how much money he keeps for himself and how much he gives away. it looks to me he is giving much more than he is keeping.
• apeescape 3y ago
  I've always hated the social porn aspect of altruism. On one hand, you're doing a good thing by giving something of your own to someone in need, but on the other hand, you're using the publicity to boost your public image. I understand why people say the good side trumps the negatives, but to me it's just off. Watch Drake's music video for the song "God's Plan" and ask yourself if it's heartwarmingly nice, or social porn in the name of making Drake look good.
• Lapsa 3y ago
  I hate those over the top orgasmic face video thumbnails
• SergeAx 3y ago
  I am not keen with American culture, but it seems to me that he wants to be YouTube Oprah on steroids, right?
• LelouBil 3y ago
  In semi-related news, a french twitch streamer, "Zerator", just learned that he will become "Knight of the National Order of Merit" which is an honorific title that "rewards distinguished merits acquired either in a public, civil or military function, or in the exercise of a private activity during at least 10 years." He is known for organizing a caritative event each year in France with a lot of french twitch streamers and content creator, where all donations go toa different non profit each year. In the last edition (September 2022) they raised 10 182 126 euros !
  • walthamstow 3y ago
    Nice! How does that award rank in the French honours system? I am only familiar with the Legion D'Honeur (almost certainly spelt incorrectly)
    • poulpy123 3y ago
      it's just under the legion d'honneur, but to be fair these awards have not much meaning these days
• dimgl 3y ago
  This YouTube video from MeatCanyon IMO nails why Mr. Beast is so damn uncomfortable to so many people, including myself: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-tQXZCEi54 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-tQXZCEi54 It's also pretty hilarious to boot. Edit: he made a follow-up LOL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VRKJthNmWw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VRKJthNmWw
• krick 3y ago
  Casinos have become a viral sensation for their acts of altruism
• themagician 3y ago
  I’ve always assumed it’s mostly fake, like damn near everything else. Is there any hard, actual proof that he actually gives away what he says he does? There doesn’t seem to be any reason to actual give away the money if you can so easily fake it and still get the views. It’s kind of a known YouTube scam, and I just figured MrBeast was the biggest.
• phonescreen_man 3y ago
  I know it’s dark but reading some of the comments calling out how much money he has created for charities etc brought to mind Jimmy Saville, the good friend of King Charles made millions for charity throughout his life. If people get an ‘icky’ feeling about this man’s so called altruism, it’s understandable in this world.
• throwaway2037 3y ago
  There is so much tension in this discussion. Not too much grey area. This feels like another "work from home" argument. What do people think about YouTube's Pleasant Green and "The Story of Chikaordery"? Ref: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLeykLlB1Bftscawq_q1uqUHaQccrApLl https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLeykLlB1Bftscawq_q1u...
• Halan 3y ago
  Unpopular opinion, I respect him more than most channels for grownups that pretend to be “educational”. Take LTT as an example. Their titles are extremely click bite-y. Linus and his team talk an awful bunch about their plans for YT but then their execution feels so cheap. Mr. Beast instead uses titles that feel like click bites but then goes on explaining why that is true in the video, he doesn’t make a bunch of videos boasting about his media company and he is consistent in his production, at least on the main channel. I am not a fan of his content but wish there were more YouTubers with a solid vision on the platform.
• Euphorbium 3y ago
  I know zero real people who watch, like or engage with this fool in any way. Corporate mascot.
• ljlolel 3y ago
  The uneasy feeling people sense from Mr Beast is his fake happy soy-face smile
• shp0ngle 3y ago
  I hate the rapid-cut way his video are done. Once I tried to watch some of his videos, and I thought it's just a trailer to the "actual video", but then no actual video came, it's just all like that But it's fine I guess. People watched crappy reality shows in 2000s, now we have this stuff.
• LinAGKar 3y ago
  What altruism was that? I'm not gonna listen through a half hour audio file to find out
• poulpy123 3y ago
  Saying it's altruism, philanthropy or charity is like saying your salary comes from altruism from your boss
• aforwardslash 3y ago
  It is perfectly possible to have an altruist and a business agenda in the same space. That's how most non-profits operate - they have a revenue stream (donations, trust funds, etc), they pay operational expenses including salaries for the staff that keep the machine running (just like a company), and funnel the rest for their specific activities. The only real difference (besides taxation) between a non-profit and a regular company is the distribution of dividends - companies may slice profits directly between their shareholders, and non-profits cannot do this. MrBeast seems to be rebooting the non-profit enterprise with a broader approach and leveraging modern revenue streams - such as ads - instead of the traditional guilt-trip of shocking images or statements to pressure you to donate. It's a business? Yes. Does it help people? It seems so. To the people arguing it is localized and sparse: so what? Like it or not, they are changing the world - not only those that are reached by them, but also those that are inspired to pursue similar enterprises.
• mihaic 3y ago
  I find MrBeast hollow and I doubt he can understand what creeps many of us out about his videos. It's very hard for me to put it into words as well. His videos seem to reflect a generation that has lost hope and dignity. None of his subscribers care that his style of handout can't scale to a society, everyone want to be that person that gets a free Lambo just because they exist. What I find most disturbing is how thin the veil of hyprocricy is, and yet still so many people fall for it. I would be a lot less icked out by these videos if they weren't so succesful.
• Only_Spam 3y ago
  It's funny how "Mr. Beast" with no soul or content cares about others. He does charity because of tax write-off not because it benefits society. I once watched a video of his because of clickbait, and it was a waste of time targeting immature youth. He's all about hype and no substance.
• j-bos 3y ago
  I find arguments against Mr Beast on the basis of his charity not being properly altruiatic worth considering. I'd be curious to see what percent of his companies pre-"giving" profits are given away vs the equivalent numbers for other youtubers, corporations and even non-profits who also publisize thier "altruism". Feels like those metrics would cut to the quick much better than soft pro con feelings.
• difosfor 3y ago
  I don't get why people like charity so much. It basically just means that whoever manages to get a lot of money gets to choose who does or does not get money. I'd rather see all of this money go to a government and then democratically determine who gets the money so it really benefits society as a whole.
• sacnoradhq 3y ago
  Team Trees was like saying you're "helping" like a 5-year-old stopping a hurricane by playing in the sand with a teaspoon. Helping would be genetically modifying seaweed to need less iron and making 1000's of robotic seaweed processing and disposal platforms. Helping would be globally banning all forms of fossil fuel extraction. Helping would be ending animal agriculture. Helping would be not pied pipering people into a phony social movement that doesn't bridge the reality gap free from logic and data. Truth is hard to hear, but necessary. Paraphrasing Upton Sinclair: it is impossible to get someone to break through cognitive dissonance when it risks taking away their comfortable but omnicidally-unsustainable lifestyle. This is why climate change solutions cannot use democratic means, because people will never vote to put down their fork or cigarette even if they are dying from diabetes and losing their feet or breathing from an oxygen tank.
• locustous 3y ago
  It's not altruism of he is getting a payout in cash or Internet points.
• browningstreet 3y ago
  Mr Beast does a lot of things, but the most philanthropic of his efforts shouldn’t even need to exist in a society with a functioning medical care system. Instead of dragging him for his “I fixed people’s hearing” videos we (Americans) should be embarrassed that a YouTuber is a medical benefactor for fairly basic problems.
  • bitshiftfaced 3y ago
    I'm sorry if I'm missing something, but I don't actually watch the channel. Is this what you're referring to? > In it, Donaldson and his team give away over “$3 million worth of cutting-edge hearing technology” to 1,000 people across the U.S., Mexico, Guatemala, Brazil, South Africa, Malwai and Indonesia. https://nationalpost.com/news/world/mrbeast-inspiration-porn-deaf-people https://nationalpost.com/news/world/mrbeast-inspiration-porn... It looks like, in the USA, children with an IEP qualify under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) https://www.understood.org/en/articles/at-a-glance-free-and-appropriate-public-education https://www.understood.org/en/articles/at-a-glance-free-and-... Also, it appears at least in some states, those with Medicaid would also qualify.
• dahwolf 3y ago
  This thread is getting a lot of engagement and your clue should be that this is exactly what successful influencers manage to accomplish. It doesn't matter what opinion you have of MrBeast. It matters that we have an opinion, any opinion, lots of it. To give another recent example. A young progressive woman on TikTok went viral because she claimed that traditional masculinity (chivalry, providing for her) was absent in liberal men and only found in Republican men. Yet she does not culturally align with Republicans. She wanted both aspects of men and couldn't find any. As expected, half the world engaged to point out hypocrisy, unrealistic expectations, and so on. Each participant in this conversation thinking they're correcting her, setting her straight, putting her back in her corner. That's not what happened. She won. All of this is engineered. Engagement traps and engagement farming. And we fall for it every single time because it is a hard-wired feature of our brain: to obsess over deviations of the normal.
• agent00shoe 3y ago
  Recording yourself doing things for views/hits/money is not altruism.