5 ms·
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 po
by 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 agoUnfortunately, 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 agoTo 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 agoAre TV game shows (Jeopardy?) also poverty porn? How do you even know the contestants are poor and not participating just for fun?
- kortilla 3y agoNo, it’s not poverty porn if it’s not showing the poverty. Poverty porn requires the demonstration of how life changing it is.
- jerojero 3y agoYou know the people participating in most of Mr.Beast videos are poor because, well that's the point of the videos in a lot of cases. I'd say a lot of his videos are fine, but some of them can be quite jarring. In a lot of them for example there's families that are struggling and he spends almost no time in the emotional aspects of it and just kind of jumps into the "BUT HERES 10 THOUSAND DOLLARS!" to get reactions. It actually feels very dehumanising, as if these people are but a prop in the stage. Of course, no one will say he's doing something bad by giving people money. But ultimately, to make a spectacle out of poverty is worth criticising, no?
- jjallen 3y agoHow would he be able to do any charity if not for YouTube and broadcasting it? He’s effectively transferring dollars from large advertisers to poor Americans. Very unlikely he would be doing this at all if not for YouTube.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- paulpauper 3y agoI 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. the federal govt. spends trillions on aid without having to film people. The whole reason Mr Beast is able to give anything away at all is because of the spectacle. otherwise, no one would watch and he'd have no money to give.
- blackoil 3y agoFederal govt. has a right to violence to collect those trillions and they are pretty inefficient in spending it.
- kaba0 3y agoBecause the US governments often values companies more than their own citizens. It is not a fundamental property though, Scandinavian countries do a whole lot better for example.
- no_wizard 3y agoSure they do, but he’s doing it without any bureaucracy. No real strings for the recover. Government aid is both more political and often has strings attached or requirements. Very different things entirely, nor is it sufficient
- pavlov 3y agoNow imagine a government that helps people with no strings attached, without making them feel like shit about needing help, and no cameras pointed at their face either. Who says it can’t be done?
- chasd00 3y ago> Now imagine a government that helps people with no strings attached, without making them feel like shit about needing help, and no cameras pointed at their face either. Who says it can’t be done? All of history so far.
- jonny_eh 3y agoIt strikes me that people are simply jealous. Jealous that he’s both successful and well liked.
- dymk 3y agoExactly this. People don’t have a problem with him doing good. They have a problem with him getting credit for it.
- DropInIn 3y ago[flagged]
- seydor 3y agoThis is philanthropy porn. He is not the philanthropist because he doesnt haev the money in the first place, he is using other people's money to perform charity on camera. I 'm not very religious but it is a tale as old as humans. The christian gospels called out this hypocricy for a reason: > Therefore, when you do a charitable deed, do not sound a trumpet before you as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory before me. Assuredly, I say to you, they have their rewards. But when you do a charitable deed, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, that your charitable deed may be in secret; and your Father who sees in secret will Himself reward you openly.” – Matthew 6:2-4 The other thing is that philanthropy is about helping people according to their need, not randomly or according to their willingness to get on cam
- irishloop 3y agoBut if we never celebrate altruism or philanthropy, are we not, perhaps, discouraging it? Don't we want to instill these cultural values of giving? It seems to me that keeping quiet is a kind of purity ritual that perhaps does more harm than good as well. Personally I don't care about MrBeast one way or the other, he doesn't affect my life in any appreciable way, if he makes money giving other people money, cool, I can think of a thousand worse ways to make money.
- seydor 3y agowhere is the celebration?