3 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
by 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]