7 ms·
How $100 Million Really Gets Donated, Mark Zuckerberg Style
- greghinch 14y agoI'm confused by this article. The whole thing is positioned like they are blowing the whistle on some scandal, but what scandal? That a public figure donating a large sum of money wants to make sure it brings some good PR? Is that a surprise? Or that the money was donated with specific uses already in mind? Shouldn't someone who donates that much money be allowed to condition it on the changes they'd like to see made? If you don't like their ideas, don't take the money. Or is it that the bulk of it is to pay teachers bonuses? That sounds like a good thing? Seems like sensationalization of a non-issue
- JabavuAdams 14y agoIt's interesting to get a peek behind the curtain. Most people don't have any idea how these things are done. While money can buy things, it also buys access. This article provides a little taste of that.
- greghinch 14y agoI agree, it's more the tone of the specific article. It paints the picture as if it's some sort of controversy, when there isn't one.
- optymizer 14y agoI concur. I was expecting some kind of plot twist.
- 001sky 14y agodonated with specific uses already in mind ==Purchasing
- binarymax 14y agoI'm not so sure. I think this quote: “Mark’s money is not going in to classrooms.” -Bari Mattes, 9/19/2010 Is the "surprise" here. I am guessing spin here around the 'Waiting for Superman' backdrop is that the public would have expected the donation to the schools to be used for the classroom and to directly impact students, where now it seems that it was used for salaries and investments to those with the same educational agenda as those who donated. Again, no surprise for the HN crowd, but I suspect this will probably get some NJ parents warmed up.
- greghinch 14y agoThat quote is exactly the sensationalization I was referring to. Because a few paragraphs down, it says the money will primarily go to teacher's bonuses. And it seems like keeping teachers well paid and happy is the best use of the money. But a parent will read to that first quote and get all worked up.
- pemulis 14y ago> And it seems like keeping teachers well paid and happy is the best use of the money. Is there any evidence that this is the best way to improve schools? Honestly curious.
- greghinch 14y agoNo I suppose not, I'm more speaking from my own experience having a number of friends who are teachers, all of them care deeply for their students and work hard to do the best they can, and all of them could stand to be much better paid. Hopefully, since this is going to bonuses, those are weighted well on performance and so may be better incentives than just salary. Then again, the teacher's union may have negotiated specific bonus rates that have to be paid across the board.
- larrys 14y ago"and all of them could stand to be much better paid" Many people could make the argument that they should be better paid. It's a supply and demand situation. There's enough people who want to be teachers that they pay can be what it is and people will still want that job. Don't forget also that a standard teaching job comes with much time off and some good benefits. Airline pilots are notoriously (from what I read) underpaid. I've read some really whacky low numbers. So that's something to consider before taking on a career in aviation. Or in teaching. If the collective people stop going into those careers then the remaining people will be highly paid and the balance will shift. Like with programming.
- noahr 14y agoIt is noteworthy that Newark delayed releasing these records for two years, and then finally did so on Christmas Eve. If they had nothing to hide, why not just hand them over a long time ago? And I'm confused about why you think this article is making the story look like a scandal. The headline says it's about how $100 million gets donated, and goes on to say it's a glimpse at what happens behind the scenes of such a large donation. At the very end it does say: "If there is a smoking gun" - that's pretty far from editorializing or sensationalism.
- gwern 14y ago> It is noteworthy that Newark delayed releasing these records for two years, and then finally did so on Christmas Eve. If they had nothing to hide, why not just hand them over a long time ago? Precedent? Fear that you can hang an honest man? Intrenched bureaucratic inertia and desire for control over info? The belief (justified or not) that Zuckerberg et al prefer privacy on these internal communications?
- noahr 14y agoZuckerberg didn't give this money to another corporation or a private charity, he gave it to public schools. The money belongs to the people of Newark after that. For parents and teachers who work in the schools there, isn't it expected that they should be concerned about what this amount of money is going to be used for, and whether there are strings attached? If Zuckerberg had something else in mind he could have set up a foundation to create separate, private programs that support public schools (this is what the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation often does).
- KeyBoardG 14y agoThere is no story here. They donated money and had it run through PR to get the right amount of public impact, like anyone would do with that amount of money.
- addlepate 14y agoThe irony is that people seemed to barely notice Zuckerberg's recent gigantic donation. So even if it was stage-managed, it got pretty much washed out of the news.
- nicholassmith 14y agoAmazingly Zuckerberg has people that manage his PR and so on, and they've worked to make him look as good as possible. What a surprise. I imagine even Gates has people who do things like this even though he's effectively retired now. Doesn't matter if there's a PR spin on it, $100m was donated.
- danielpal 14y agoWhat a terrible guy Zuckerberg is. He donates 100M to charity. Then he makes a lot of effort trying to get a platform to incentivate others to donate. Finally he convinces other millionaires to donate money and worst of all he tries to push them into donating more. What an awful guy..
- rprasad 14y agoDamn that Zuckerberg! If only he hadn't donated that money, it would magically have appeared out of the aether so that the Newark school district could attempt this experiment which, if successful, could restructure teacher compensation and recruitment nationwide! There's a special place in hell for Zuckerberg.
- zethraeus 14y agoHas anyone found a link to the raw transcript? The editorializing here seems rather pandering, but It would be interesting to read what actually went down.
- dhbanes 14y agoNew link: http://www.fastcompany.com/3004509/how-100-million-really-gets-donated-mark-zuckerberg-style http://www.fastcompany.com/3004509/how-100-million-really-ge...
- mongol 14y agoQuestion for Americans: why did Mark choose Newark for this charity money? Is it because Mark grew up there, or is it in a very sorry state compared to the rest of the country, or..?
- noahr 14y agoInnovation is a really scary thing for public agencies. Democracies and public bureaucracies are set up specifically to mitigate risk. Yet risk is an essential factor in the success of innovative companies, many of which are now all dealing with gov't regulations and bureaucracies (think Uber or Airbnb). Here's how New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg put it in the Aug. 2011 issue of Fast Company: "The public," Bloomberg says, "insists, and arguably has a right to insist, that it knows where its money's going. [They] have a very high expectation of results." He is talking about how the government spends its funds. "That is not the way innovation works. Innovation--the essence of innovation--is you don't know what you're going to build, what it's going to be called, how much it's going to cost. You cannot use public monies unless you can answer virtually every one of those questions, which is why government tends not to innovate. The public wants that accountability in advance, that justification in advance. But that's not going to work for certain things."