Why do celebrities come across as such hypocrites?
I just finished watching the commercial where all of these rich & famous celebs are snapping their fingers and - the commercial ends every 3 secs a child dies from aids or poverty. Here's my take - each of those celebs in that commercial has enough power / money of their own to possibly end starvation in Africa. Yes, I know a few of them adopt 1 or 2 children, but really, they could help a lot more than just that. I may be wrong in asking this, but if I had their kind of money I would do a hell of a lot more to help.
Comments
Because we don't see anything approaching the full narratives that constitute their lives. We think that we know so much about them, since we're bombarded with images of them, but we have no idea what they actually do.
You assume that they have a lot more money and power than most of them actually have. And you assume that they are or should be less self-centered than the rest of us. The thing about celebrities is that they are in no way extraordinary as a group. Some of them are, I'm sure; most of them are just as fickle, confused, uninformed, busy, conflicted, and worried as we are. They're not by any means the richest people in the country (look at the Fortune 500).
A lot of them get a great deal of flak for trying to make a difference when they do speak out or use their money to do good in the world. Think of the negative press that goes along with Angelina Jolie or George Clooney or Sting or Bob Geldoff. They get crucified in the press - accused of trying to make money and increase their fame on the backs of suffering people. Most famous people who try to do good in a public way probably find fighting the cynicism and accusations of hypocrisy so maddening that they eventually give up. It's easier for them to work behind the scenes.
At the root of your question is a profound assumption about what causes poverty and starvation in a place like Africa, though. It isn't purely a question of giving money, nor even of sending food or fuel. I'm a liberal, in favor of increasing our foreign aid significantly, but I know that whenever we make a donation, there is no way to be certain whether we'll be helping in the short term and causing long-term problems. So, let's say Oprah empties her bank account to feed Darfur for five years - what then? In 2011, Darfur residents may have been well-fed for five years, but they have no infrastructure, no economy, no government, no farms, no irrigation, no educational system; the birth rate has gone up; more people have HIV; there are no more doctors, hospitals, clinics, teachers - and Oprah is broke.
It's so complicated. And I think most people, individually, celebrities or not, try to do the best that they know how to do. What we lack is a vision for organizing charitable wealth and distributing it in the least harmful and most effective ways.
We can not be really sure if certain celebs do more than we read. The press can be damning either way for a celeb as by donating too much money could be seen as a publicity stunt or to promote a movie etc. Some celebs do donate more than you think, Michael Schumacher donated a very large sum of money after the Tsunami to help the relief effort which showed a different side of him.
Some could donate more money but some do more than you think and providing their name, face and time can be alot more valuable than a sum of money. The other trouble is with the amount of charities, who would you donate a large sum to?
The celebs who do these public service commercials, usually donate their time (don't take salary). Some contribute money from their pockets, as well.
Look at Jerry Lewis Telethon for MD: The celebs perform for free, give Jerry a check, and go on their way. Also, look at all of the major corporations who donate millions of dollars.
An individual celeb cannot end starvation in a country. The celebs give others the incentive to give to particular causes. Many celebs donate to numerous charity organizations; have many causes they believe their money and name will be of help as to getting more people to donate.
I know what you mean, but I think its only natural that they should want a fair amount of their money, and with the amount some of them earn, they might well be giving lots to charity and still have enough to support their lavish lifestyles. Anyway, I dont think they come across as being the most moral group of people, with all of the divorce and cheating that seems to occur!
it really is almost the element of the international that you stay in. In my u . s . a ., such an excellent style of contain heavily desirous to attend till marriage. clone of me. yet then I failed, for the guy i replaced into ninety% particular i will marry, on the on the spot. Now i'm nonetheless with him, in person-friendly words that share has been decreased to at least something like 60%. What i'm attempting to say is, there are an excellent style of girls who really propose it even as they say they prefer to attend till marriage. it really is only not always efficient. As for you, you also do not understand even if you'll prevail staying virgin till marriage. And in case you do not prevail, you does not prefer to be talked about as a hypocrite...
Maybe because they are.