Sandra, I agree with you that celebrities are blatantly public about their good deeds and this seems to go against the Christian view that a good deed is most genuine when done in privacy. However, I disagree with your point that the fact that Justin Bieber has so much money makes his philanthropy far less meaningful. I think a kind act is a kind act no matter how much money the person who does it has.
Though I agree that the sincerity of the celebrities who make their support of charities public is questionable and that they often benefit from their good deeds by gaining popularity, I think at the end of the day the fact is, they are donating to charities and that in itself is good and benefits the recipients of the charities. In other words, the number of recipients who benefit is far larger than the one celebrity who's popularity and public image benefits from the deed.
I also think it's important to consider in what context the celebrity mentions or presents their good deed. Personally, one celebrity whose shameless self-promotion of their own good deeds that really irks me is Oprah Winfrey.
Though it is undeniable that Oprah has made numerous contributions to making this world a better place, such as her Oprah Book Club that has helped increase literacy in America, I find that her philanthropy is often presented in such a way that it's hard not to notice how she is in many ways congratulating herself.
Another thing that bothers me about Oprah's method of charity is how highly consumerist it is. Her idea of "changing someone's life for the better" is giving them a brand new car or the latest iPad. Granted Oprah's "favorite things" giveaway isn't the only charity Oprah participates in--- she also has contributed lots of money towards funding schools in America and towards building schools for girls in Africa. However, Oprah makes those good deeds a public event as well, and has had many episodes in the past that talk about her various charitable endeavors. And like Sandra mentioned, it's hard to find these good deeds sincere when celebrities present them in ways that come across as bragging and as blatant attempts to make them seem like good people.
Sandra mentioned Ellen DeGeneres as an example of a celebrity who makes their charity well-known. One thing I admire about Ellen DeGeneres is that the gifts she gives away to the guests on her show are more often than not gag gifts and are very much a parody of Oprah's blatantly consumerist giveaways. I really get the sense that Ellen DeGeneres doesn't take herself or these gift giveaways that seriously but when she is advocating for something she genuinely and seriously supports, her attitude is completely different. For example, Ellen DeGeneres was quite vocal of her support for the It Gets Better Campaign.
As you can see, Ellen is advocating for working towards suicide-prevention and putting an end to bullying, especially bullying people based on their sexual orientation. In this case, I find her public support for these issues and organizations that work towards this issues, admirable and extremely genuine.
Sandra also mentioned George Clooney and the announcement he made showing his support for Hope For Haiti Now. Again, I find this far more appropriate and genuine than Oprah Winfrey's giveaways or Justin Bieber's music video for his song Pray. I think that in this case George Clooney is putting his name behind a cause he truly believes in and is trying to motivate other Americans and the fans that respect him, to follow suit. With this in mind, I think there is a distinct difference between a celebrity advocating for a cause they truly believe in and using their name to help gain support for the cause, and a celebrity using charity as a way to create a positive public image. More often than not, most celebrities achieve the former and though the latter is often a consequence, I think the more important thing to focus on is how celebrity endorsement of particular issues helps support these issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment