Philanthropy should not be for show

pranav SRIRAMAN

Surfing the Twitter timeline, I came across a post that several of my mutual Tweeters, as well as several other accounts, were interacting with.

The tweet was from Dexerto, a media and news company, and stated, “In his latest video, @MrBeast gave 20,000 kids in South Africa their first pair of shoes,” with a 33-second clip of the action attached beneath the caption.

Jimmy Donaldson, more commonly known by his internet name “MrBeast,” is a famous YouTuber and social media influencer who has created a massive online platform by creating content based on philanthropy. MrBeast travels to various poverty-stricken areas around the world and creates videos of himself helping out people in need.

On initial review, one may think that MrBeast is using his platform to make the world a better place.

Not quite.

On the surface, MrBeast’s actions in these videos are positive: he is providing something of need to someone in need. However, upon further evaluation, it becomes clear that is not the case. To say that there is nothing problematic with the way he and other philanthropic influencers use their platforms would be incorrect.

Mr. Beast’s generosity, and that of other philanthropic influencers, is a clear ploy to garner respect from the internet.

Morally, it’s hard to garner respect for someone who is donating for personal gain, regardless of the extent to which it’s being done. If someone were to truly care about philanthropy, then there wouldn’t be a need to bring a camera crew to the site.

However, some internet users say that MrBeast and other philanthropic influencers create content and record their actions in order to earn more money to fund their next charitable act.

But according to Forbes, MrBeast is the #1 highest-paid YouTuber in the world, earning approximately $54 million a year. The result of him spending a sum of money on YouTube is making even more money, some of which is spent on his next production, while the rest of it is likely largely spent on himself.

In return, he also gains more sub-

Is it practical to enact laws promoting electric vehicles?

Many states, including Oregon and California, have passed requiring all cars for sale be zero-emission by 2035. This will greatly increase the sale of electric vehicles.

Yes

scribers and traction. He is undoubtedly benefitting from his charitable work, both monetarily and in personal gratification.

Given his large platform and its power, it would be more suitable to see MrBeast make content addressing the injustices that result in poverty-stricken areas. However, the backlash and lack of interest that comes with real activism will almost certainly kill his source of income, which is something his brand simply cannot afford.

The action being made can be one that is good but if it results in personal gain, is the action still acceptable?

The answer is no.