Turn on thread page Beta

When celebs sing for charity cases. watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    The only thing they do is:

    -Increase their celeb status
    - Make people feel bad for not giving money while they fly their jets after the recording and still drink their 10 thousand dollars champgne

    Yes, in essence it can be seen as something good but the wrongs definitely outweigh the good in my opinion. By singing these songs they captivate themselves in this fantasy world where if you sing and show some love everything will go away.

    If they are truly sincere why aren't they out there helping out? Yes I've heard of some people actually doing thing (like Bill Clinton) but I'm wondering why they're only feeding into the hype by devoting to Haiti while there are others who are starving and dying everyday. If all rich donated money I'm sure poverty would definitely be less in the world. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything, but to make us feel bad while they're still living their millionaires lifestyle and us struggling to pay debts is crazy!

    In short: Celebs are hypocrites when it comes to charity. Cowell just wants to be mroe famous.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    agreed i dont really like it either
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I do agree with you, but these things can help and I'm sure the celebs do know this. Whatever their intentions, though, I'd say that a positive outcome is worth appreciating.

    I'm not one for donating money to charity, for instance. Call me selfish, too, but I think that money donated to charities too often ends up wasted. A mere hour ago, if you'd have asked me if I'd be likely to donate any cash with the intention of helping those in Haiti, I'd have said no. However, a re-release of my favourite song has just been posted on a thread here (I'm sure it triggered you to make this one), and I think the song's beautiful and intend to download it - a plus, I guess, for anyone who believes my money will help.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I know Alexandra Burke flew to Haiti to help out..but to some extent I do agree with you..Charity singles are not that good e.g Saturdays-Just Cant get Enough
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RatnSha)
    I know Alexandra Burke flew to Haiti to help out..but to some extent I do agree with you..Charity singles are not that good e.g Saturdays-Just Cant get Enough
    I bet all the cameras were on her. It's all 'me me me' even when it comes to serious tragic cases such as these. I bet she overstayed in a 5 star hotel and drank her evian while "working", assuming she's very stupid.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    You say that they only do it for their own gain, but to a certain extent that's what everyone else does when they give to charity. People give a few coppers into a collecting bucket at Tesco for example, then go away with bags full of shopping and a car. A few pennies on their own don't really do anything, but it makes people feel good that they've managed to give 4p to charity AND get rid of their coppers at the same time.

    Singers do not get paid for singing on charity singles, and I think in some cases they also donate directly themselves (I don't know how you could be so involved in a project trying to raise money and not give some of your own money too). And people complain that the singles aren't generally that good, but it's not trying to be a musical masterpiece, rather a means of gathering a whole lot of money from people who might not otherwise donate.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Radiohead raised over half a million dollars through a one-off charity gig, which is fairly commendable in my humble opinion. I would have imagined that they also did not give a **** about any publicity that occurred as a result. In fact, whatever it did amount to, it was very small.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kreuzuerk)
    Radiohead raised over half a million dollars through a one-off charity gig, which is fairly commendable in my humble opinion. I would have imagined that they also did not give a **** about any publicity that occurred as a result. In fact, whatever it did amount to, it was very small.
    I just don't like it when celebs out of all people pretty much pressurize us commeners to donate money. If all rich people donated we wouldn't even have to donate a cent.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    The worst offenders for me are the Royal Family, like bwfoew Christmas when they claimed Will(or was it Harry?) would sleep rought for a night to experience life on the streets, shame he had a massive crew with him and security just in case.

    Or something happens like in Haiti and you see a celeb hugging a child, if they cared so much they wouldnt have a camera crew!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WarmEye)
    I just don't like it when celebs out of all people pretty much pressurize us commeners to donate money. If all rich people donated we wouldn't even have to donate a cent.
    I agree in regards to all of the various appalling songs that have come about, but this Radiohead gig is clearly different. They got rich folks to buy expensive tickets and then donated all the proceeds, and I highly doubt that they did it for any media attention, in fact it's unthinkable to suggest that. Their contribution was a good one and did not pressurize anyone into donating, in my opinion.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    My eyes. They are open.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WarmEye)
    I bet all the cameras were on her. It's all 'me me me' even when it comes to serious tragic cases such as these. I bet she overstayed in a 5 star hotel and drank her evian while "working", assuming she's very stupid.
    Well I didn't know about it. :dontknow:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    agreed and i hate the 'everbody hurts' cover
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Agree
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kreuzuerk)
    I agree in regards to all of the various appalling songs that have come about, but this Radiohead gig is clearly different. They got rich folks to buy expensive tickets and then donated all the proceeds, and I highly doubt that they did it for any media attention, in fact it's unthinkable to suggest that. Their contribution was a good one and did not pressurize anyone into donating, in my opinion.
    I definitely wasn't disagreeing with the radiohead point, rather the very nature of musicians in general when they take part in charit cases. Of course there will be the rare individuals who are sincere and actively take part in this rather than feeding into the hype so they'll uplift their status.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    Bob Geldof is the worst of them all. Biggest hypocrite who ever existed.
    Shouting at governments to give money to Africa and yet hiding all his money offshore so he doesn't pay taxes. **** off you ******.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WarmEye)
    The only thing they do is:

    -Increase their celeb status
    - Make people feel bad for not giving money while they fly their jets after the recording and still drink their 10 thousand dollars champgne

    Yes, in essence it can be seen as something good but the wrongs definitely outweigh the good in my opinion. By singing these songs they captivate themselves in this fantasy world where if you sing and show some love everything will go away.

    If they are truly sincere why aren't they out there helping out? Yes I've heard of some people actually doing thing (like Bill Clinton) but I'm wondering why they're only feeding into the hype by devoting to Haiti while there are others who are starving and dying everyday. If all rich donated money I'm sure poverty would definitely be less in the world. I'm not saying we shouldn't do anything, but to make us feel bad while they're still living their millionaires lifestyle and us struggling to pay debts is crazy!

    In short: Celebs are hypocrites when it comes to charity. Cowell just wants to be mroe famous.
    Well I wouldn't call them hypocrites even if it isn't altruistic they still benefit the charities therefore indirectly contribute to lessening of suffering blablabla.

    You would actually be the hypocrite right now if you don't support a charity.

    Personally I don't support any charities simply because I am a greedy and bad person.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Student2806)
    Bob Geldof is the worst of them all. Biggest hypocrite who ever existed.
    Shouting at governments to give money to Africa and yet hiding all his money offshore so he doesn't pay taxes. **** off you ******.
    This is based on the assumption he doesn't give money directly to third world charities. I'd imagine £100k given to the chancellor would be a lot less productive than if it were given to an 'on the line' charity, don't you think?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stratos)
    Well I wouldn't call them hypocrites even if it isn't altruistic they still benefit the charities therefore indirectly contribute to lessening of suffering blablabla.
    They may still benefit the charities, but that's not what my topic is about. I'm talking about whether they are sincere, and doing it for the right cases. And if so, why they don't actively support charity in general. As said before they want to be involved with the whole 'hype'.

    You would actually be the hypocrite right now if you don't support a charity.
    I actually do support charities, but even if I wouldn't I don't make myself out to be as a person who's better than others. Which the celebs do, whether it be intentionally or not.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fusion)
    This is based on the assumption he doesn't give money directly to third world charities. I'd imagine £100k given to the chancellor would be a lot less productive than if it were given to an 'on the line' charity, don't you think?
    That is irrelevant. He has two UK properties that are owned by overseas companies, which are themselves owned by him. Whether he gives money directly to charity is neither here nor there - he's deliberately avoiding tax in this country while preaching that the UK government should give taxpayers' money (which he should be contributing to) to Africa.
 
 
 
The home of Results and Clearing

2,227

people online now

1,567,000

students helped last year
Poll
A-level students - how do you feel about your results?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.