SOHAIL: We should not put internet 'philanthropists' on pedestal
Column: Nohman's Nuances
If you give a dollar to a homeless person and there is no camera to record it, did you ever really give it?
Donating for content purposes has called for a competition to decide who is the kindest creator on the internet. This fetishization of charity has led social media influencers astray in their donations, shifting motivations from reducing poverty to increasing clicks.
While not explicitly sinister, this phenomenon has detrimental consequences. The viewers — plagued with this idea of gratuity, reciprocation and content from those in need —become less likely to rely on empathy to donate. Thus, we must be wary when promoting these channels, as their motivations and messages shy away from good intentions.
Monetization and the possibility of sponsorships provide a profit incentive for charity. Given how popular current charitable accounts and videos are, it is no surprise that creators wish to pursue the trend of philanthropy.
A popular example is Surthany Hejeij, owner of the Tiktok account Surthycooks. Among the posts of her lavish lifestyle, travels and recipes are a subgenre of stitched videos, where she shows a brief clip of food wastage to follow it up with a curated compilation of her creating meals for the poor. These videos are the most viewed on her page.
Aside from the meals she supplies to low-income communities having low nutritional value, these videos maximize viewer appreciation and minimize labor.
Commonplace among these cooking posts that extract high effort is the quick-cut method of content. These cuts allow the creator to put themselves in the spotlight while remaining absent for most of the creation. Popular YouTube channels like Primitive Survival Tool have found themselves at the forefront of controversy for the truthfulness of its videos using this method.
An added benefit of being a "donation influencer" is the proverbial philanthropic shield dedicated fans create to deflect any criticism. Viral creator Jimmy Donaldson, known informally as MrBeast, continually surrounds himself with problematic figures. For instance, Donaldson recounted his success on the same podcast that gave a platform to Sandy Hook conspiracy theorist Alex Jones and faced little to no backlash.
Failing to admonish these influencers for their wrongs concedes the idea that if you become as famous as these influencers, you too can do these things! It is vital to hold celebrities accountable, especially on social media, where young, impressionable audiences are active.
To expand his audience and remain relevant, Donaldson needed to incrementally increase the scale of his charitable endeavors. Thousands have tried to replicate his videos, but donating small amounts has grown to become less impressive.
What initially began as tipping pizza delivery drivers hundreds of dollars became donating $1,000,000 dollars worth of food to food pantries across the country. There are only so many people on the internet, so the highest "bidder," in this case, Donaldson, has a monopoly on viewers searching for "feel-good" content.
Having a young audience is also very profitable. A 2004 study by the American Psychological Association found that children and their families are more susceptible to child advertising, as "parent–child conflicts occur commonly when parents deny their children's product purchase requests that were precipitated by advertising."
The most common defense for donation influencers is, "at least they are doing something. What are you doing?" In regards to profits, Donaldson is estimated to earn more than $3 million a month from his main channel alone — this obviously provides more benefit to the individual than the community.
Think of profit as the effort put into earning income. Donaldson holding onto a significant portion of the profits (or efforts) involved and then giving to the less fortunate in his videos is not providing net benefit. And this is not even to account for his diversification in the chocolate and fast food industry.
Nonetheless, It would be unfair to Donaldson not to appreciate his large-scale deeds. Grassroots collaborative efforts of his like #teamtrees or #teamseas have amassed significant support, garnering enough funds to plant more than 24 million trees and remove more than 33 million pounds of trash in months.
The effects of "donation influencers" are damning, and the passive misconstrual of the word charity to mean giving with the expectation of reciprocation, reward or even appreciation is dangerous. The presence of a camera crew makes donating a profitable business practice that is both disingenuous and harmful to communities.
We must give proper dues to all involved in charitable endeavors and remain wary of using philanthropy as another means to shorten our attention spans.
Nohman Sohail is a first-year in the School of Arts and Sciences majoring in economics and political science. His column, "Nohman's Nuances," runs on alternate Thursdays.
*Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
YOUR VOICE | The Daily Targum welcomes submissions from all readers. Due to space limitations in our print newspaper, letters to the editor must not exceed 900 words. Guest columns and commentaries must be between 700 and 900 words. All authors must include their name, phone number, class year and college affiliation or department to be considered for publication. Please submit via email to oped@dailytargum.com by 4 p.m. to be considered for the following day’s publication. Columns, cartoons and letters do not necessarily reflect the views of the Targum Publishing Company or its staff.
