Charity shouldn’t be a pawn in game of social vanity
Before the Internet, people donated anonymously. Now I see photos and videos of people’s philanthropy on Facebook. It is time we addressed how vanity is affecting society’s perception of charity (Tax-deductible donations fell sharply last year: COC; Sept 8).
Before the Internet, people donated anonymously. Now I see photos and videos of people’s philanthropy on Facebook. It is time we addressed how vanity is affecting society’s perception of charity (Tax-deductible donations fell sharply last year: COC; Sept 8).
As Facebook becomes less of a communication platform and more of a marketing one, many online do-gooders have evolved into social media experts.
While there is nothing wrong with aspiring to be a social media star, there is something sinister when a Kardashian wannabe is cloaked in Mother Teresa’s robes.
It is more worrying when these do-gooders take advantage of the support they receive for their “charitable” acts by promoting profit-driven businesses.
It seems that there was easy access to a camera for many of the posed shots in these posts. In the competition for likes, some individuals go the extra mile to create videos showcasing their charitable side.
I came across one crooning an operatic number to a dog he rescued. As if doing a good deed is not enough in itself, one must milk it for publicity.
It is kind of impressive how polished these videos are. And if one goes behind the scenes to witness the number of takes needed to perfect a video clip, one has to admire the effort.
But it makes me wonder why they do it, as if there is no point doing something if they do not share it with their 1,635 Facebook friends or 4,567 Twitter followers.
Like the tree falling in the woods, if nobody sees you helping a beggar, did it really happen? Time was when people did not talk about their charity work for fear of appearing gauche.
People who wanted to donate to a cause had to fill in a form or write a cheque that only an office administrator would see. If one wanted to help a beggar or rescue a stray, one did so quietly.
Now one’s Facebook feed is bombarded by screen grabs proving acts of philanthropy. The problem this poses for our society is twofold: First, it perpetuates vanity.
Charities that are the savviest about social media would receive the most support, though they may not be the most deserving.
Lesser-known charities that are no less deserving but served by silent altruists would be on the sidelines as a result. Do we want charity to be a competition in social media savviness? Do we want to celebrate vanity?
Second, individuals savvy about social media could inadvertently abuse society’s naivety to further personal interests, such as promoting their business or even propagating fake charities. Where does one draw the line between real and fake charity?
Maybe we should not care how charities get their money, as long as they get it. But it would be nice if we all donate to charities we believe in without making a song and dance about it.