Ask Lemmy
A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions
Rules: (interactive)
1) Be nice and; have fun
Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them
2) All posts must end with a '?'
This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?
3) No spam
Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.
4) NSFW is okay, within reason
Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected].
NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].
5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions.
If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.
Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.
Partnered Communities:
Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu
view the rest of the comments
I'm not a fan, but his philanthropy work is also popular. I only started to know him because of his project trees and not about his streaming
But supposedly the philanthropy is staged and the prizes are given to his friends.
I'm always suspicious of people who make a show of their philanthropy. It just makes it seem like they're either exploiting people for their own gain, or they have something to hide and are trying to do so with philanthropic work.
I mean yes but isn’t that being extremely pedantic?
Take Mr Beast or an hypothetical example. Give 1M to strangers in need, record it, upload it to YouTube make 4M on ads and other sponsors (content is still free). Pocket 2M, make second video where he gives 2M to other strangers in need. Record it, upload it to YouTube etc etc
Now I agree with you, philosophically it’s best to give without expecting or earning anything in return. But is that really the best outcome? Isn’t it actually arguably better to publicize it and with it reach and help way more people?
For me the answer is clear. I’d rather have someone record and even make money of this type of content (as long as there’s no exploitation or slimy shit) than have that same someone not do that and instead only help a fraction of the people. I’ll argue that the people being helped don’t give a crap about it, so it feels a bit patronizing to say that they shouldn’t be helped because of X or Y
This isn’t specific to Mr Beast, I don’t even know the details of the recent scandal. I just see this argument everywhere and I feel it’s very naive
Well, without making money on the philanthropy videos he wouldn't have money to continue making philanthropy videos. He may be doing it as a 100% selfish thing, but so what? The end result is that lots of lives are improved. I won't watch his videos, but I'm glad people are being helped.
Guy brought crypto-bros' fake twitter/telegram giveaways scheme to youtube. Anybody with some knowledge of social media scams should have been suspicious. But his viewers were mostly kids and kids like flashy over the top content.
Anyone remember these on Xitter?
With a bot farm driving engagement, there'd be 1000s of comments in few hours. Probably mostly fake but still a lot of suckers reeled in everyday.
That's not the philanthropy part, the games he does are usually with his friends yeah, also in a smaller town in the Carolinas so you probably already know most everyone. The philanthropy stuff is building wells, bridges, houses, planting trees, and what not in other countries, I really don't see those being his friends as he doesn't know their languages.