to think comic relief is a manipulative millionaire sleb lovein?

[glasnost]

After watching most of last night's nth comic relief can't help thinking it's ever more hypocritical in laying a guilt trip on us poor folk to get us to part with some of the dwindling cash we have whilst never getting to the root of the problem.

Political corruption, greedy pharmaceutical companies etc. Without addressing these core problems we'll keep on having comic relief as an annual salve to people's consciences while poverty and injustice continue.

Jonathan Ross et al who earn vast amounts have alot of front in standing there emotionally blackmailing us when the obscene wealth he and others like him earn is part of the problem. AIBU?

I did not say 'only' like that. I said that last time it raised 82m (bloody well done- I wasn't saying it was a crap amount). I picked last time as we have that final figure. Then I said that PM (he was an example of a begging celeb) earns over 700m.
It sticks in the throat rather to be begged to donate money by a man who could afford the total figure several times over without breaking a sweat when many of the people they are pleading to donate will be wondering how they will be able to pay this months week 5 of food bill or whether they can afford to get their dcs new school shoes this month.

Unbelievable, now LH is not the 'token black' but the 'only person whose heart is truly... blah blah blah'. Absolutely laughable!

Actually I lie I did donate in a way but only through buying my children the right to mufty and cakes etc

glasnost please don't pick on my point so it looks like we are arguing from exactly the same viewpoint. I agree with some of what you have said int he op but would disagree with a lot of what you have said since and do not want to be associated with that

fgs bronze he is a tax payer as all of us (well most). IF you do not like the tax system, lobby for it to be changed through your PM. Nobody goes through your house to check what you have is essential and what not.

People always churn out the 'those celebs' could fund that 10 x over etc.Whilst true this is about a bigger picture and we cannot expect individuals to shoulder the responsibility of these things just because they have a certain salary! This is about everyone doing their bit to alleviate fellow human beings suffering. If we really expected those who by talent or not have amassed a certain wealth to personally donate where would it end.If your next door neighbour is better off and you lose your job should he buy your shopping? This is not the responsibility of individuals no matter how rich

'Nobody goes through your house to check what you have is essential and what not.' That is Glasnost's idea of perfect society. In it everyone would be living in communal barracks and be provided with 2 sets of gray uniform and a spade.

No you're right it is not their responsibility. what I would iek to see though is more ordinary people featured. The people who slog their guts out to make these things work.
The bloke who gives up his saturdays to teach innercity kids to play football, the girl who goes to afghanistan to help set up the schools for girls. Why can't they be the ones doing films showing us how bad it is and what can be done with the money.
As for Lenny. He is fantastic, he does slog his guts out year round trying to make it work

I suppose slebs are a bigger pull and they are trying to get a huge audience and in turn a large ££££. I agree about the unsung people who work tirelessly They should possibly start introducing that element aswell as the famous people.The sketches and bands etc are what make people tune in and stay watching

I think the short films. Davina in Niger, Tennant in Liberia etc (not actually films just examples) should be real people though. People who are out there doing stuff already. People who really know the situation. I think they dont need to be celebs the obvious suffering is what makes people pay not some sleb having been flown there at cost to watch in horror as another child dies through lack of antibiotics. If anything I think sending celebrities out to do that cheapens it slightly

V fair point about 'cheapening' CR bronze I do not watch it for this reason.

It may cheapen it, but to be brutally honest that's what gets people watching. People need to be entertained - in other words, there has to be something in it for them before they can be persuaded to donate money. That's a sad but true fact.

And as for slebs not giving to charity - how do you know that they don't? It's a massive assumption to say that they hang on to all their money.

I'm sure some do and some don't - but if they made a big song and dance about their donations they'd get slaughtered as well, so they can't win.

My fault partly I've googled and discovered PM was part of a 'funny' act not a sent sleb so maybe slight confusion there

I do not get it. "Funny" act is ok, but being a "sent sleb" is not? Whatever, I off from here it is a madhouse.

What point in common bronze? Didn't even see your post re. Paul McC til now. Mentioned him as he was the most obscenely rich of all of the grating bores on. I don't need to resort to childish tactics to bolster my opinions such as desperately clutching at potential allies on threads. If I were like that I wouldn't even start these threads. Now you're backtracking in order to appease other aggressive posters re. McC. Even if he wasn't sent to do a report from Africa it's still insulting.

And bemybebe whatever your political reactionary axe to grind may be stop casting aspersions on what kinda society I would like to see. I don't wanto see abject perfectly AVOIDABLE poverty. You do if you support the extreme, imperialist capitalism now ravaging our globe. Simple as. Ciao for now!

pmsl

I haven't backtracked at all. All along I was talking about the celebs who make the films begging.

The whole thing amount comic relief is do something funny for money. If anyone chooses to do something funny and they are funny enough to be sent up on live tv then go for it. . I would like many more unknowns in this bit too. I have just seen a clip of a comedy group that I have never heard of and it was hilarious. I can't remember their name but thats not important.
But
I still think the not funny bits should not involve celebrities. It should not be used to raise their profile and is not needed. Having a rich person stood next to a dying person begging us for money still sticks in my throat.

Clebs - like 'em or loathe 'em - they generally do lots for charity. They just don't harp on about it. They also support charities and front campaigns. Some charities would not survive without the awareness they bring to the table.

We make them celebrities by buying their records/watching their programmes - celebs have been around a very long time. Lord Byron was treated like a pop star in his day.

Saying that the rich people should give all the money instead of us if a peculiarly simple and childish arguement. Their money on the whole has been earned by, as someone mentioned earlier, talent. I do not begrudge a man who was part of one of the most famous bands in the world - who has, with Lennon, left us an incredible legacy of songs.

There will always be people who are richer than you. Prettier, younger, more talented. You can't sit in a corner and suck your thumb.

Meanwhile, while everyone argues - there are some wonderful people applying that money to save lives and quell some of the misery in the developing world.

Meanwhile, while everyone argues - children die.

This thread did make angry at first and like bemybebe, I have watched it descend into a madhouse.

Now it just makes me enormously sad. Compassion not churlishness - that's what we need more...

Hear, hear Punkatheart

www.amazon.com/Collapse-Empire-Lessons-Modern-Russia/dp/0815731140

You are not a punk at heart. You're a boring conformist. Real compassion aint applying a bandaid to a gaping, festering wound.

bemybebe glasnost means transparency. Your username is obviously obfuscating right wing not seeing wood for the trees. Let's see whether you "pop in" again.

And publicity.

You should have your own show you know or better still write in to LH and offer your services for next year

I will also interject then with some literature, some books I looked at when studying Globalization and the effect of aid and charity work.

www.amazon.com/Road-Hell-Ravaging-Effects-International/dp/0743227867

www.amazon.com/Crisis-Caravan-Whats-Wrong-Humanitarian/dp/0805092900

There is so much literature and research out there on the damaging effects of aid and charity of this kind. It is just that it is only now coming to the limelight and is not recognised by many who switch on their TV's and buy into whatever they are being sold by CR without doing some actual research themselves.

BTW, people like Lenny Henry are 'too far removed' from their heritage to understand these issues in the same way as a current African national would, unless he devoted just as much time as the average john to learning about it too. He is an African indeed, but too far removed to understand the complexities of the other side of the coin. I have African friends who have been brought up in Britain who are like that, it is not a new thing within our community, just hard for people on the outside to understand. Being Black doesn't mean you 'get it' so to speak.

I'm always intrigued when insanity terminology (madhouse, fruitloop etc) is applied to a debate that gets to the truth. Insanity is David Tennant emoting really badly while black babies die behind him. Insanity is there being enough money to go round but it being restricted to a tiny few. Insanity is a camera crew being present while a mother dies of TB and her baby dying 3 days later of malnutrition as she could only give him sugared water.

See you next year folks as this isn't going to go away.