To think Stacey Dooley was right in her response to David Lammy

[CoolCarrie]

“ Africa doesn’t need white saviours” says Lammy commenting on pictures of Stacey Dooley on a comic relief trip. Why pick on her? Loads of celebrities over the years have gone to Africa to show how money is helping the poorest of the poor, and the huge difference it has made over the years.
What Africa does need is governments that are not corrupt and better leaders.

Honestly what kind of ridiculous caption is this?

He was 100% right in what he said.

Yeah, she IS a young white female journalist.

I'd like to see see Lammy say this to Bob Geldof. He'd knock him out.

Wouldn't do that though would he? Prefers to pick on a easy target.

Vile man. Obnoxious and racist. He needs to retract what he said, and apologise.

So what should the formula be then?

They should donate the money where it's most needed, without headline-grabbing pictures contrasting celebrities with poverty.

But the UK is, what 85% white, and the percentage of white people in positions of privilege and influence is likely even higher. So if privileged white people are being culturally insensitive by helping these people and publicising their plights - who will do it? Then people like Dooley will get criticised for not giving a shit. So Lammy criticising without proposing any solutions is wildly unhelpful, even if he has a point about the cultural and historical contexts.

I think they’re both right. The comic relief formula is totally outdated and Lammy is right to address that. However apart from Stacey dooley’s skin colour, I don’t think she fits that mould. She’s visited lots of places before, all over the world when making her tv series and has met all sorts of different people, many of them living in abject poverty and always comes across very well. I like her a lot and think her intentions are good.

He's married to a white woman, so I doubt he's racist...

Having said that, I’m very against schools sending their over privileged 6th formers to help ‘build a village’. Very little is actually accomplished on these trips other than said students having something else to hang on their UCAS application whilst the teams on the ground set about dismantling the ‘school’ or ‘youth centre’ ready for the next set of students to arrive and ‘transform the lives’ of those in the village.

His comments come across as typical British politician to me. It's so easy to pick holes and criticize so many elements of life and society.

Most politics come across to me as running down others rather than making positive suggestion. The irony being I'm sitting here criticising the critical politicians and not getting involved With positive suggestion myself!

I can understand that portraying white rich African child poor in need of help could paint a distorted picture. But the projects being funded are real and fulfill a need. It's rather like stopping giving to food banks won't change the catalist of benefits changes that have caused so many to resourt to their use. Its a sticky plaster not a solution, ut its a needed sticky plaster.

The projects are funded by a UK charity and those highlighting the works of the charity to raise further funds for ongoing support should in some way represent the wonderful cross section of society we have - not fit into any steroetyped box. If it was only ever young white women then his point would have more validity.

Has he made any constructive points?

I share his concern about the way such an issue is portrayed by such a charity.

‘starving african children’ needing celebs to intervene because their ‘corrupt’ govts are unwilling/unable to help is a tired old cliche. Does the literature actually say the charity (if it ever gets there!) takes forever to get to where it is needed? So eti es the best intentioned charities often undermine local initiatives?

So I’m white, shall I cancel my CR donations this year? Would that help?

Would it fuck. That’s where this thought process ultimately leads.

He's right though, Comic Relief needs a massive rethink.

I can see why Stacey was upset as she actually works hard, but the average celeb sent out by Comic Relief looks good, has an epiphany and then just gets back on with being a celeb.

They’re both right. It is our responsibility to help. It’s also time we get past our archaic notions that everyone in Africa is living like that and also assuming that those that are aren’t actually happy with their lives, and when they aren’t we should actually ask them what help they would like.

I like Stacey Dooley and I don't think that it's particularly fair to make her the entire focus of this point. But I do think that Lammy has made a strong point about Comic Relief and its marketing strategies that rely on tropes of the White Saviour and cultural paternalism that is unnecessary and damaging.

100% agree with a David Lammy. The white saviour narrative perpetuates white supremacy. While the celebrities themselves have good intentions, the overall effect is damaging, particularly while rich countries are still exploiting African resources. Stacey wouldn’t think it was okay to pick up and photograph a random kid in the UK so why are African children not given the same respect? The expression on the child’s face says everything tbh. Follow No White Saviours on insta for some real horror stories of where this attitude can lead.

He should put his money where his mouth is, and take up comic relief’s offer to go and see for himself!

But you have missed the point, here is his response on twitter:

"It’s not about me making a nice film, but about you giving some of your very privileged platform on the BBC to the hundreds of African comedians, filmmakers, celebrities and everyday people who live on the continent."

I agree with David Lammy on this and it's not about Stacy (who I like and who has made some excellent programmes). It's about the outdated approach and about giving a voice to African people.

Didn't we have a thread on here a few months ago (think it was actually about Eddie Izzard) about celebrities endorsing charities and people were saying that like it or not that celebrity endorsement increases donations? SD is high profile at the moment because of Strictly so it's not surprising she's been asked to do this. Personally I think the fact that she is a decent journalist who has done good work on uncomfortable subjects in the past makes her more qualified to do this (plus she's got a lot of kid followers because of her shows on CBBC).

I think if I was a mother being handed a mosquito net that would save the lives of my children then I wouldn’t give a fig who was helping or why.

and this ^

Who cares who was right? If Stacey putting it on insta made one person aware of the charity and that person donated some cash that wouldn't have previously, isn't that a good thing? I literally don't care if she was black, white or whatever! She's a high profile name that has lots of insta followers.

The same way companies use celebs to sell us things. George Clooney and coffee! People like celebs and whether we like it or not, we are influenced by them.

Unless Africa doesn't need any charitable donations anymore? Maybe that's the politicians point? In which case cancel comic relief

I’m in agreement with David Lammy. I do like Stacey but photos like that just seem to use black children as props and I find it distasteful. He wasn’t personally attacking her.

I don't give a shit about the skin colour of a person trying to help and raise awareness, they can be bright green for all I care.

I suggest Lammy go with Dooley's suggestion and go over himself, demonstrating exactly how he feels it should work.

It amazes me that trying to help poor communities overseas results in this. I donate every month to various charities, some overseas, some in response to watching Comic Relief. My support is no better or worse than anyone else's. We're all people.

One of the charities was to do with maternal health. In Uganda there are 440 maternal deaths per 100,000 live births, and god knows what the serious injury rate is. But yeah lets not offer help to women dying at 63 times the rate they are here, because David Lammy reckons the politicians and people of Uganda are going to rush in to solve this problem as soon as Stacey Dooley goes away

But the choice isn't between doing Comic Relief and doing nothing. I think the point is maybe it's time to revamp CR and take a different approach to this type of charity fundraising.

"Comic Relief has previously offered to collaborate with Labour MP David Lammy on a charity film in Africa but the politician snubbed it, the charity claimed today. The organisation told Lammy the "offer is still open" after he criticised Stacey Dooley on Wednesday over her work on a film ahead of Red Nose Day."

Funny how it suits him to criticise now but it didn't suit him to actually do anything about it when he had the chance.

So what 'should' charities like CR be doing?

And agree this I think if I was a mother being handed a mosquito net that would save the lives of my children then I wouldn’t give a fig who was helping or why.

I agree with David Lammy that we need to think really carefully about this issue, and about who represents African, and how they do that. But I think

1. he should have made that point generally to Comic Relief and the BBC, and not in response to one particular person
2. the problem is not just one of philanthropy but of structural inequality. Maybe he could use his power to draw attention to the need to relieve still existing debt burdens, and to deal with the effects of uneven capitalist development (whereby exploitation of labour and other effects of production, like pollution, are externalised by the West to other parts of the globe). We also urgently need a global regulative and tax regime that will deal with the fact that the climate change-causing lifestyle of the West is going to impact most severely on the poor of the global south, who have much smaller footprints in general.