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.

I think Stacey's response was ill thought out and now she's got kick back for it, I predict a retraction and a statement coming out in the next couple of days from her camp. Not because she means it but because it's a bit of a pr disaster for her.

Far more good is done by the smaller, unseen charities than is done by the likes of comic relief, however uncomfortable that might make people feel.

This is why organisations like Givewell exist, to try and highlight which charities are most likely to be effective in using donations.

www.givewell.org/charities/top-charities

I guess it’s quite hard for her to avoid being pretty, given that’s what she is. But let’s make sure she’s saddled with everyone else’s cultural baggage because of that. Definitely not the case that sexist wankers have been doing that to pretty women for centuries. No sir. Nothing to see here.

I agree with David Lammy and I thought Stacey's response was chippy and ill thought out. We've had this debate over and over and I think it's high time that the outdated white/western 'saviour' idea was binned once and for all. Images of celebrities carting around children in developing countries as a photo op is offensive, whether it's for charity or not.

“Chippy” snobbery too is getting an outing.
Amazing how thin the veneer is sometimes

Sorry to keep banging on about this, but if anyone who is outraged by Stacey Dooley's white savourism wants to know about, support, or (most of all) help to publicize my actual African friend's project to help real refugee children from South Sudan who have lost their parents, do get in touch.

I like Stacy Dooley but I think David Lammy's right.

It creates a feeling that African people can't help themselves. But they can, if they have the resources. I think raising money for African charities is a good thing, but we do need to look at how we do this.

There was a documentary on radio 4 about orphanages. About how a lot of the children weren't orphans. How the charities involved wanted children to be in the orphanages so they could raise money from the UK and US. But when the mother asked if they couldn't help her to keep her children at home with her, they refused. Because this doesn't generate money. If we took away tax credits and insisted all parents who needed help put their kids in orphanages, there would be an outrage.

I donate to the reverse book club partly because of this. They send books to schools and set up libraries. But for me the most important thing is that they send up to date medical textbooks, books on the latest agricultural research, so that they can be used to help skill up African people.

I live solely on benefits. I have a disabled son. If a charity wanted to send a celebrity to use photos of my child as click bait I would not like it. My son has a right to self determination and medical confidentiality. He is not there to make some rich people feel good about themselves.

If you want to donate, great. But don't do it because of some celebrity film. Just do it.

I think he's right but he could have been far better in the way he said what he said, and she could have been far better considered in her response. But it's Twitter, it doesn't lend itself to consideration but to knee jerk quick reactions.

I don't know Stacey's background, I assume (maybe wrongly?) that she didn't study journalism? If she had surely this kind of stuff would have been covered, about tropes and gaze etc. particularly in photojournalism.

Her photo was cringey - imagine how you'd feel if a hugely wealthy tourist came to your town and took a photo of themselves with your baby without you and captioned it on social media 'oh look how cute, i'm so in love with this baby'.

But really David Lammy should have responded by saying he feels Comic Relief's model is outmoded and not by attacking her as he did (although he later said he hadn't meant it personally it was the effect the first response he wrote had).

David Lammy’s remarks were personal and that’s uncalled for. Why didn’t he take it up with the BBC?

If he feels than CR’s narrative is old fashioned and patronising then he should have used the chance he had to take part and change it.

Whether we like like the formula or not it is one that brings the money in.

Another vote for Team Lammy.

Screaming African babies left lying around for passing Western slebs to pick up and say 'aaaah,' makes me sick.

Didn't he refuse an offer from comic relief to go to Africa? If so he should keep quiet about her.

He did, and he has explained why, and it supports the point he made about Stacey Dooley's visit.

I think David Lammy is right, and his explanations coherent, and his attitude sensible.

I also think the Comic Relief fundraising and spending models need a massive overhaul. They give to some very dubious (IMO) 'causes'.

If David Lammy has seen through this, good on him. He's an intelligent man. A caring man.

I can think of any number of posh blokes who write for the papers without “training” in journalism either (one has to wonder what the hell that would involve) but oddly, no one ever seems to have a problem with that.

I agree with David Lammy.
Reminds me of gap years- when lots of middle class, predominately white, teenagers from my school suddenly filled their Facebook with pictures of themselves surrounded by black or asian children, or being hugged by them

Her instagramming holding a little black baby is in bad taste yes i know she is there for comic relief but he was right white people swooping in to hold little babies only makes the people look worthy I think comic relief needto be more responsible.

And her reply is a bit tantrummy which is a real shame because I usually really like her

Team Lammy here too.

I'm torn. Probably because I'm struggling to understand if Lammy means "white people" or means Brits/Westerners/Europeans (because those are two different things, clearly).

I just pootled off to see if he had given any clarifying interviews and found this, in which he's apparently using them interchangeably;

m.youtube.com/watch?v=b6pmQ9LmX3o

I'm definitely with Lammy on this one.

I agree with her, why doesn't he go there and help, do as you say! Comic Relief was founded by a black man, Lenny Henry. It is better somebody help and highlight the issues, than none at all! Why dosen't the media highlight black celebrities helping, are there many black celebrities that help?

I think he means privileged, powerful people and that most usually (but not always) means white.

And most importantly (which I omitted) people that are not actually African.

I'm with David Lammy. The image was distasteful and outdated for the reasons he gave.And we're fine ones to talk about corrupt government and poor leadership

Exactly.

[https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/david-lammy-refused-offer-to-make-comic-relief-film-in-africa-says-charity-amid-white-saviour-row-a4078966.html]

What a hypocrite, do as I say, not as I do.