to think that freerice.com is ...horrid.

[onebatmother]

For each word you define correctly, the site's sponsors donate 10 free grains of rice for distribution to the world\s hungry through the UN. Sponsors' banners are displayed prominently.

Am I the only one who thinks this is yuk?

Firstly - so smug! I secretly pride myself on my Enooormous vocab - but somehow this in the context of people who don't actually have enough to EAT revolts me!

Secondly - why don't the sponsors just give the freaking rice for nothing! If all it that's stopping them from doing so is that I got the definition of discombobulate wrong, well ffs!

Thirdly - so trivial!! No mention of global politics etc. So insulting! Come, World's Poor. With my extensive vocabulary, I will feed you.

I know, I know, that it's 'light-heartedness' is probably deliberate, aiming for an unreached demographic etc. And what's the diff between this and an equally pointless sponsored walk.
And at least it's doing something..

But, oh, yuck, yuck.

Saw this story on the BBC website the other day.

You are overthinking this. And actually giving it great publicity. I have emailed my son about it - if he's going to waste time online buggering about playing stupid games he may as well do some good.

Thanks for all your thoughtful replies, both for and against. Please excuse rambling, it's been a long day.

Hmm. Having read them and thought it thru again, I have some (possibly inflammatory) thoughts:

I agree that the total (which I hadn't seen) is impressive. And the viral idea is innovative and works. And yes, in the time it's taken me to word this, I could have added another 1000 grains.

And - of course - I agree that it is far better for any one family to have eaten today than not, regardless of how the rice got to them. That, as several posts said, is the bottom line.

But.. I don't believe that is necessarily true on a macro level (altho this might be proven illogical).

There has to be a way of raising awareness that is more careful of the dignity of those it aims to help, and less exploitative of the thoughtlessness of those it is targetting.

I can't find a metaphor that fits my feeling exactly, but the closest I can get is this: If I offer a destitute woman a job as a topless model, it's certainly better than letting that individual woman starve; but it diminishes her as a person, and diminishes women in general.

I know this doesn't strictly work because the starving family isn't having to perform for us - but my point is about whether all help is good help. (Although I do actually think we are treating them as entertainment, to some degree.)

Fundamentally, I think I recoil at any equation of entertainment with food for starving people.

'Hey, you clever, clever people| Every word you define is worth ten - yes, you heard it right, TEN! - whole grains of rice to a starving developing word family".

There is something slightly obscene in attempting to define the value of ten grains of rice for that family - it's indefinable. It's life.

And something definitely obscene in defining that value as 'knowing the definition of 'oriel''".

It is true, Beansprout, that Children In Need etc is more guilty of the entertainment = relief equation than freerice.com. But it's rarely quite so excruciatingly specific. No-one says "dress up as a male schoolgirl and you could buy one child a whole hour - yes, ONE HOUR! - of life!"

My bottom line: the relief of suffering is empirically a good thing. But there are 'more good' and 'less good' ways of achieving this.
And that just because the individual families aren't saying 'don't treat my dreadful situation thoughtlessly" doesn't mean we aren't doing so.

Thoughts?

Also, I question their demographic. Aren't the people who are anxious about their vocab skills the very same people who are already anxious about their charity?

I'm not entirely sure how getting those of us with internet access to perform like seals is damaging the dignity of those the site aims to help?

I can only speak for me when I say that I played, for a considerable amount of time. It will not distract me from making the donations I would normally make, nor from discussing (and where necessary, challenging) the political and commercial forces that make those donations necessary at this point in time.

If you don't like it, don't play...but have you considered that your opinion may now be preventing people playing who would otherwise be donating?

Gizmo yes, I have considered that.

I concluded that realistically I would be drawing more people to the site than would be put off by my 'angels on pinhead' argument.

But seriously - so I shouldn't express my doubts about the ethics of this?

Please look again at the topless model analogy. It's lame in some respects, but effective in others.

If it's a question of play online war-games, or play win-a-grain-of-rice, by all means play the latter.
Otherwise - think again about how best to help the desperate.
People, lobby your governments! etc etc

Also, gizmo, just because those it aims to help aren't aware that we are betting our vocab knowledge against their empty stomachs, it doesn't mean that we aren't, empirically, damaging their dignity.

But how is it really any different from Red Nose Day which for a lot of people is about having fun, socialising and raising money? They both have mixed motives.

i tend to agree with you, onebatmother.

got to go to bed chocchip but think it's to do with the fact that the entertainment is so directly linked with the charity.
ie one correct definition equals ten grains of rice.

Well, I had never heard of freerice.com. I've been sick all day and spent most of my time slack-jawed playing online mah-jhong. Think I'll check out freerice...it'll probably do more good than all my time matching tiles.

There are loads of quiz sites on the web, which are pointless. At least there is some good to FreeRice - it doesn't just suck up time - you test to test your vocab / learn new words, and people get fed!

I was directed to the site last week from another thread on here, and it didn't even register with me for quite a while about the grain thing.

Hey maybe for every post on MN we could make a donation, how would that be different / pointless / horrid?

there are plenty of charities which host lavish gala dinners to fundraise or do things which seem in direct opposition to their core beliefs - it is a balancing act to not behave distastefully

however, they raise a lot of money or encourage more supporters to join up

i don't think the ethos of "do something now and save someone's life" is new - Bob Geldof did this for Live Aid over 20 years ago with his give me your f*ing money now speech

people need an emotional trigger to do something

I have mixed feelings about this, tbh.

I agree with onebatmother that there is something about it that is smug, and somehow trivialises the situation.

I think the fact that one correct answer is equated to a specific amount of rice, and that amount is so tiny, makes the whole thing seem rather tasteless (no pun intended).

But on the other hand, the site seems to be generating some impressive amounts of rice for donation, and better this should happen than nothing.

Perhaps if it were worded differently, it may be more palatable (again, no pun intended)?

But on balance I think it is better to risk offending a few people re the website, and doing some good, than not to bother at all.

Hmm what the UN don't tell you is that Africa has massive natural resources like oil and coal. If the UN would let them use them (as the west do) then africa would not be a third world country. They force them to use 'green energy' while take the oil from nigeria and other countries for our use.

Are they forcing 'green engery' on saudi arabia er no.

There is one doctor who has a clinic in Africa and he is only allowed a solar panel and if he tries to use his fridge (used to store medicines) and his light at the same time the whole thing shuts down.

The UN is treating Africa like the global concience of the west...its all a lie....

The people of Afica dont want you guilt they want to be able to govern thier own natural resources like we do, they are kept hostage by being donated food by the west...and have become dependant...teach a man to fish....

yes

Good post Beeper.

actually ruby I felt pretty about sir bob too, when I was 15 or whatnot! I remember ny father asking whether I'd called the hotline yet and being absolutely shocked when I said I wasn't going to..