Filming yourself helping people shouldn't be frowned upon, amirite?

Showing off a persons own art isn't comparable in any way. A lot of these help videos include vulnerable, homeless people and it feels exploitative to "trade" help in return for plastering their faces all over the internet.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

If it's about the art, then not. But many people make it about themselves.

by Rosannadoyle 1 week ago

But the assumption is that help is given out of goodness. Art is the desire to share creativity. That's like….the dumbest thing I have ever read.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

No, you seem to have a very transactional and narrow minded view on life. I didn't ask you to say anything to me, so we're good.

by Rosannadoyle 1 week ago

You're the one viewing a person filiming themselves helping another person as strictly transactional. I'm not.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

It isn't though

by Anonymous 1 week ago

At least to me, it's less about doing it for clout, and more that it's exploiting a vulnerable person for someone else's benefit.

by Ethelyn44 1 week ago

But the person that's being helped also benefits.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

Usually the benefit of the person receiving the help is pretty minimal tbh. I don't think getting a few dollars or a free meal or whatever undoes the exploitation. If the person making the video goes viral, are they gonna split the ad revenue?

by Anonymous 1 week ago

presumably your art and other achievements aren't at the expense of other people's dignity. if they are, you shouldn't share those either.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

Performative deeds done for attention are not truly good deeds.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

Thats not true though. When Mr beast made a video where he paid for a bunch of peoples surgeries to restore their sight, that was a good deed. If you reduce the amount of suffering in the world, you're doing a good deed. What you mean to say is it's not altruistic. Mr beast doesn't do that out of the goodness of his heart. He did a good deed because it benefitted him. Intentions don't change whether a deed is good or not. It only changes who the giver is as a person.

by Primary_Regret 1 week ago

So anyone doing the thrashtag challenge was not doing a good deed?

by Anonymous 1 week ago

Did the ice bucket challenge actually do anything for people with ALS?

by Anonymous 1 week ago

Prove it

by Kitchen-Property-501 1 week ago

Its just performative at the end of the day. They are giving a homless guy a sandwhich for a video that will get them more money than they spent on the sandwhich. Sadly alot of them are only nice on camera as well, so they end up doing more harm than good since they arent always recording.

by Altruistic-Bonus4052 1 week ago

Naw, it's one of the worst forms of clout chasing. Exploitative and cringe as hell

by Fuzzy_Attitude_5125 1 week ago

give from the kindness of you're heart...we're rolling? are we live? is the internet connection stable? and I'll need 2 camera angles for this, ready, set, action! "it means so much to me providing this for you." gimme a break

by Anonymous 1 week ago

For me, I always think of that lady who makes a bunch of food for impoverished kids. The reason why she films is to make profit off those videos, to be able to buy more food, to make more meals for those kids. Like full circle moment kinda

by Anonymous 1 week ago

If you film it for your own safety fine. If you film it to put online then you are crossing into douche territory.

by Dull-House 1 week ago

I'm perfectly fine with people helping others as long as there's no harmful exploitation happening there and the person gets the help as promised. If someone gets help and the helper get clout. I'm all in for that. I don't care that the help isn't pure of heart and stems from an egocentric mind. I rather see that form of help over no help. Its a net positive and I don't get why people are so against this other than the possibility of someone getting harmfully exploited. It's valid!

by AwayBend 1 week ago

What if I want to not be filmed more than I want a free meal?

by Anonymous 1 week ago

What ways did you have in mind?

by Anonymous 1 week ago

Rhett and Link come to mind. They give away thousands of dollars each month to different charities as part of the Wheel of Mythicality, and more during the summer doing competitive games to "earn" money for their chosen organizations. The charities benefit from the money and the audience attention and Rhett and Link's public image benefits from centering philanthropy in their work, all without filming people in dire straits or asking them to talk about the worst moments in their lives.

by Anonymous 1 week ago

I don't think it's very dignified for the person being "helped". They haven't chosen to be filmed, and nor do they probably feel like they ask the "helper" not to share the video because they received something they have wanted/needed. People filming themselves collecting rubbish is not comparable to filming people when they are at their lowest. If people want to share imagery of their artwork, skills, or doing a good deed for the need of the planet I've not got a problem with. But filming people when they are probably at their worst, not okay. Don't get me wrong they can still help those people, but not for views and likes.

by Daytonbarrows 1 week ago

I -like- to think of it as inspiration for others to do the same. Not necessarily film themselves doing it, but going out to do good. Maybe someone seeing someone else do something decent for someone else, will get them off their ass to help others as well? idk

by Anonymous 1 week ago

That's how I see it too.

by Anonymous 1 week ago