He is an evil individual who fails to address systemic issues or assist people for their own benefit.

As a game show host, he humiliates and exploits participants, boasting about his own virtues without any regard for the contestants.

Examples:

I believe legal intervention is necessary to limit his actions towards people and prevent him from exploiting them for personal gain.

Quick note: while I believe that results of some of his videos is good ( which he did to show how good of a person he is), that does not change the facts about his evil videos, the same way bezoz donations does not make him a good person.

  • pikasaurX4@lemm.ee
    662·
    10 months ago

    A fair point, but I think OP means that this guy already has the means to make a difference but chooses to dangle it in front of needy people and make them dance for it rather than tackle poverty problems from a different angle

    Not sure what OP would do with this guy’s wealth, but I’m sure there isnt a magic wand Mr Beast could wave to solve poverty even if he wanted to

    • Betch@lemmy.world
      265·
      10 months ago

      but I think OP means that this guy already has the means to make a difference but chooses to dangle it in front of needy people and make them dance for it rather than tackle poverty problems from a different angle

      But then if he’s not getting any returns from it, it’s going to dry out.

      • pikasaurX4@lemm.ee
        20·
        10 months ago

        Well the returns he gets are the views on his videos. People love to watch people fight to survive. So he pits them against each other in order to draw eyes (and therefore advertisers) while positioning himself as a “humanitarian” making “donations” out of the goodness of his heart. Obviously it’s working because his wealth is growing, not shrinking. That’s part of what I think makes it “evil” in OP’s eyes. If you’re profiting off of it, is it really charitable?

        Edit: Oh wait, I can’t read. I see what you are saying. Disregard the above. I think you and I agree there. I don’t think it would be easy for him to just give all his money away for free because then it would be gone and people would still be poor

        I’m just trying to play devil’s advocate

        • Betch@lemmy.world
          61·
          10 months ago

          Hahah no yeah I do agree with you. I was just saying that if that’s what OP is thinking then that’s pretty silly.

          • cqthca@reddthat.com
            2·
            9 months ago

            I took the OP as saying: I think X is an evil, so I didn’t do X. Therefore it is an evil, and so is the person doing X . MORAL PROJECTION

    • Cethin@lemmy.zip
      42·
      10 months ago

      I think more than anything it’s that he could use his platform to make people vote to change things. No matter what he does he can’t fix things as an individual. He does have the influence to change voting habits though.