|
|
|
|
|
by nkozyra
1103 days ago
|
|
> If unselfish means that I can't benefit in addition to you benefiting One doesn't preclude the other. But if my benefit is a pre-requisite for the benefit of others, it changes the dynamic. Would Mr. Beast continue these acts if he weren't also turning it into content? I'm sure everyone has an opinion, but I'm not particularly convinced. I suppose what makes it hard to be skeptical here is there is real "good" being applied here, but the motivations behind them are important, too. |
|
I give you 30 grand or cure your blindness or buy you a house and you participate in my video. It seems like a win win.
If the argument is that he is making more than they are making off that one video, again, that goes back to me having benefit less than you.
Maybe the problem is the framing people have of it being a charity? Even in that light, he creates content for people to consume for free, the content is driven by him giving things away, the people who pay him are businesses who also get a service provided by all of those people finding out about their product/service. It seems a lot less extractive than most business models.