Quote:
Originally Posted by bitontheslide
by your definition everyone who mentions charity is as bad as Oprah and the rock, which is obviously not the case. I get you want to make an argument, but i am no royal fan, and there is a striking difference between the way royals handle charities and the way celebs do it and you are being disingenuous if you don't recognise that
|
Again - there's a difference between how a chef chops a carrot and how my 11 year old chops a carrot, but at the end of the day you're still eating carrots.
Your error here is mis-remembering anywhere that I said any of this is
bad. I don't think it's "bad" that the Royals support charities (if they must exist, it's the least they can do) or that celebrities support charities. I find the methods of both ham-fisted but each to their own ... the Royal methods seem less "dignified and refined" once you see them for what they are (PR) but ultimately wherever/whenever money is getting where it needs to go, that's a positive.
So I don't think the Royals are "bad" for doing charity.
I don't think The Rock and Oprah are "bad" for doing charity.
...I just think they're exactly the same... and noted a very vocal Royal-fan being very critical of celebrity charity. Which is just sheer hypocrisy.