Katrina & Hollywood

disasters come and disasters go...

Z-N, I am reminded of a personal anecdote, which I assume you can appreciate, considering your relationship with Israel.

In the immediate aftermath of the October 19, 1994 Dizengoff Square No. 5 bus bombing (which I was caught in, as a passer-by) there was shock and outrage aplenty. Body parts were strewn all over this popular central Tel Aviv gathering place. "Popular" doesn't even describe it. The Israelis even have a verb in the modern Hebrew language, "L-hizdengoff" which defined the act of strolling along that Boulevard in the evenings.

How could we go back? Go back to those movie theaters in the square, back to see the fountain of Yaakov Agam (Fire and Water), back to just walking along, people-watching and going nowhere?

But go back we did. We also went back to the Dolphinarium, We went back to Sabarros, we went back to the Stage. It was necessary for our sanity.

===========================

Katrina is a tragedy, of unprecedented proportions.
The nation's heart reaches out. We have given millions of $$$$. We have taken-in many of the displaced. We have tried to aid in various ways from a distance, and many people even have gone down to the Gulf States to help personally. There is much still to be done.

The Academy of Televison Arts and Sciences was offered the gift baskets, and the individual recipients may choose to do what they will with them. That is the very nature of gifts. You accept them graciously, and then re-gift them (quietly and without fanfare) if you are so inclined.

It is entirely possible that some of these celebrities will do exactly that. Or not.
 
geni said:
Yep if you belive that your moral objections to the way people spend money are of any significance then communism (or at least a state run economy with no free market) is the logical end point of your position.
Click to expand...
I don't believe your assertion. So ZN has a moral position. Now, please lay out the logic that leads to his (her?) advocating for a communist economic system. I just can't wait to read this.
 
ZN: "{One would hope that they} would donate the few million spent on these 90+ lavish "gift baskets" to the people affected by Katrina."

90 gift baskets would have to be valued over $110,000 each to equal just one million dollars. A quick calculation of that list shows:

Mp3 player $250
Canadian 3-night trip $1200 (?)
suitcase $300
chocolates for 100 $1200 (?)
fancy gold-button shirt $500 (?)
spa care products $250
digital camera $350
picture phone $400
useless signed drawing $50

Total: less than $5000.

I dunno, call me crazy, but where is the "few millions" indicated in the OP?
 
Apple Computer donated $1M to the Red Cross for Katrina relief. I don't think it's so bad that they gave a few iPods away.
 
Exactly my point.

All of these companies have an advertising & promotional budget, and this Emmy 'gifting' deal falls into that clearly.

It is not a question of Katrina survivors being 'biffed" out of being helped -- they are indeed getting financial aid from their fellow Americans. Did nobody see the MDA Labor Day Telethon? Jerry Lewis agreed to designate a segment of his annual campaign for Muscular Dystrophy just for the disaster relief effort. That type of thing has been happening all over, and continues. Many places of business have set up 'cookie jars' for cash contributions.

So, the Academy of Televison Arts and Sciences had a nice evening to self-promote. Big whoop, it is just mindless TV entertainment. And like I said, I'm sure millionaire celebrities have donated.
 
webfusion said:
90 gift baskets would have to be valued over $110,000 each to equal just one million dollars. A quick calculation of that list shows:
Click to expand...

Just a nit-pick, but your math is off by a factor of 10. These baskets only need to be worth a little more than $11,000 for 90 of them to be valued at a million.
 
I guess after 9-11, after the tsunami and after Katrina I find self-promoting scams like the Emmys distasteful. What I find even more distasteful is showering "presenters" at the Emmys with thousands of dollars worth of luxury gifts while parents have missing children and are living on cots pennyless, jobless and homeless in louisiana and mississippi.

"Let them eat cake" is what runs through my head when I think of them handing out these luxury gift bags at the Emmys...anyhow it's obviously a personal thing that many don't seem to understand.... I'm cool with that. So I shall end this thread here.:p
 
A bit off kilter here, but among the newspaper photographs I saw of Katrina's devastation was one of the actor Sean Penn in a boat helping survivors...
 
The reason they don't convert the prize baskets into money and give it to the hurricane victims or whatever is that the Emmy Awards isn't about helping anyone not in the TV industry. It's about nothing more than promotion...of "stars," of TV shows, of products, etc.

And as far as the claim someone made that Bill Gates could rescue the economies of any number of Third World economies, I think that is patently ridiculous. If it were that simple then all the Third World economies would have been rescued long ago.
 
Number Six said:
The reason they don't convert the prize baskets into money and give it to the hurricane victims or whatever is that the Emmy Awards isn't about helping anyone not in the TV industry. It's about nothing more than promotion...of "stars," of TV shows, of products, etc.
Click to expand...
Precisely. The Oscars and Emmys were created to rebrand the product - movies & TV shows - so that you - the consumer - would go "gosh...I gotta see that cuz it 'won' and Emmy/Oscar". Then the studios cash in on your Pavlovian conditioning.
Diogenes said:
Are you supporting these insideous Hollywoodites by watching television?
Click to expand...
Nope. My TV is rarely turned on...the only reason I have cable is to watch "The Daily Show", Speedvision and occasionally "Pilot Guides". :D
 
zenith-nadir said:
Bill Gates is one of the greatest philanthropists of our time Diogenes.)
Click to expand...
And his giving has nothing to do with the massive tax breaks/incentives, and good publicity resulting from his giving.
 
factor of 10

Mycroft, I typed $11,000 I swear I did. Then I added up the gifts to $5,000. and wondered where "millions" was arrived at, but in any case, the main point is the same ---
We appreciate our entertainment, and this years' show was watched by more people than last years' presentation.

I especially liked the comment by Ellen DeGeneris:

"But seriously, I think overall in the scheme of things winning an Emmy is not important. Let's get our priorities straight. I think we all know what's really important in life : Winning an Oscar."


http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/wireStory?id=1138422

Now, on that note, this thread is officially over?
 
luchog said:
And his giving has nothing to do with the massive tax breaks/incentives, and good publicity resulting from his giving.
Click to expand...
Bill Gates may be in it for the publicity a little bit but I don't think that's his primary purpose. I say that because:

1. He gets very little publicity relative to how much money he gives. Every now and then I'll see a little blurb in the paper about him giving $200 M for vaccinations in Africa whereas anytime an entertainment celeb gives 100 K it's all over the place. I may have seen more media coverage over Celine Dion's $1 M gift to New Orleans relief than I've seen to all Gates gifts combined, which must total in the billions by now. If he's doing it for the publicity then he's got a bad publicist.

2. Gates' financial fortunes are only weakly tied to his PR. If he comes off in the media as a dirty b****** then maybe he sells a little less software. If he comes off as a great philantropist then maybe he sells a little more software. But mostly his sales depend on how well people like Windows.

OTOH the entertainment celebs fortunes depend heavily on how much the public likes them, or at times how much the public likes to dislike them, but definitely on how much the public knows and recognizes them. They aren't selling a tangible product, rather they're selling themselves and their image. People don't go to see Sean Penn act, rather they go to see Sean Penn. If they like him they go see him or maybe if they really dislike him they go see him so they can yell derogatory comments at the screen.

Bill Gates could make a vow tomorrow to remain personally anonymous as possible and his fortunes would barely be affected but if the entertainment celebs made the same vow it would ruin their careers. That's why I'm so cynical when I see them pop up on telethons or whatnot for disaster relief. It benefits them to be there and it harms them not to be there so I have a hard time falling at their feet and thanking them for their wonderful service.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom