Plus, from a celebrity mindset, its rather easy to get publicity for relatively cheap, plus its for a good cause, and, well, even that catches on more people
Plus, from a celebrity mindset, its rather easy to get publicity for relatively cheap, plus its for a good cause, and, well, even that catches on more people
Speaking of the potato salad kickstarter, why did that blow up? I still don't get how he got so many backers and therefore money for what started out as a joke kickstarter.
I wouldn't say it's peer pressure; "peer pressure" suggests there's some sort of negative reinforcement to pouring the bucket of ice water over your head. I don't see people that don't accept the challenge being judged by their peers, and I don't see people accepting the challenge solely to avoid judgment. If there's any reinforcement to accept the challenge, it's positive.
To be a bit more cynical than ECP, the reason the challenge got so big (and the reason it snowballed even farther, as ECP says), is that it's slacktivism. People are by and large fundamentally good, but they're also fundamentally lazy and will therefore jump at an opportunity to meet that notion of "goodness" with the minimal amount of effort. Which isn't to say that the challenge is a farce, since it has funneled more money into ALS research (possible bottlenecks aside), even if that increase is skewed from large celebrity donations. Either way, increased funding a good thing!
It raises an ugly question, though...is it fair that research of one fatal disease can "win out" (scare quotes heavily emphasized) over research of another fatal disease with slacktivism? I knew someone with pancreatic cancer that seemed a bit put-off -- not bitter or offended, just fazed -- that breast cancer awareness is so much more widespread than awareness of other cancers, in part owing to pink ribbon culture. And that leads to disproportionate funding (IIRC breast cancer receives close to $15,000 in funding per death while pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, and others only receive about $2,000 per death -- can't remember where I got this from). Is that right?
I dunno, I'm starting to feel too cynical for even my own good. I do feel that the ice bucket challenge is a positive force, no matter the source of its success.
They're harnessing the power of the internet chain letter and peer pressure.
The Ice Bucket portion is just a fun little aside from the main point, and entertaining people through these videos is a great way to get money from them.
Plus, from a celebrity mindset, its rather easy to get publicity for relatively cheap, plus its for a good cause, and, well, even that catches on more people
Speaking of the potato salad kickstarter, why did that blow up? I still don't get how he got so many backers and therefore money for what started out as a joke kickstarter.
I was watching a guy on Twitch the other day playing what is normally a completely Free to Play game... He had gotten a few subscribers and a couple large donations (around $40) and he had to change his top donator a couple times and casually mentioned "ooo it looks like a top donator war". Within the next 20 minutes he had received several donations for over $100 and finally a $200 donation. I am not sure where it went from there. Add a little bit of competition to something or a little bit of humor (like the potato salad) and the bandwagon just gets too tempting for people to resist.
The ALS bucket challenge is working because it's become a fad. People get to run around making a spectacle of themselves on social media, and if we've learned anything, it's that people LOVE making spectacles of themselves on social media.
It raises an ugly question, though...is it fair that research of one fatal disease can "win out" (scare quotes heavily emphasized) over research of another fatal disease with slacktivism?
I'm not sure what meaning that question has. If we want to talk about "fair," it's not "fair" that the diseases exist at all. It's not "fair" that some people suffer from illnesses that are less in the public limelight than others. So is making headlines for activism by promoting awareness of a disease that doesn't typically make it into the headlines unfair? Is making the world less unfair unfair? If it is, who cares?
It raises an ugly question, though...is it fair that research of one fatal disease can "win out" (scare quotes heavily emphasized) over research of another fatal disease with slacktivism? I knew someone with pancreatic cancer that seemed a bit put-off -- not bitter or offended, just fazed -- that breast cancer awareness is so much more widespread than awareness of other cancers, in part owing to pink ribbon culture. And that leads to disproportionate funding (IIRC breast cancer receives close to $15,000 in funding per death while pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, and others only receive about $2,000 per death -- can't remember where I got this from). Is that right?.
I don't quite get the question you're raising.
It's not like there is a moral imperative that we donate money equally for researching all diseases. Of course the more publicized, and so more public, ones will receive more funding. People just know about it more.
I'm not sure what's wrong with that though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For the record its raised over 13 million, which is 8 times more then last year. The challenge raised over 7 million in the first 2 weeks.
Now we are seeing some very high profile people get involved and throw some large amounts of money at the cause.
Is this because of peer pressure? Wanting to be part of something? Something else?
Thoughts? Discuss.
Example,
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/324283889/potato-salad
Plus, from a celebrity mindset, its rather easy to get publicity for relatively cheap, plus its for a good cause, and, well, even that catches on more people
Speaking of the potato salad kickstarter, why did that blow up? I still don't get how he got so many backers and therefore money for what started out as a joke kickstarter.
Credit to Heroes of the Plane Studios for the Avatar & Miraculous Recovery for the Banner.
My 540 Card Cube (WIP)
To be a bit more cynical than ECP, the reason the challenge got so big (and the reason it snowballed even farther, as ECP says), is that it's slacktivism. People are by and large fundamentally good, but they're also fundamentally lazy and will therefore jump at an opportunity to meet that notion of "goodness" with the minimal amount of effort. Which isn't to say that the challenge is a farce, since it has funneled more money into ALS research (possible bottlenecks aside), even if that increase is skewed from large celebrity donations. Either way, increased funding a good thing!
It raises an ugly question, though...is it fair that research of one fatal disease can "win out" (scare quotes heavily emphasized) over research of another fatal disease with slacktivism? I knew someone with pancreatic cancer that seemed a bit put-off -- not bitter or offended, just fazed -- that breast cancer awareness is so much more widespread than awareness of other cancers, in part owing to pink ribbon culture. And that leads to disproportionate funding (IIRC breast cancer receives close to $15,000 in funding per death while pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, and others only receive about $2,000 per death -- can't remember where I got this from). Is that right?
I dunno, I'm starting to feel too cynical for even my own good. I do feel that the ice bucket challenge is a positive force, no matter the source of its success.
The Ice Bucket portion is just a fun little aside from the main point, and entertaining people through these videos is a great way to get money from them.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
I was watching a guy on Twitch the other day playing what is normally a completely Free to Play game... He had gotten a few subscribers and a couple large donations (around $40) and he had to change his top donator a couple times and casually mentioned "ooo it looks like a top donator war". Within the next 20 minutes he had received several donations for over $100 and finally a $200 donation. I am not sure where it went from there. Add a little bit of competition to something or a little bit of humor (like the potato salad) and the bandwagon just gets too tempting for people to resist.
I'm not sure what meaning that question has. If we want to talk about "fair," it's not "fair" that the diseases exist at all. It's not "fair" that some people suffer from illnesses that are less in the public limelight than others. So is making headlines for activism by promoting awareness of a disease that doesn't typically make it into the headlines unfair? Is making the world less unfair unfair? If it is, who cares?
I don't quite get the question you're raising.
It's not like there is a moral imperative that we donate money equally for researching all diseases. Of course the more publicized, and so more public, ones will receive more funding. People just know about it more.
I'm not sure what's wrong with that though.