Artists for Grenfell

Shelster · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:35

Have just heard this on the radio in work after rading all about it in the press and while I am probably going to get a right flaming a probably a ban for this, have to vent over it.

I agree that as a very civilised and compasionate country, doing somehting to help out those who have been effected by the tragedy is a great thing.

By my count there are 30 'stars' who have taken part in this and from what I understand, they are definitaley not short of a bob or two. Instead of their self promoting guff and asking the general public to dip ito theor pockets once again to help out, why dont they dip into their vast wealths and drop £100k each into the fund? Am sure they can manage to get it written of in some sort of tax loop somewhere so that it does not hit them that hard and for what they are all worth, it is not an amount that is going to effect them, but will make a great difference to those on teh receiving side of it.

Rant over and sitting back ready for the assault.

Glanza · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:37

It's the same everytime they do one of these be it from band aid up to the Grenfell song.

G-MAN2004 · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:38

How do you know they haven't? Not everything has to be public.

scorza · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:40

Welcome to how charities work in the age of the celebrity. I always wonder how much actual money people like Ewan McGregor and Martin Sheen actually give to the UNICEF programmes they promote, or is it merely that they've given up their time?

Shelster · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:41

Glanza said:
It's the same everytime they do one of these be it from band aid up to the Grenfell song.

Agree

G-MAN2004 said:
How do you know they haven't? Not everything has to be public.

I don't. But if they are all taking the time to do the single and then pose and promote their great contribution to outside press, then why would they not go that final step and say if they had donated their own money and not just 'time and profits'?

Semple · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:42

G-MAN2004 said:
How do you know they haven't? Not everything has to be public.

They normally publicise the value of the fund, and regularly too.

I'm agreeing with the OP, don't get me wrong it's great that these artists give up a bit of their time to create something that will make some money. But you can't preach to the public to dig deep in their pockets if you as a star aren't going to either.

MooMoo444 · 21 Jun 2017 at 08:57

G-MAN2004 said:
How do you know they haven't? Not everything has to be public.

What celeb would turn down that much good publicity?

Diddums · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:00

I have no doubt that they're doing this for good publicity, but even then, surely anything and everything to help these people restore normality to their lives is a good thing? I mean, if you discount the self-gratification of this act then all that's left is the public helping to raise money for those affected. How is that not a good thing?

Fair play to them I say, regardless of their true intentions. Sometimes in life you have to ignore the fine print and just appreciate the bigger picture.

jsmoke · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:02

Most of them have sold their souls to the world so they feel justified in holding onto to their money.

cheesyboy · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:04

What a **** OP

People only donate when they feel they want to. If you don't want to, that's fine. Feeling defensive and insecure because you are unwilling or unable to donate, and then projecting that upon the artists attempting to help is a rather unattractive trait.

Why wouldn't artist try to drum up public support? They are probably already donating anyway. But even if they aren't, their pulling together in this way offers more comfort than just cash.

Of all the things to use up energy getting ****** off over....

robgmun · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:14

G-MAN2004 said:
How do you know they haven't? Not everything has to be public.

Absolutely this, the biggest philanthropists is history are unusually only found out after they die. The only reason that Bill Gates went public was so that he could get other rich types to do the same, otherwise i believe we would never know about him giving away billions.

Armageus · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:17

MooMoo444 said:
What celeb would turn down that much good publicity?

Lots I imagine - even if they donate £100k for example, no doubt there would still be people saying, "they have £10bn, surely they could donate more"

smogsy · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:27

cant stand it myself,
From my Overhearing

with had lilen Allen telling her Story, & Simon Cowell Making a Charity.
That's fine and all but i don't want to hear it.
Make a Charity but don't assign your name to it. Its simple self promotion... or even better donate & don't put your name to it if you really care you dont need your name out their..

cheesyboy · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:31

smogsy said:
cant stand it myself,
From my Overhearing

with had lilen Allen telling her Story, & Simon Cowell Making a Charity.
That's fine and all but i don't want to hear it.
Make a Charity but don't assign your name to it. Its simple self promotion... or even better donate & don't put your name to it if you really care you dont need your name out their..

What's the point in making a charity single if there's no promotion for it?

Who would hear about it?

xyphic · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:34

Attaching a celebrity endorsement to a charity increases its profile. It may not be *right* that this is the case, but it is certainly *true* and as such it makes sense to do it. Many celebrities regularly give both time and money to various charities and as such help to raise plenty of money. I'm not sure I see what's wrong with that.

Cleisthenes · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:39

As has been said before, the publicity is great for the celebs as well as it being a good cause. We don't know how much they've donated, and it's their right to not disclose that.

I hear Ariana Grande's songs on Radio 2 about 4 times as often as I used to so there are clearly upsides to doing this sort of thing for less privileged people.

Diddums · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:39

Thank you to whoever fixed the thread title. Was doing my swede in.

Armageus · 21 Jun 2017 at 09:41

Diddums said:
Thank you to whoever fixed the thread title. Was doing my swede in.

smogsy · 21 Jun 2017 at 10:15

cheesyboy said:
What's the point in making a charity single if there's no promotion for it?

Who would hear about it?

it can be just a charity single by Artists, does need to be Charity Single By Simon Cowell

d_brennen · 21 Jun 2017 at 10:26

If every rich person dug into their pockets when something bad happens, they'd soon be poor