Kristen Gyles | The likes-activated, social media charity

Imagine for a minute…

You are homeless and you ‘live’ in New Kingston gully. You have nowhere to bathe, brush your teeth or relieve yourself – not that the problem ends there, since you don’t have access to soap, toothpaste or other basic toiletries. You haven’t eaten a meal in two days and you have been walking around in the same smelly clothes for even longer. You see a nicely dressed person going about their usual busy business and they have a bottle of water in their hand. You ask for it.

They pull out a cell phone and start recording a video of you. Then they start their speech: “Good morning Facebook. God is calling us to give even when we have nothing to receive….” Blah, blah, blah. The speech continues. Finally, the person hands you the bottle of water, ends the recording and continues about their day.

This kind of thing happens, perhaps, twice a week, with different people. After not very long, you’re a superstar! Now everybody, even those living on the western end of the island, have seen the New Kingston gully beggar.

Eventually, with a little help, you make it off the streets and things take an upturn. You are now able to tend to your basic needs but now you also want to be reintegrated into society. You are looking for employment and you are looking to advance yourself. Do you think those videos will make it easier or harder for you? Put that aside. How do you *feel* knowing these videos will eternally be making the rounds online?

A nuh every ting fi post. Some things need not even be captured by a cell phone camera. We live in a social media era where almost everything qualifies as broadcast-worthy material. The need for the repetitive endorsement of random strangers through likes and reposts and retweets and shares on social media seems to have arrested the rationale senses of some people.

For a predominantly Christian country, you would think greater consideration would be given to Jesus’ admonition that “… when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth” (Matthew 6:3). Notwithstanding, it has become quite the norm for people to broadcast themselves stretching out their right, alms-giving hand, not only in view of their left hand, but in full view of the entire world through social media.

EXPLOITATIVE

It is always commendable to give. In fact, the world needs more givers. But giving as a means of self-promotion is exploitative. If you are helping, why not just help? Why is there a need to post the bottle of water you are giving to a beggar? Let’s say you need to show the world how sweet you are. Why not tell them while leaving images of the beggar out?

We often don’t think of the homeless and people living in destitution as caring about rich-people luxuries like ‘dignity’ and ‘pride’. Except, that thought assumes that their situation will never change and that they are destined to a life where such ‘luxuries’ will never matter to them. No one wants records of themselves half-naked and dirty circulating online.

Extreme cases of poverty clearly attract cameras. But there is a culture now of recording every recordable thing: the porridge I cooked for breakfast, the birthmark I just discovered on my left butt cheek, the weights I am lifting in the gym, etc. Naturally, why wouldn’t such a person want to post their heroic deed of helping an indigent, poverty-stricken stranger? However overwhelming the urge to overshare, though, a little consideration goes a far way. Don’t share the kinds of pictures of others you wouldn’t want shared of yourself.

Then there is the good ol’ corporate social responsibility and the extra coins it piles into the company’s coffers.

Corporate entities are experts at this kind of thing. Labour Day comes around and they find a dilapidated old house with no roof and a cracked, manure-tinted pail for a toilet. They offer to remodel the house and of course, the occupants gladly accept whatever help they can get. In exchange for the service, the company comes in and takes pictures of the old house with the family inside eating dumpling and salt for dinner. The CEO and a few vice-presidents then interview themselves and reiterate how they have really saved the day for the poor lady and her nine children who were living in squalor.

The lady might think they are a bit over-the-top and might not want pictures of her children and the previously filthy living conditions made public. But, what will she say when she is getting a new house?

The company’s management ensures the pictures are plastered all over social media, in the upcoming annual report, and in the next television commercial, and justify to each other that these images will lead to increased business which will then enable them to help more vulnerable people. It’s a win-win … or something like that.

There’s nothing wrong with sharing, and especially in public affairs, transparency is always good. But declaring how public funds were spent (in the case of elected officials) or how a corporate budget was fulfilled can be done in a way that does not publicise the identities of the persons who were helped and in a way that does not broadcast audiovisual content of them at their lowest.

On a slightly different note, there is also a serious issue with people videoing mentally compromised people just for laughs. A mentally ill person roaming the street, dressed in a big garbage bag, is not in the frame of mind to consent to having their face plastered all over the Internet. So if you are extending charity to someone who is obviously insane, just don’t video them. Again, pulling out a recording device won’t help them. It will only help you stroke the ego of your alternative online persona and garner more likes and shares.

Similarly, intervening to stop a suicidal person from jumping off a high-rise building is not something you need to video. Just help, where you can, and leave the cameras out.

Kristen Gyles is a free-thinking public affairs opinionator. Email feedback to kristengyles@gmail.com.