-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
'The Activist' - Usher, Priyanka Chopra Jonas, and Julianne Hough host a tv show where activists... *sigh* ... compete to promote their causes...
- Thread starter Khanimus
- Start date
Priyanka Chopra is a really shitty person and a hypocrite who should not be celebrated at all:
Pakistani actress: The problem with Priyanka Chopra | CNN
Rather than use her position as a US-based celebrity to broaden what it means to be an Indian celebrity, with a tweet -- and then scoffing comment in response to a questioner over Kashmir -- UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador Chopra fell into the same jingoistic role that her fellow countrymen are...www.cnn.com
^she made on apology for that this year… after years of profiting from it
Priyanka Chopra slammed for calling out racism after promoting skin lightening
People are calling out the 'woke' stars.metro.co.uk
Damn I didn't know she was that awful before this thread. Only thing I've actually seen her in is the White Tiger, and her character in it is hilariously fitting for her in hindsight now that I think about it
I haven't read the whole thread but the premise doesn't sound morally repugnant like the OP is implying to me. The show still serves as a platform to raise awareness of the participants causes, regardless of whether they win the competition. If a game show is what gets people's eyeballs then so what? This doesn't have to be a zero sum game. Everyone besides the winner potentially benefits from the increased exposure. A lot will depend on the tone of the show, and how they handle points and eliminations. They have to be careful of not conveying a message that eliminated participants causes were not worthy enough.
It does sound that bad...there are limits...this gross for so many reasons. While obviously the resourcing the 'winner' achieves could make a difference to them, I think the wider message this sends is much more problematic. It trivialises and infantalises the work that many activists do. The choice of hosts are also problematic. Its crude, it is shallow, and its unhelpful to many of us fighting to take us beyond the mindnumbing state of much contemporary culture.
I think it really does depend on the execution. It's not like fundraising or charity work is limited to making calls or going door to door. Charities run concerts, lotteries, dinners, social media events (eg the ice bucket challenge) and use many other strategies which engage an audience through shallow entertainment. All of this still raises awareness and funds. Some of this may be fleeting and not deep engagement but it's worthwhile nonetheless.
Awareness is one part. Cooption, trivialisation and sanitization is another. Sure it might provide resources. I am involved in quite a number of campaigns and we could always do with more resources. I am not sure if I know any activists who would like this shit though. Some NGOs might though...and my experience is obviously anecdotal...it is a huge field. But I see this is having limited positive impact overall, and more problems by association and trivialisation. It is about resources and awareness, but it is not only that. Ultimately, to me this just looks like too much of a fucking piss take.
Justice signaling monetization of activism. They might well have called it Oppression Olympics to top it off. Who the hell greenlit this?! So these entities have the actual wherewithal financially & the resources, to help people but first they need to go through trivial song and dance for consideration? I agree with everyone in this thread how this is morally bankrupt.
Yeah I hardly believe anyone running the show actually cares about anything. If they did, they wouldn't be making it a battle Royale first of all.
Ah yes, forgot she was a crappy individual for other reasons. Cannot stand this woman. She's like the Indian sister of Gal Gadot, I swear. The less stuff they are in, the better. Already annoyed she's in Matrix 4, ugghhhhh.
So this is about co-opting activism too, making it seem like it exists to be performative for fame.
Christ what an evil show.
The linked twitter thread a few posts up sadly removes all benefit of the doubt.
Conceptually, it isn't at all.
There are people who repulsed by the idea of activists going on a shark tank style pitches when in reality it's perfectly normal in the non profit sector for activists to make pitches to potential donors. Activists spend their time and they deserve to be compensated for it, so seeking funds is a necessary part of activism.
There are those who are repulsed by the idea of them having to compete for funding, and to be honest this isn't necessarily a bad thing either. There a lot of organizations who have the best of intentions but don't have the strategic or operational skills to follow through on their goals. They may genuinely want to change the world but they often lack the basic competencies you would expect from a non profit and to give them money is just wasting money you could have given to someone who knows what they are doing. Not to mention there are non profits that are straight up scams.
It's understandable to not like this being turned into a TV show for entertainment, but even if you lose the competition the free press you might get from being on a TV may be worth tens if not hundreds of thousands that the non profits won't be able to make on their own. Yeah, some shitty Hollywood producer may be getting new sports car out of the deal, but there is still quite of bit of incremental value for the non profit sector.
Again, I say that there isn't much wrong with this conceptually. As we've seen earlier in this thread, there are clearly some people who are less than fully reputable attached the project.
I would say the quoted bit suggests even the concept is flawed. Those elements do not inherently signify successful activism, just marketing and branding. None of this is going to demonstrate operation skills, abilities to reach/persuade stakeholders, organize, etc. It's just surface level stuff.
I missed that. That's a big Oof.
It sadly isn't surprising that the only metrics they care about are the intersection of what the non-profit needs and what can be used to sell ads.
Last edited:
Being Made for TV fundamentally changes this though. Let's look at Shark Tank as an analogous setup. The types of pitches being made to Shark Tank "investors" are NOT the types of pitches a startup/someone with a product idea would make to actual investors. There's a disingenuous amount of dramatization made for dumb TV audiences and even more dumbing down than usual. I think that's the biggest issue with this.
These activists aren't being asked to pitch their orgs/ideas for funding in earnest. They're being asked to tailor them to be game show competition worthy and it's gross
I saw that this morning, if you going to do this stupid show at least vet the people. Just a quick look at their wiki article. She should have said that shit in the beginning not after it was pointed out.
lol. In other words, they're judged by how many people tweeted about the show to help boost the network's ratings. That's really funny.
This is the world where people film themselves doing things like giving homeless food or clothing or paying for them and post it online. They aren't doing it for the needy they are doing it for themselves. Of course a show like this exists . They could just use the budget of the show and paycheck to all these celebs and do 10,000 times more good
Aren't all the contestant's organizations getting more exposure just being on the show that they would without the show, especially if it's a success? Not sure what the uproar is here
"Ladies and gentlemen, three human rights enter the stage, but only one will win. Who will it be? Text your favorite human dignity to 1800-ACTIVIST or tweet your answer with hashing #HungryChild!"
Now, a word from our sponsor.
*seagulls flying. Nice scenic view of a beach with a happy family having fun*
"Dad: ExxonMobil has been the bedrock of our community for over 50 years...."
The money being used to produce this show could go directly to said organizations as well. Ask yourself why they aren't doing this lol.
Yeah it's been known for a while now that she's an asshole.
:lol Yup. Just came to mention that I've seen this episode before.
Habitat for Humanity...Your performance this week in Snatch Game had all the habi-tit, but none of the habi-tat.
I'm sorry my dear but you are up for elimination.
She is absolute trash. One only needs to read her disastrous r/AMA. Probably the biggest bomba of reddit.
"I'm sorry, Children Cancer Foundation, your retweet quota is way below The Dodo. But don't worry you'll get another chance in a few months so tell the kids to just hang in there..."
I think it's possible that someone could use the show for good ends if they were willing to put on a show but based on what they have shown so far it didn't seem on the up and up and the uproar was bad enough that even a winner with a good heart would be also fighting negative publicity for even being on the show lol
no idea what the change to a documentary will do either
no idea what the change to a documentary will do either
The Activist: Priyanka Chopra sorry for role on reality show
The show was originally pitched as a competition series but will now become a documentary.
www.bbc.co.uk
Lol I called it, the although the show has already been filmed, it will be remade as a documentary and some stars have apologised. There has been a lot of backlash. I'm amazed no one (senior enough) thought this was a ridiculously bad idea
Sad Easter, Xbox.
Whether they go through with this desperate salvage attempt, or it (preferably) ends up being canceled, I hope the production companies lose a bunch of money and partnerships and the assholes up top responsible for this travesty end up in need of charity.
I'm inclined to believe they were being malicious assholes rather than stupid ones. They probably did realize how grim this show was and how fellow humans would respond to it, it seems impossible not to. They just didn't care because they thought this could be beneficial to themselves, reckoned the backlash wouldn't get this bad and could be used for publicity.The Activist: Priyanka Chopra sorry for role on reality show
The show was originally pitched as a competition series but will now become a documentary.www.bbc.co.uk
Lol I called it, the although the show has already been filmed, it will be remade as a documentary and some stars have apologised. There has been a lot of backlash. I'm amazed no one (senior enough) thought this was a ridiculously bad idea
Yup, and she continues to support the ultra right wing BJP government in India and the ethnic cleansing/genocide.
Pakistan calls on UNICEF to drop actress Priyanka Chopra as an ambassador | CNN
Pakistan has demanded that Indian actress Priyanka Chopra be stripped of her UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador role, saying that her "support for war" and the Indian government amid heightened tensions in the disputed region of Kashmir make a "mockery" of the position.
edition.cnn.com
She doesn't deserve to be associated with any activism with such a background. I don't think she still hasn't been stripped of being a UNICEF Goodwill Ambassador.