Oprah's Good Intentions - Neo-colonialism?

[sherrife]

Oprah's Good Intentions
Wednesday, 31 January 2007
by Rev. Irene Monroe

[member34258]

Oprah suffers from "look at me" syndrome. When she gave away a car to each audience member, she made a big deal of her largesse. Really though it was the car manufacturer who footed the bill, not Oprah.
As far as the school goes, she has stumped up a lot of cash. But a person who has as much cash as her should spend up big on these projects. Plenty in her position do just that, without the media circus that follows this woman.

[Dale61]

Also, with the car give-away, not many of the audience took ownership as they had to pay the relevant tax on said vehicle, which Oprah wasn't going to pay.

So, although it made good TV, in the end it was just a publicity stunt.

[Didaicos]

I actually read about her reasons for choosing South Africa. Supposedly it was due to the attitudes of the kids there

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/08/AR2007010801418.html?nav=rss_opinion/columns

[sherrife]

By no means do i want to restrict the flow of this topic, but her reasons for doing this aren't really the point of the article at all.

It was more about the nature of aid itself, and that how you give money to charity/invest it says a lot about your values and principles. The auther concludes that Oprah's principles may be questionable, especially since she elected to spend money on a spa and yoga centre in a 3rd world country where there clearly are other priorities.

I think questioning her genuine will to help out is a bit stupid, as is doing the same for Bill Gates. They clearly care, but is what they're doing reinforcing the power and dependency relations between the 'west' and the rest? Or is it actually contributing to empowering the people their giving aid to, so that in the long run they can drive their own development.

[David]

I won't even discuss Oprah's intentions, most of these Hollywood (slash American entertainment industry) people seem as sincere as a televangelist, and Oprah is the queen of insincerity.

All the same, I guess it's a good thing if they're contributing to charities. And, when it comes down to it, whatever her reasons for doing this, a lot of people's lives may be better off. So in that regard, it's positive.

As for your question, Sherrife, I'm a little undecided. I can see both points, yes it does display a kind of patronising attitude and could encourage dependency, and yet at the same time money can be a useful helping hand when it comes to improving a country, and education is always a big priority in developing nations.

So, in conclusion, I'm just going to sit on the fence

[Pa Marmo]

And she`s buyyyyyyyyying her stairrrrrrrrrrway.........to heaven

[member34258]

[Nutmeg]