Hollywood Philanthropy is Egocentric

As recovery efforts continue in Haiti, it would seem that the outpouring of financial support from Hollywood was no more than another passing fad. As soon as the earthquake subsided, celebrities set up telethons and begged for relief money through Twitter and Facebook.

Sources at CNN report that major charities have raised over $380 million in relief money so far and a great deal of that came from celebrity donations. Three weeks later, however the influx of money is slowing and the Haitian people are still struggling.

The Hollywood elite have always been quick to jump aboard any cause that makes them look good but these self-appointed blue bloods tire quickly. Many take action in the name of some humanitarian cause with no regard to the consequences.

A good example is the trend in Hollywood to adopt children from overseas. I can't believe any reasonable court or agency would place a child into the hands of people who set the standard for dysfunctional relationships and quickie divorces.

What happens to the children, not if, but when the adoptive couple divorces? A brazen example is Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie. While they have never legally married the couple has six children, one of which is Cambodian adopted by Jolie and ex-husband Billy Bob Thornton.

Here is a young boy who was essentially ripped from his culture and now lives on the brink of being the child of yet a second broken home all because a couple of actors wanted to look good. I think these children may actually be better off in their home country rather than coming to America to become the pawns in a divorce settlement.

With fortunes wrapped up in real estate, fancy cars and expensive clothing, most of the Hollywood left are so far removed from the reality they don't even know the price of a gallon of milk. It's likely that if they were to be extracted from their make-believe environment, most would have no marketable skills with which to earn a living.

Hollywood is a land devoid of consequences.

For example, in the real world, if you have a drug problem it's virtually impossible to find a job. In Hollywood, you're more likely to get hired - and for more money because you're bad behavior will land you on the cover of the Enquirer, boosting publicity for your next project.

It doesn't seem to matter to these people what happens once they've written the check, or how their actions affect others. Haiti is just the latest example, but there will be new causes and the Hollywood crowd will be ready with cash in hand. In my opinion, it's often as much exploitation as it is philanthropy.

Trounced by the conservative right for her demonization of the Texas beef industry, Oprah Winfrey is highly respected in the liberal community for her philanthropic endeavors. As one of the richest people in America, Winfrey got to where she is by exploiting the sad stories of everyday people - and the occasional celebrity - all in the name of ratings.

I hate to let everyone down, but Oprah brings people on her show to keep viewership high and attract big-dollar advertisers - just like everyone else. There's nothing selfless about it.

In reality there is virtually no difference between Oprah and Jerry Springer. I can just hear the gasps out there on that one. The only real distinction is in the presentation. Springer makes no excuses about his show being exploitive and voyeuristic.

Oprah shrouds the same actions in good deeds, a calm audience full of O-worshiping housewives and a good deal of smooth talk. She still gets paid to have these guests on the program and exploit their issues, just like Springer.

The way I see it is that if someone less fortunate benefits from it, who cares where the money came from? If one kid in Haiti gets clean water and fresh food for a day, what does it matter if Oprah shows his picture on television?

It would be refreshing, however, if their philanthropy weren't cloaked in so much egocentricity. Celebrities may look like heroes to some but you never hear about the enormous tax breaks they receive for their donations - the same benefits for which they would criticize conservatives.

Gery L. Deer is a freelance journalist based in Ohio. For more information go online to www.gerydeer.com