Charlie brought up Asmon mentioning a lawsuit.. Asmon still actively bans anyone who mentions softgiving in his chat. It would be interesting to see how much of the “charitable expenses” were just payments to OTK members
So, what's more disgusting; the fact that they stole nearly half of the money they were given to perform simple wire transfers on behalf of well-intentioned givers, or the fact that they are now using that money to file suit and defend themselves in court for their obscenely egregious misconduct?
Why would you ever donate money to a charity? If you're really dedicated to a charitable cause, just hand the beneficiary the money. Is it really that difficult? I really need to instruct a course on common sense.
@@RobbieStacks90 There are proper organizations that operate to distribute funds and aid to people in need. Not everyone can afford to fly around the country/world and hand money to people that need it, and that would be a waste of money to go there to aid them.
@@nesamdoom So you think funding the FAA is a waste of money? What in the name of obliquity. You take air safety for granted because you've never been in a plane that had lost a couple of engines mid-flight or went into an aerodynamic stall. If you can't empathize, you can at least try to understand.
@Zenigundam a little technical but it's generally because charitable donations handed to a beneficiary, in most cases, doesn't qualify for tax returns.
@@RobbieStacks90because not every group you would want to donate to you can access directly. For example if you wanted to donate to help build a well in Africa 99% of people in the us have no real way to directly support them there
I hosted a charity stream with Brandfluence last year, and this is absolutely disgusting to hear. My amazing community was so generous, and knowing how a large portion of the money they raised likely didn't go to where I'd promised them it would is more than upsetting. I was planning another campaign with them for a week's time, so glad this all came out before then so I can move forward and run it independently!
@@stephenpmurphy591I thought this was just europe but nope. Every developped countries seems to have made Associations and charities godlike. Litteral free money pipelines with tax evasion modules included, fkin modern magic
Lmao people act like they can’t do the two seconds of research it takes to figure out who your giving your money to. Giving to charities is a good thing, there are good charities that exist just like there are bad charities that exist. Don’t stop giving just because of bad actors within the scene.
@@TheGreatestJediOfAllTimeyou're ancient. but I'm 14 so that makes me old too. not to b pessimistic, but if even i can't keep up with the internet, don't even try yourself
That's unfortunate how public figures like him have to do, even if they're in the right, nobody wants to get dragged into a petty lawsuit for years even though everyone knows what the outcome is gonna be, that's how a lot of scammers protect themselves, by using a threat of a lawsuit, so instead of speaking up you're better of shut up.
Except the ones he cares about and would also like to actively help, but couldn't be bothered because the lawsuits are lame in nature. Like Billie Michell and other people that he made damn sure to say he's stating the claims and giving basically a "good luck" after acknowledging the potential lawsuit.
I was invited by Softgiving to do a charity event once, and they had an entire onboarding process and several meetings you had to go through, all of which you could NOT disclose the information of. The representative also stated I couldn't end my event unless I hit the end milestone goal. I knew that shit was fishy and dipped.
Sounds standard, they aren't a charity perse, they are middle man between the charities and steamers and users, so of course they are in just for the money, not to help anyone but themselves.
This is why i always INSIST on full transparency and explanation of where the money goes beforw i donate. I prefer to just send individual people the money or supplies directly whenever possible
Its honestly sad how people keep scamming under the good name of charity, its supposed to help the needy, not the fortunate who are too lazy to get a real job
Hey man, it was bearenstein. I had to do a book report and me and my father debated whether the name was pronounced with a "steen" vs "stine" pronounciation because i wanted to be as accurate as i could to get a good grade to bring my average up in fourth grade. I had just checked it out from the library that weekend it all somehow changed back in 1984... It was a german/jewish bear family named bearenstein on friday, by Monday... Nope, they were suddenly danish or something. I'll NEVER let this go. Never. Ever.
Incidents like this are particularly infuriating because now people are wary of any and all charities. Good causes may go underfunded because a few bad apples ruined the reputation of everyone else.
Let's be real, he stopped because he want the money to himself. It's not hard to find charities that actually functions well, it's just that the one that are drawn to influencers are made by get rich quick CEOs. Nothing wrong with wanting to keep the money you earn to yourself but let's not pretend he has this struggle with donating because it's all "scam".
@@treali I’m not sure I agree about the charities. I do agree that he wanted the money to live on and build a business, but I think unless you’re finding local organizations that observably do well it’s probably really difficult not to have donations go somewhere where they aren’t pilfered. The NGO structure is perfect for internal thievery. Personally I never donate to charity, if I want to do something nice I help a friend who needs it, but if I had a bunch of money burning a hole in my pocket the local Unitarian church has turned their soup kitchen into a donations only cafe with legit good food and they’re trying to move out of the church and into a larger space with cold storage and a big bakery that the local food coop is vacating, so I’d probably give to them with confidence. I can’t think of a single large organization I would ever give a dime to. There might be good ones, but they all seem sus to me. Edit: cleaned up my illiterate their/theyre/theres
I used to run an esports organization and we held a couple charity events across our content creators, some of our players, and creators we had a good relationship with. Hearing this is gutting, to know that nearly half of the money we all raised was taken by them. I can confirm it was not our understanding that much was taken. It's been a few years but I seem to remember them sharing that it was supposed to be something to the affect of around 5% for operational expenses. Though this wasn't officially documented that I can recall because I had to ask about it.
Its like those businesses that ask you if you want to donate your change to a 'cause'. so the company can use most of that themselves, and the rest they can use as a tax write off so they pay less in taxes. You shouldent support those and instead just donate directly to the cause of your choice.
This is why I check out the charities I want to donate to. As much as I hate to say it, not all charities are good. The more transparent a charity is about how much they take for admin fees and where the money goes the better.
exactly, it's not like it's illegal for them to take a cut as long as they technically donate most of it. there are some popular charities out there that pocket far more money than is reasonable, it's up to the donators to figure out which ones are actually good.
I mostly click as a gamble. Either I'm going to be amazed at something cool or pissed off at something dumb, small chance I'm just going to laugh at a ridiculous story.
That is jaw-effing-dropping. I work for a non profit and a few folks have tagged us that they've done Twitch streams to benefit. We didn't ask anyone to do so and it's not often. So i just gave my thanks and gratitude, we're happy for any donation, made a note to look into Twitch giving but hadn't had time... But Lord Almighty. That fucking sucks. We spend donations damn well, 4 star on charity navigator, and it sucks that fucking half of the money from folks who chose us might not even have gone. The fucking hell.
If I see "charity" attached to any streamer or TH-camr I will literally never donate. Hell, half the paid sponsors they have are scams. If I want to donate I'll pay directly to a cause.
I mean, if your gonna pay someone on and through TH-cam, don’t. Unless that’s the only way and you want to support them. TH-cam takes a chunk for itself.
They are not filing lawsuits, they are having their attorney sending threatening letters. They will not file an actual suit as then there would be discovery. No shady business wants discovery.
If there's any silver lining to these situations, hopefully people will be more cautious and do research before donating to charities, especially smaller ones.
The problem with that is, if people who wants to donate has to go through researches like job hunting just to give their money away most of them wouldn't bother to go through the trouble. Government should hold these charity accountable and there should be people investigating these situations
Softgiving isn’t charity. It’s just the middle man like GoFundMe is for entrepreneurs. It’s to prevent me from doing a fundraiser where proceeds go to my own account, which Im now responsible for… extra bank accounts, taxes, etc. Also prevents me from getting a little greedy and taking a few extra bucks.
As a streamer who did a charity stream for this charity last year, they also scammed the viewers themselves having to make them "donate" to join the giveaway they hosted at the end of stream. My viewers read through the minimal TOS they had written, and in between that it said "you DO NOT have to DONATE to join the giveaway." I thought it was weird and reached out to them and they said they only make them donate so they don't just join for free stuff...but yet that is also illegal on its own, figure they didn't tell me this too, i only found out through my viewers.
that's standard sweepstakes law in some countries/states - most of them are considered gambling if there isn't a free way to join even if you massively weight the odds for paid contributors. it can be scummy but that behaviour in itself is not scummy just a legal loophole allowing you to offer rewards for donations. incentivising donations is the purpose of that kind of organisation - taking too high a % is what makes it scummy - doing the same things in the interests of the charities is supposed to be the point. They are supposed to make their money on the volume not by taking a large cut.
There was a way to join for free but you had to scroll all the way down. I got offered to do one, plus a friend of mine did a stream with them as well. They're disgusting people and my friend and I only learned after they did their stream :c
Thanks for using your platform to bring attention to stuff like this. I really like how you make funny haha forklift videos, but then also turn around and inform people about important shit that's happening, without letting the shift in tone stop you from doing it.
Never heard of softgiving, but people really should get into a habit of donating to charities DIRECTLY. No matter who or what you donate through they will always take a percentage.
By law (according to a 501-C3 which is a charity is on paper) roughly 8% has to be spent on act charity and the rest can be filed as a 501C-4 which lets them pay themselves and spend the money on promotion and throwing parties, they are not required by law to reveal any of this. And for these reasons, the law should change. This is the wild part, it’s legal. 501C4 is how they do this. Not every organization should qualify.
That's not how 501c3 and c4 works. Any donations to a c3 are tax deductible and CANNOT be spent on c4 work. That is IRS will f--k you type behavior. c3 and c4s can share resources like offices or split staff time but that's it. And you know if you're giving to a c4 (and there are reasons to like supporting passing laws which c3s can't do) because it will absolutely be disclosed that it isn't tax deductible.
I think it’s something like 14% in the U.K. without condoning the ethics of it, the internet keeps discovering these everyday things and throwing a tantrum calling it ‘illegal’ etc when it’s clearly just a thing that has always been the case. The whole established titles thing was another one. Something that was always a meme gift here in the U.K. for dads on their 59th birthday that’s just a certificate calling them a lord, and the internet loses its collective mind because it turns out it isn’t legally true.
@@neoasura actually churches pay pastors off a 501C-4 as well and it’s what it’s original intent was for, to give those who give back a stable income but it’s been abused to make mega churches and even in charity cases to pocket hundreds of not millions over the years.
I saw this article drop last month and was surprised that almost nobody talked about this. I wondered if the Open Hand foundation stuff helped it slide under the radar. I was about ready to give up hope that the streamers/content creators who were involved would never talk about their take on the information in the article until now. Glad it's finally getting the mainstream attention it deserves. I wonder why it took nearly 2 months though? (Genuinely don't know and not intending to speculate.)
When in high school (way back) I wrote a paper on United Way and their allocations by percentage for their donations and it was quite eye opening. I only donate my time when I can. These people are paying themselves to run these "charities". Stops becoming a charity when they have an "operating cost". They become a business.
Softgiving literally PAYED me to do a charity stream even when I'm a very small streamer!! Now I get why they are capable of doing that. This is crazy, quite sad to hear.
80% should go to the charity. Rest goes to admin. If any charity doesn't meet this split...hold onto your money. 20 years ago, a study was conducted to ascertain how many charities meet the 80/20 rule. Only about 4 charities cut the mustard. I stopped giving cause the majority are scams.
The amount of people in the U.S. that make well over $200K for "managing" or "directing" the "operations" of a charity is obscene. They usually pay themselves at least half of what comes in, so if they have 50 employees, and $10 Million in donations, $5 million goes to the salaries, $1 Million goes to marketing for future donations, $3 million goes to whatever cause they've selected- and $1 Million stays liquid so they can fund their defense when people find out where most of the money went.
Those streamers may lose trust in charities and may never donate to causes ever again. This is not simple theft. It is destructive to the society as a whole. Disgusting.
I did a stream with Brandfluence two months ago. I was already a bit doubtful about it since the whole thing with The Completionist was going on at the time, but I decided to do it anyway out of excitement. I should've looked into them more. And you're right, with this, my trust for charities is completely gone and I will probably never work with one ever again.
@@johndor7793 yes, of course I could. But the thing is, the fact they changed their name to Brandfluence at the time they did is no coincidence, it made it harder find bad dirt about them because of it. They pull off stunts like that to cover their tracks. I feel I am admittedly not the best at investigating things, so this could happen to me again personally if I decided to work with one again, hence why I feel skeptical about them all now.
@@CoTeCiOtm I'm never thinking of hard research. Just the kind where you ask around a bit and do a little prodding. Maybe seeing it in a positive way in that you'd be more attentive if something might be fishy.
@@johndor7793 yes, you're right, of course. It's just, after this, I have become very skeptical about it so of course it's going to require knowing a lot about a charity before I decide to jump into something like that again. As the OP said, you lose trust in the whole thing.
It's always been Berenstain Bears, when I was in elementary school I did a book report on one of them, and another student pointed out the name is Barenstain and not Barenstein, and we looked at one of the books and sure enough, it was. I've remembered that ever since. This was in the early 1990s.
Never trust anyone who claims the universe changed instead of admitting as a kid they thought something was an E when it was an A. The pure ego. No I'm not wrong the entire universe changed!
@@FastrThanYou77the fruit of the loom cornucopia one is fucked though. Because I can clearly remember learning what a cornucopia was, then a few days later realising that the mysterious item holding fruit was a cornucopia on the logo.
@FastrThanYou77 its mostly a joke. But its weird that this same thing, for this exact same example, happened to too many different people across different countries. This is how this conspiracy/joke theory about multiple universe started. Its just a strange phenomenon.
@@zinc2zinc2 people really believe the multiple universe stuff tho. I think the mandela effect is cool and interesting but most of it is pretty easily explained. Stein is common, stain isn't. Froot loops.. People thought it was just spelt correctly. People added in Luke to "I am your father" for context, doesn't matter thsts not the exact line.
This is why if anyone asks me to donate money, I tell them no. I always go straight to the charities I want to support and donate there. Most charities have easy online donation links these days!
I've said it before and I'll say it again: ONLY DONATE DIRECTLY TO ORGANIZATIONS YOU WANT YOUR MONEY GOING TOWARDS. DO NOT DONATE THROUGH INTERMEDIARIES.
I'm kind of confused though, wasn't this known for a year already? Wasn't that the whole controversy last year? There are plenty of videos from last year on this same thing.
@@k.w.6626Its been going on since December. A year ago was a different thing I think, when xqc claimed that he got paid 90k for a charity stream that only raised like 60k.
@@k.w.6626 maybe, but there's so many out there, it's hard to tell. Maybe it needs a resurgence bc people are trying to forget it. But the issue itself needs to be spread for more awareness in general
Charlie isn't 6' tall. He's no more than 5'6". Greater heights in humans present long-term evolutionary disadvantages in terms of overall health and fitness.
During my time as a customer service employee, I used to have the additional task of selling chocolate saying it's for a good cause. One customer told me, "Why should I give my money for this? Why not the multi-million dollar corporation that runs this place?" That guy had a point. I've been a cynic about charity ever since.
Charlie is always real for bringing light to the creators that compile this stuff and sending his audience to them. what a guy. shouts out to Jacob Wolf 🤝
I remember hearing about this sometime halfway through last year. Where the report called it "Softgiving? More like Halfgiving" and ever since I've been discouraging people from working with them.
Thank you for laying down the truth on the Bernstein Bears. I remember how it was pronounced in the 90’s too. I’m not the only one loosing my mind over this.
As a small content creator who has worked with them before and raised around 1200€ in ONE STREAM (with an average viewerbase of ~30-40 viewers!), I felt incredibly heartbroken to learn this horrible news, and I am incredibly glad I didn‘t enter the contract they offered me. Just imagine how horrible creators feel knowing their communities essentially donated half of the money to Softgiving instead of the actual cause, and how absolutely gutting it is knowing the support you thought you were giving to the children in hospitals in this case, wasn‘t nearly as valuable as it could‘ve been. It also does damage to other, legitimate charity organizations, because I have been having trust issues regarding other organizations ever since there has been negative news about Softgiving. It‘s heartbreaking and makes me absolutely mad.
I 100% agree about the Berenstein bears, but apparently there were misprints and knockoffs spelled that way since people commonly thought it was -stein, not -stain. Maybe that was it? I def remember those too
I remember hearing that the books mostly had one spelling and the vhs copies of the show had the other spelling thus creating the confusion but don’t quote me on
Scams like this is the reason I think twice before even considering donating to charities. You just don't know where that money is going and that's a sad situation.
There are a lot of charities in the space that work directly with content creators. I work at one of them. Not all of us are bad. Softgiving wasn’t a charity. It was a platform.
@@deepak-ui5li Even then the charity itself can be scumbag, in France one of the biggest charity organisation "Action contre la faim" or roughly "Action against hunger" an organisation with a self explanatory name have been investigated and it has been shown that they keep 80 000 000 € in stock in case of "hard time"... and then bought brand new office with imported japanese sakura in the garden (more than 10 000€ per tree) oh and the boss pay himself more than 10 000€ per month. Note that this "charity" org send you picture of dying/starving kids in your mailbox basically telling you that it's your fault that kids are dying because you didn't gave them money! Literraly a picture of a dead kid with a "you could have helped him" on it, disgusting.
So allow me to ask the stupid question of why anyone would use this "service" to facilitate donation transfers....it sounds like a scam from the onset..."umm no thanks I'll send the money to whom I'm donating to myself, but gee thanks anyways.." that's just me tho.
I agree, that sounds extremely dodgy. If you're interested in the topic of charity v. overheads though, there's an excellent TED talk by a guy called Dan Pallotta, called The Way we Think about Charity is Dead Wrong. Really interesting look at the complexities of overhead issues within charitable giving (far more entertaining than I just made it sound). But Softgiving definitely sounds worthy of intense investigation. First and foremost, charities must always operate transparently.
Softgiving taking enormous chunks out of donations has been a known problem with them for at least three years. A streamer called Jorbs has a video on TH-cam about why he has a personal distaste for the company them that he put up almost a year ago, and one of the reasons he called out was them taking a significantly larger chunk of the donation than other, more legitimate charity processors. His experience with the company was in 2020.
i dont rly understand why people would use a middleman in the first place... like, why not just donate the stream earnings directly? it doeant make any sense at all
I don't donate to charities for many reasons, this being one of the biggest ones. Charities are supposed to be about helping. Yet it'll have big wigs who make absurd salaries and on top of that they pay actors to do commercials and shit. Shouldn't it be volunteers who make the ads for free to help promote the charity? I just view them all as scams.
People need to realize that this is going to continue with many other "charities", as these people don't learn their lesson and could care less whether they get caught or not.
@@SEEYAIAYE Most of the really big ones are so bloated they're taking in donations so they can afford to pay people to call people to ask for donations, plus the six figure salaries of the top dogs running the charity. And the people that need the donated aid ... get about a nickel for every dollar donated when it's all said and done.
I think a big thing that's also a problem here is that as more and more of these alleged charity fraud situations come to light, more and more people are going to become wary or disillusioned with online fundraisers and charities and become less likely to donate to legitimate ones in the future. These people's short-term greed is going to have long-lasting effects on the entire online charity landscape in certain spaces.
Question: Why would you not just donate to the desired charity directly? I've never been in a financially stable enough position to donate to any charity, but it seems to me that if you had a large sum of money you wanted to donate, you could just donate to that organization directly.
In France we have a big charity event on stream called Zevent, and i saw there that it take a lot of time and effort to work directly with these organisation for diverse logistical reason, i guess ppl just choose the easy way without much tought. Even then the charity itself can be scumbag, still in France one of the biggest charity organisation "Action contre la faim" or roughly "Action against hunger" a charity organisation with a self explanatory name have been investigated and it has been shown that they keep 80 000 000 € in stock in case of "hard time"... and then bought brand new office with imported japanese sakura in the garden (more than 10 000€ per tree) oh and the boss pay himself more than 10 000€. Note that this "charity" org send you picture of dying/starving kids in your mailbox basically telling you that it's your fault that kids are dying because you didn't gave them money! Literraly a picture of a dead kid with a "you could have helped him" on it, disgusting.
So I think the solution to paid charity streams is people who do them without getting paid need to start saying they aren’t paid, and people need to make a big deal of it. Maybe it would be good to require paid streamers to announce that they are being paid to do it as well. The main issues I see is that streamers paid to do charity streams aren’t giving full endorsement of the charity, and also they aren’t helping for the right reasons. So it’s a bit of a stab at both. I do think more transparency is the way to go though.
I know 100% for a fact that everyone around me in elementary school called it Berenstein Bears but I'd show them the book saying "-Stain" and they'd ignore me and keep calling it "-Stein". It's always been Berenstain, just people aren't used to that ending in a name so they auto-translated it to what they were familiar with.
@GeorgeMonet no, especially when you look at the target audience - people just barely learning how to read. Many are still working to recognize patterns while they memorize the words, so when names like Goldstein and Frankenstein are 1000% more common than anything ending in "-stain" it will lead little kids to misremember. Also, you saying "no" to my comment is weird because I said something that actually happened to me and you're saying it didn't happen.
![SAFEPLANET - ดาวเคราะห์ [ THE PLANET ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/4X1XL3I_k3c/mqdefault.jpg)
"We're going to sue you for exposing the crime we commited" always goes over well in the public eye.
The ol' Johnny Depp tactic
Logan
Charlie brought up Asmon mentioning a lawsuit.. Asmon still actively bans anyone who mentions softgiving in his chat. It would be interesting to see how much of the “charitable expenses” were just payments to OTK members
The Completionist is fluent with that tactic 😂
@@guybrushthreepwood969it's weird how Charlie refuses to bring that up
This is exactly why it’s important for charities to be transparent about where money goes
6 million bots is crazy
Ok millennial stop promoting charity. Genz does not need your donations and then hear you moan.
@@MrUssy101 no what
@@bababababababa6124fr 😅
bro bought someone's account and don't know what to do w it now but comment on Charlie's videos
Honestly at this point there's no point trusting Anything or Anyone, This worlds too greedy..
You know it must be serious when Charlie changes his hairstyle
@Davidvevo558 nerd
@Davidvevo558 Have fun remaining irrelevant. Bye now.
@Davidvevo558 shut up
Ponytail = urgent news
@Davidvevo558BOT!
So, what's more disgusting; the fact that they stole nearly half of the money they were given to perform simple wire transfers on behalf of well-intentioned givers, or the fact that they are now using that money to file suit and defend themselves in court for their obscenely egregious misconduct?
Why would you ever donate money to a charity? If you're really dedicated to a charitable cause, just hand the beneficiary the money. Is it really that difficult? I really need to instruct a course on common sense.
@@RobbieStacks90 There are proper organizations that operate to distribute funds and aid to people in need. Not everyone can afford to fly around the country/world and hand money to people that need it, and that would be a waste of money to go there to aid them.
@@nesamdoom So you think funding the FAA is a waste of money? What in the name of obliquity. You take air safety for granted because you've never been in a plane that had lost a couple of engines mid-flight or went into an aerodynamic stall. If you can't empathize, you can at least try to understand.
@Zenigundam a little technical but it's generally because charitable donations handed to a beneficiary, in most cases, doesn't qualify for tax returns.
@@RobbieStacks90because not every group you would want to donate to you can access directly. For example if you wanted to donate to help build a well in Africa 99% of people in the us have no real way to directly support them there
I hosted a charity stream with Brandfluence last year, and this is absolutely disgusting to hear. My amazing community was so generous, and knowing how a large portion of the money they raised likely didn't go to where I'd promised them it would is more than upsetting. I was planning another campaign with them for a week's time, so glad this all came out before then so I can move forward and run it independently!
It sucks for real Charities too, since scams like this will scare potential people from donating to real genuine ones
Good, people should research the charity they donate to.
@@cipherbenchmarksyeah but what if they don't research enough and just scroll through their website.
@@Jaxv3rYou just described what not enough research is
Sadly laws covering charities allow 90%-95% of all money collected can be used too cover administrative costs..
Yikes!
@@stephenpmurphy591I thought this was just europe but nope. Every developped countries seems to have made Associations and charities godlike. Litteral free money pipelines with tax evasion modules included, fkin modern magic
If they slapped him with a lawsuit for just investigating them, they knew they were up shit creek without a paddle.
What pieces of filth.
When a "charity brand" sends you a lawsuit. 😂
Dirty scammers. Threatening to sue as a cover up. It'll all come out in the wash for them.
Makes you wonder how many times this has worked and we (the public) have no idea.
They did name themselves Soft Giving, so they kind of warned everyone that they would only give a soft effort into giving.
Don’t let all these scumbags deter you from giving. Do the research and find one that works for you and your cause.
Bah! All of them are corrupt anyways.
Donate to the individuals instead.
Ok millennial stop promoting charity. Genz does not need your donations and then hear you moan.
Lmao people act like they can’t do the two seconds of research it takes to figure out who your giving your money to. Giving to charities is a good thing, there are good charities that exist just like there are bad charities that exist. Don’t stop giving just because of bad actors within the scene.
@@MrUssy101 Please be quiet.
@@Blank-lp4fzWho the fuck says "Bah!" 💀
This can only ruin the reputation of charity streams as a whole further because everyone is gonna be examining them with a fine tooth comb.
Charlie, Coffezilla, and Mutahar working overtime on calling out scammers for the last 2 years. Thank you for bringing these crimes to light.
Karl too, to an extent.
Omg u have 115 likes
Omg u have 117 likes
its crazy they dont got a podcast with karl jobst but i do like the red thread and some ordinary podcast
yet he hasn't called out Amouranth and her fake claims of an abusive partner
Every time Charlie says "This is probably someone/something you've heard of," I know I will have absolutely no clue who or what they are.
I had the same reaction. Lol Glad I'm not hip to most of these clowns.
For real. Im 26 so i wouldnt know about any of this internet shi without charlie
@@TheGreatestJediOfAllTimeyou're ancient. but I'm 14 so that makes me old too. not to b pessimistic, but if even i can't keep up with the internet, don't even try yourself
@@oddball1336I’m sorry but you are a child😭 Tiny infant. I’m 19. Also still very young.
@@firentialombardi7951 m8 I'm halfway to 30. getting up after waking up, I hear my joints pop as if I have to "activate" my body in the morning
The absolute best way to ensure your charity actually gets put to good use, is to volunteer.
I like how Charlie has incorporated the word "allegedly" into any statements that can remotely get him sued 😂
That's unfortunate how public figures like him have to do, even if they're in the right, nobody wants to get dragged into a petty lawsuit for years even though everyone knows what the outcome is gonna be, that's how a lot of scammers protect themselves, by using a threat of a lawsuit, so instead of speaking up you're better of shut up.
Except the ones he cares about and would also like to actively help, but couldn't be bothered because the lawsuits are lame in nature. Like Billie Michell and other people that he made damn sure to say he's stating the claims and giving basically a "good luck" after acknowledging the potential lawsuit.
I was invited by Softgiving to do a charity event once, and they had an entire onboarding process and several meetings you had to go through, all of which you could NOT disclose the information of. The representative also stated I couldn't end my event unless I hit the end milestone goal. I knew that shit was fishy and dipped.
Whoaaa that's very sus
This makes it even sadder that OTK worked with them. Just soo lazy
With the amount of viewers you get, it sounds like bull💩
I almost got sucked into two MLMs. I'm not paying you so I can work for you. It's insanity.
Sounds standard, they aren't a charity perse, they are middle man between the charities and steamers and users, so of course they are in just for the money, not to help anyone but themselves.
This is why i always INSIST on full transparency and explanation of where the money goes beforw i donate. I prefer to just send individual people the money or supplies directly whenever possible
Softgiving sounds like a holiday replacement for people who are super anxious and easily overwhelmed
I'm going to start celebrating Softgiving now. What day will this holiday be on?
@@Vinthateshandles 30 March good Sir
@@WildArtistsl I'll be sure to mark my calendar
That actually sounds really wholesome and I would love to be a part of something like this if it existed.
Its honestly sad how people keep scamming under the good name of charity, its supposed to help the needy, not the fortunate who are too lazy to get a real job
When you have enough money you can just ask people for money. what a dumb world.
This is classical Christian charity tho.
@@ctg4818?
Hey man, it was bearenstein. I had to do a book report and me and my father debated whether the name was pronounced with a "steen" vs "stine" pronounciation because i wanted to be as accurate as i could to get a good grade to bring my average up in fourth grade.
I had just checked it out from the library that weekend it all somehow changed back in 1984... It was a german/jewish bear family named bearenstein on friday, by Monday... Nope, they were suddenly danish or something.
I'll NEVER let this go.
Never. Ever.
Also, no one ever mentions how the bearenstein bears began as a strip in Highlights Magazine...later replaced by The Timbertoes.
Incidents like this are particularly infuriating because now people are wary of any and all charities. Good causes may go underfunded because a few bad apples ruined the reputation of everyone else.
You *should* be wary of whom you give 500k $. This could have been easily avoided.
@@mikeycracksonI don’t think that’s a problem, where do you want the money to go?
@@mikeycrackson lol no... is there any proof you can provide with that fact?
OGs will remember Charlie used to give his monthly YT cheques away to charity until he realised they were all scumbags.
Ah. A fellow explorer. Good day sir.
& he realized he didn’t wanna work shit jobs. Dudes worth 10m now
Yeah he initially wanted to give away the money he made on TH-cam because he believed money corrupts people
Let's be real, he stopped because he want the money to himself. It's not hard to find charities that actually functions well, it's just that the one that are drawn to influencers are made by get rich quick CEOs.
Nothing wrong with wanting to keep the money you earn to yourself but let's not pretend he has this struggle with donating because it's all "scam".
@@treali I’m not sure I agree about the charities. I do agree that he wanted the money to live on and build a business, but I think unless you’re finding local organizations that observably do well it’s probably really difficult not to have donations go somewhere where they aren’t pilfered. The NGO structure is perfect for internal thievery. Personally I never donate to charity, if I want to do something nice I help a friend who needs it, but if I had a bunch of money burning a hole in my pocket the local Unitarian church has turned their soup kitchen into a donations only cafe with legit good food and they’re trying to move out of the church and into a larger space with cold storage and a big bakery that the local food coop is vacating, so I’d probably give to them with confidence. I can’t think of a single large organization I would ever give a dime to. There might be good ones, but they all seem sus to me.
Edit: cleaned up my illiterate their/theyre/theres
I used to run an esports organization and we held a couple charity events across our content creators, some of our players, and creators we had a good relationship with. Hearing this is gutting, to know that nearly half of the money we all raised was taken by them. I can confirm it was not our understanding that much was taken. It's been a few years but I seem to remember them sharing that it was supposed to be something to the affect of around 5% for operational expenses. Though this wasn't officially documented that I can recall because I had to ask about it.
Its like those businesses that ask you if you want to donate your change to a 'cause'. so the company can use most of that themselves, and the rest they can use as a tax write off so they pay less in taxes.
You shouldent support those and instead just donate directly to the cause of your choice.
This is why I check out the charities I want to donate to. As much as I hate to say it, not all charities are good. The more transparent a charity is about how much they take for admin fees and where the money goes the better.
90% (probably more) of charities are scams
@@6ial what
reply what if you want to commit warcrimes
exactly, it's not like it's illegal for them to take a cut as long as they technically donate most of it. there are some popular charities out there that pocket far more money than is reasonable, it's up to the donators to figure out which ones are actually good.
or just dont donate at all
Charlie is always there to provide me with great or terrible news, and it's always a gamble.
His content is basically clout chasing stories and news.
да, such is life
Even though charlie said hed only do youtube for fun and charity 10 years ago? (Yes you can verify it, its still in his videos).
I mostly click as a gamble. Either I'm going to be amazed at something cool or pissed off at something dumb, small chance I'm just going to laugh at a ridiculous story.
Keeps us on our toes
1:26 Angry Video Game Nerd has a quick section in one of his videos where he uncovers an old book/tape and it has a missprint Beranstien.
That is jaw-effing-dropping. I work for a non profit and a few folks have tagged us that they've done Twitch streams to benefit. We didn't ask anyone to do so and it's not often. So i just gave my thanks and gratitude, we're happy for any donation, made a note to look into Twitch giving but hadn't had time... But Lord Almighty. That fucking sucks. We spend donations damn well, 4 star on charity navigator, and it sucks that fucking half of the money from folks who chose us might not even have gone. The fucking hell.
If I see "charity" attached to any streamer or TH-camr I will literally never donate. Hell, half the paid sponsors they have are scams. If I want to donate I'll pay directly to a cause.
I mean, if your gonna pay someone on and through TH-cam, don’t. Unless that’s the only way and you want to support them. TH-cam takes a chunk for itself.
They are not filing lawsuits, they are having their attorney sending threatening letters. They will not file an actual suit as then there would be discovery. No shady business wants discovery.
If there's any silver lining to these situations, hopefully people will be more cautious and do research before donating to charities, especially smaller ones.
Poor victims getting half of what they are expected to have. Greed is such a bitch.
The problem with that is, if people who wants to donate has to go through researches like job hunting just to give their money away most of them wouldn't bother to go through the trouble. Government should hold these charity accountable and there should be people investigating these situations
Softgiving isn’t charity. It’s just the middle man like GoFundMe is for entrepreneurs. It’s to prevent me from doing a fundraiser where proceeds go to my own account, which Im now responsible for… extra bank accounts, taxes, etc.
Also prevents me from getting a little greedy and taking a few extra bucks.
Hey bro, somebody has to pay for the CEO’s new charity boat
As a streamer who did a charity stream for this charity last year, they also scammed the viewers themselves having to make them "donate" to join the giveaway they hosted at the end of stream. My viewers read through the minimal TOS they had written, and in between that it said "you DO NOT have to DONATE to join the giveaway." I thought it was weird and reached out to them and they said they only make them donate so they don't just join for free stuff...but yet that is also illegal on its own, figure they didn't tell me this too, i only found out through my viewers.
that's standard sweepstakes law in some countries/states - most of them are considered gambling if there isn't a free way to join even if you massively weight the odds for paid contributors. it can be scummy but that behaviour in itself is not scummy just a legal loophole allowing you to offer rewards for donations.
incentivising donations is the purpose of that kind of organisation - taking too high a % is what makes it scummy - doing the same things in the interests of the charities is supposed to be the point. They are supposed to make their money on the volume not by taking a large cut.
There was a way to join for free but you had to scroll all the way down. I got offered to do one, plus a friend of mine did a stream with them as well. They're disgusting people and my friend and I only learned after they did their stream :c
It's illegal gambling.
if you are required to pay to enter, you arent its just well hidden@@BishopStars
Thanks for using your platform to bring attention to stuff like this. I really like how you make funny haha forklift videos, but then also turn around and inform people about important shit that's happening, without letting the shift in tone stop you from doing it.
Never heard of softgiving, but people really should get into a habit of donating to charities DIRECTLY. No matter who or what you donate through they will always take a percentage.
By law (according to a 501-C3 which is a charity is on paper) roughly 8% has to be spent on act charity and the rest can be filed as a 501C-4 which lets them pay themselves and spend the money on promotion and throwing parties, they are not required by law to reveal any of this.
And for these reasons, the law should change. This is the wild part, it’s legal. 501C4 is how they do this. Not every organization should qualify.
That law only applies in California, which is why a lot of them base their operations out of California. Another reason to hate that state.
That's not how 501c3 and c4 works.
Any donations to a c3 are tax deductible and CANNOT be spent on c4 work. That is IRS will f--k you type behavior. c3 and c4s can share resources like offices or split staff time but that's it. And you know if you're giving to a c4 (and there are reasons to like supporting passing laws which c3s can't do) because it will absolutely be disclosed that it isn't tax deductible.
I think it’s something like 14% in the U.K. without condoning the ethics of it, the internet keeps discovering these everyday things and throwing a tantrum calling it ‘illegal’ etc when it’s clearly just a thing that has always been the case. The whole established titles thing was another one. Something that was always a meme gift here in the U.K. for dads on their 59th birthday that’s just a certificate calling them a lord, and the internet loses its collective mind because it turns out it isn’t legally true.
you know exactly why that's still legal, too. people with money who want to keep it and keep scamming folks.
@@neoasura actually churches pay pastors off a 501C-4 as well and it’s what it’s original intent was for, to give those who give back a stable income but it’s been abused to make mega churches and even in charity cases to pocket hundreds of not millions over the years.
In Latin America there is a charity called Teletón and over 65% goes to administrative expenses instead of the actual kids with dawn síndrome
I was pretty heartbroken when I found out that all of my good hardwork money has gone to this scummy people, hope we get justice
Get rekt
this why i dont donate to charity streams, if i want to support a cause ill donate directly or volunteer. Fuck all this middle man shit
Lol @@VIPz_Kirk
Nah, merely 42%
why are you donating to shit you know nothing about?
Give within your own community and to those who obviously need it.
As I said on the other video. If you really wanna donate just do it directly. Never use a middleman. It will always be a scam
Every time I hear about one of these, my blood becomes french onion soup because I'm stewing
Charlie you'd be surprised how many charities take more than 42% in "operation costs". Crazy that these guys werent even disclosing it
Charities can take up to 99%
cough cough Red Cross cough cough
cough cough UNICEF cough cough
@BigDaddyJinx cough cough Susan G Komen Foundation cough cough
I saw this article drop last month and was surprised that almost nobody talked about this. I wondered if the Open Hand foundation stuff helped it slide under the radar. I was about ready to give up hope that the streamers/content creators who were involved would never talk about their take on the information in the article until now. Glad it's finally getting the mainstream attention it deserves. I wonder why it took nearly 2 months though? (Genuinely don't know and not intending to speculate.)
0:35 I was entirely unprepared for “fuckle your seat belt” and I’m still wiping away tears a solid 60 seconds after hearing it 💀
Charity from me is always given to someone I know who needs it and by me so I know it makes it to the intended person.
When in high school (way back) I wrote a paper on United Way and their allocations by percentage for their donations and it was quite eye opening.
I only donate my time when I can. These people are paying themselves to run these "charities". Stops becoming a charity when they have an "operating cost". They become a business.
Yeah I remember hearing a LOT about United Way when I was a lad. It's also why I would never donate a shiny nickel to them.
Softgiving literally PAYED me to do a charity stream even when I'm a very small streamer!! Now I get why they are capable of doing that. This is crazy, quite sad to hear.
Did you disclose to the donators that you got paid?
wait is it paid or payed
eh whatever it don’t matter
sorry about that bud
80% should go to the charity. Rest goes to admin. If any charity doesn't meet this split...hold onto your money. 20 years ago, a study was conducted to ascertain how many charities meet the 80/20 rule. Only about 4 charities cut the mustard. I stopped giving cause the majority are scams.
Yep, and this before the money even reached the charities, meaning people probably got double scammed on this one
Well done you chose the lazy option
The amount of people in the U.S. that make well over $200K for "managing" or "directing" the "operations" of a charity is obscene. They usually pay themselves at least half of what comes in, so if they have 50 employees, and $10 Million in donations, $5 million goes to the salaries, $1 Million goes to marketing for future donations, $3 million goes to whatever cause they've selected- and $1 Million stays liquid so they can fund their defense when people find out where most of the money went.
“Don’t expose we’re evil and taking millions of charity donations, or we’ll see you in court!” Yeah they’re done lol
Are you certain about that? You do realize that court cases can be extremely complicated, and the verdicts can hinge upon minutiae, right?
they dont mean done in court, they mean done in the court of public opinion.@@RobbieStacks90
@@RobbieStacks90 this mf definently support charity fraud you responding to every comment saying something negative get a life
@@RobbieStacks90 In this case the defense to defamation is truth. Which is easy to show.
Those streamers may lose trust in charities and may never donate to causes ever again. This is not simple theft. It is destructive to the society as a whole. Disgusting.
I did a stream with Brandfluence two months ago. I was already a bit doubtful about it since the whole thing with The Completionist was going on at the time, but I decided to do it anyway out of excitement. I should've looked into them more. And you're right, with this, my trust for charities is completely gone and I will probably never work with one ever again.
@@CoTeCiOtm Or you could you know just do a little research before saying you'll never work with one ever again?
@@johndor7793 yes, of course I could. But the thing is, the fact they changed their name to Brandfluence at the time they did is no coincidence, it made it harder find bad dirt about them because of it. They pull off stunts like that to cover their tracks. I feel I am admittedly not the best at investigating things, so this could happen to me again personally if I decided to work with one again, hence why I feel skeptical about them all now.
@@CoTeCiOtm I'm never thinking of hard research. Just the kind where you ask around a bit and do a little prodding. Maybe seeing it in a positive way in that you'd be more attentive if something might be fishy.
@@johndor7793 yes, you're right, of course. It's just, after this, I have become very skeptical about it so of course it's going to require knowing a lot about a charity before I decide to jump into something like that again. As the OP said, you lose trust in the whole thing.
It's always been Berenstain Bears, when I was in elementary school I did a book report on one of them, and another student pointed out the name is Barenstain and not Barenstein, and we looked at one of the books and sure enough, it was. I've remembered that ever since. This was in the early 1990s.
Never trust anyone who claims the universe changed instead of admitting as a kid they thought something was an E when it was an A. The pure ego. No I'm not wrong the entire universe changed!
@@FastrThanYou77 it was a joke
@@FastrThanYou77the fruit of the loom cornucopia one is fucked though. Because I can clearly remember learning what a cornucopia was, then a few days later realising that the mysterious item holding fruit was a cornucopia on the logo.
@FastrThanYou77 its mostly a joke. But its weird that this same thing, for this exact same example, happened to too many different people across different countries. This is how this conspiracy/joke theory about multiple universe started. Its just a strange phenomenon.
@@zinc2zinc2 people really believe the multiple universe stuff tho. I think the mandela effect is cool and interesting but most of it is pretty easily explained. Stein is common, stain isn't. Froot loops.. People thought it was just spelt correctly. People added in Luke to "I am your father" for context, doesn't matter thsts not the exact line.
This is why if anyone asks me to donate money, I tell them no. I always go straight to the charities I want to support and donate there. Most charities have easy online donation links these days!
lets be real you don't donate to charities either. That's my excuse to just never donate money
Im so broke that there should be charities to help me, and me alone. Im not donating what little I have away
@@CharlieKellyEsq Just don't donate to charity, idk why you're coming up with a scheme here
Hate when people lie and decieve people with enough pain in their life already
I've said it before and I'll say it again: ONLY DONATE DIRECTLY TO ORGANIZATIONS YOU WANT YOUR MONEY GOING TOWARDS. DO NOT DONATE THROUGH INTERMEDIARIES.
Glad you brought this to light too
@Davidvevo558nerd
I'm kind of confused though, wasn't this known for a year already? Wasn't that the whole controversy last year? There are plenty of videos from last year on this same thing.
@@k.w.6626Its been going on since December. A year ago was a different thing I think, when xqc claimed that he got paid 90k for a charity stream that only raised like 60k.
@@k.w.6626 maybe, but there's so many out there, it's hard to tell. Maybe it needs a resurgence bc people are trying to forget it. But the issue itself needs to be spread for more awareness in general
charlie is so humble, even in his hypothetical situation where he becomes taller he chooses to only be 6'0 to leave the rest of us a chance
Charlie isn't 6' tall. He's no more than 5'6". Greater heights in humans present long-term evolutionary disadvantages in terms of overall health and fitness.
@@RobbieStacks90 Did you even read the original comment 😂
@@RobbieStacks90"even in his hypothetical situation"
There's still a lil on your lip.
edit: a drop in your hair too...
@@RobbieStacks90That's why they said "in his hypothetical situation", genius.
@@RobbieStacks90cool fact Cambridge man
During my time as a customer service employee, I used to have the additional task of selling chocolate saying it's for a good cause.
One customer told me, "Why should I give my money for this? Why not the multi-million dollar corporation that runs this place?"
That guy had a point. I've been a cynic about charity ever since.
Charlie is always real for bringing light to the creators that compile this stuff and sending his audience to them. what a guy. shouts out to Jacob Wolf 🤝
You know it's big when Charlie doesn't even take time to explain why he's greasy
and to think I was so ready to hear how the basketball went 😔
He is moist after all
I remember hearing about this sometime halfway through last year. Where the report called it "Softgiving? More like Halfgiving" and ever since I've been discouraging people from working with them.
Thank you for laying down the truth on the Bernstein Bears. I remember how it was pronounced in the 90’s too. I’m not the only one loosing my mind over this.
And the monocle on the Monopoly Man.
When Charlie wears a black shirt and ties his hair back you know it’s serious
@Davidvevo558nerd
As a small content creator who has worked with them before and raised around 1200€ in ONE STREAM (with an average viewerbase of ~30-40 viewers!), I felt incredibly heartbroken to learn this horrible news, and I am incredibly glad I didn‘t enter the contract they offered me.
Just imagine how horrible creators feel knowing their communities essentially donated half of the money to Softgiving instead of the actual cause, and how absolutely gutting it is knowing the support you thought you were giving to the children in hospitals in this case, wasn‘t nearly as valuable as it could‘ve been.
It also does damage to other, legitimate charity organizations, because I have been having trust issues regarding other organizations ever since there has been negative news about Softgiving.
It‘s heartbreaking and makes me absolutely mad.
Lesson: People that gain your Trust without revealing themselves to you (strangers), are only looking for abusing/scamming you.
the facts that charities can pocket like 94% of their donations and still legally call themselves a charity is wild
Never give to charity... give direct. This has been like this for as long as I can remember no matter what charity.
Its almost like giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to strangers is a bad idea
😱😱😱
I 100% agree about the Berenstein bears, but apparently there were misprints and knockoffs spelled that way since people commonly thought it was -stein, not -stain. Maybe that was it? I def remember those too
I remember hearing that the books mostly had one spelling and the vhs copies of the show had the other spelling thus creating the confusion but don’t quote me on
Just keep these incidents in mind each time you feel superior to granny falling for a scam.
I’ve been watching for years and I’ve never seen a different hairstyle on Charlie
Why does it matter ?
Apparently you’re blind
@@MrUssy101🤓
@@MrUssy101 Just pointing something out
@@Braydenthedoopid sure, why not.
I cant tell if that artwork is either a very uncharitable drawing of charlie or a very generous drawing of asmongold
Anybody who makes "charity" their job is extremely suspicious.
that's one way of making people not want to donate to the charities. It sucks so much that few bad apples spread bad perception of whole field so much
I was just crossing my fingers praying it wasn't AGDQ, thankfully we're good and hopefully it continues that way
Bro how tf do people do this ‘I’m gonna fake donating to charity!’ Like what
Black shirt, hair up, charity in the title. This gonna be goooood
Legally, you only need to give about 10% of the money to be classified as Non for profit
Scams like this is the reason I think twice before even considering donating to charities. You just don't know where that money is going and that's a sad situation.
Don’t donate it to middlemen, donate it directly to the charity. It’s not that hard of a concept to grasp
There are a lot of charities in the space that work directly with content creators. I work at one of them. Not all of us are bad. Softgiving wasn’t a charity. It was a platform.
@@deepak-ui5li Even then the charity itself can be scumbag, in France one of the biggest charity organisation "Action contre la faim" or roughly "Action against hunger" an organisation with a self explanatory name have been investigated and it has been shown that they keep 80 000 000 € in stock in case of "hard time"... and then bought brand new office with imported japanese sakura in the garden (more than 10 000€ per tree) oh and the boss pay himself more than 10 000€ per month.
Note that this "charity" org send you picture of dying/starving kids in your mailbox basically telling you that it's your fault that kids are dying because you didn't gave them money! Literraly a picture of a dead kid with a "you could have helped him" on it, disgusting.
Whenever Charlie wears a black shirt in a video, no one is safe
Charlies version of black Airforce ones
So allow me to ask the stupid question of why anyone would use this "service" to facilitate donation transfers....it sounds like a scam from the onset..."umm no thanks I'll send the money to whom I'm donating to myself, but gee thanks anyways.." that's just me tho.
I agree, that sounds extremely dodgy. If you're interested in the topic of charity v. overheads though, there's an excellent TED talk by a guy called Dan Pallotta, called The Way we Think about Charity is Dead Wrong. Really interesting look at the complexities of overhead issues within charitable giving (far more entertaining than I just made it sound). But Softgiving definitely sounds worthy of intense investigation. First and foremost, charities must always operate transparently.
Thanks for uploading I needed this I’ve been going through a brake up while I have a very bad flu this means the world to me
If they’re skimming that much off the top, and they are also paying streamers, I wonder how much of that is going towards said streamers.
No doubt it is a lot. I bet this is why no other streamers will talk about it. They are scared
Softgiving taking enormous chunks out of donations has been a known problem with them for at least three years. A streamer called Jorbs has a video on TH-cam about why he has a personal distaste for the company them that he put up almost a year ago, and one of the reasons he called out was them taking a significantly larger chunk of the donation than other, more legitimate charity processors. His experience with the company was in 2020.
Hate these types of things, there lying to poor people that already have hard enough lives
Thats literally everyone who is rich
i dont rly understand why people would use a middleman in the first place... like, why not just donate the stream earnings directly? it doeant make any sense at all
I don't donate to charities for many reasons, this being one of the biggest ones. Charities are supposed to be about helping. Yet it'll have big wigs who make absurd salaries and on top of that they pay actors to do commercials and shit. Shouldn't it be volunteers who make the ads for free to help promote the charity? I just view them all as scams.
People need to realize that this is going to continue with many other "charities", as these people don't learn their lesson and could care less whether they get caught or not.
Controversies Involving Charities Made Me Sick ASF To Humanity
Charlie is summoning the rumbling with this one!
Charity is starting to scream “scam” more and more these days.
It always has, seriously investigate literally any charity
If they can employ people to go around asking for your charity, it's a scam
@@SEEYAIAYE Most of the really big ones are so bloated they're taking in donations so they can afford to pay people to call people to ask for donations, plus the six figure salaries of the top dogs running the charity. And the people that need the donated aid ... get about a nickel for every dollar donated when it's all said and done.
The average is 37% for US nonprofits
heres a simple way to see if a chairty is a scam look at how much is used to "cover expenses" if its above 25 percent its a scam for profit PERIOD.
I think a big thing that's also a problem here is that as more and more of these alleged charity fraud situations come to light, more and more people are going to become wary or disillusioned with online fundraisers and charities and become less likely to donate to legitimate ones in the future. These people's short-term greed is going to have long-lasting effects on the entire online charity landscape in certain spaces.
the way Asmongold responded to this issue made me stop watching him entirely.
How did he respond?
Dang man that sucks.
Influencers should be held to some accountable. They didnt ask the questions they should have.
Question: Why would you not just donate to the desired charity directly? I've never been in a financially stable enough position to donate to any charity, but it seems to me that if you had a large sum of money you wanted to donate, you could just donate to that organization directly.
In France we have a big charity event on stream called Zevent, and i saw there that it take a lot of time and effort to work directly with these organisation for diverse logistical reason, i guess ppl just choose the easy way without much tought.
Even then the charity itself can be scumbag, still in France one of the biggest charity organisation "Action contre la faim" or roughly "Action against hunger" a charity organisation with a self explanatory name have been investigated and it has been shown that they keep 80 000 000 € in stock in case of "hard time"... and then bought brand new office with imported japanese sakura in the garden (more than 10 000€ per tree) oh and the boss pay himself more than 10 000€.
Note that this "charity" org send you picture of dying/starving kids in your mailbox basically telling you that it's your fault that kids are dying because you didn't gave them money! Literraly a picture of a dead kid with a "you could have helped him" on it, disgusting.
So I think the solution to paid charity streams is people who do them without getting paid need to start saying they aren’t paid, and people need to make a big deal of it. Maybe it would be good to require paid streamers to announce that they are being paid to do it as well. The main issues I see is that streamers paid to do charity streams aren’t giving full endorsement of the charity, and also they aren’t helping for the right reasons. So it’s a bit of a stab at both. I do think more transparency is the way to go though.
I like how since I don't use Twitter I have no idea what most of the stuff Charlie talks about is. It's such a juicy treat with his videos
I don't know if it's because he's upset or random, but this hairstyle is AMAZING
I know 100% for a fact that everyone around me in elementary school called it Berenstein Bears but I'd show them the book saying "-Stain" and they'd ignore me and keep calling it "-Stein". It's always been Berenstain, just people aren't used to that ending in a name so they auto-translated it to what they were familiar with.
Why would people think it was stein if the book said stain? People knew it said stein because it did say stein.
@GeorgeMonet no, especially when you look at the target audience - people just barely learning how to read. Many are still working to recognize patterns while they memorize the words, so when names like Goldstein and Frankenstein are 1000% more common than anything ending in "-stain" it will lead little kids to misremember. Also, you saying "no" to my comment is weird because I said something that actually happened to me and you're saying it didn't happen.