FRESH UPDATE: Today's Washington Post does a great article on the contrast between views from Live 8, the G-8, and what Africans themselves believe they need. (I've long favored ending American farm subisdies as well as supporting free and fair trade in coffee. When I slurp my Kenya AA, I want the local grower to get paid for its fabulousness.)
Regarding Live 8 itself and not just the object of its benevolence... oh, the muddle-headed ethics on display there. My previous disses here and here.
Power Line reports that, as an inducement for viewers to donate, Live 8 commentators are actually repeating the fact that poverty is worse in Africa than it was during Live Aid 20 years ago! Hmmm.... (tapping finger to chin) if we could only figure out why....
Thanks to the excellent Aussie blogger, Tim Blair, here's info on how local shelters, serving Canada's presumably also impoverished homeless community, weren't allowed to set up a food drive outside Toronto's Live 8 concert. The decision, to retard the dilution of charitable giving of course, was not communicated to those planning concurrent activities until this week, and reportedly comes from Sir Bob himself.
"I feel good about curing poverty today, but I totally love my new watch!"
Here's news about the $4,000 to $15,000 goody bags of luxury items arranged for the Live 8 musicians who are appearing for "free." You may argue that although thunder follows lightning, the artists might not have expected posh treatment at this particular event. Then notice that it was the concert's organizer itself who contracted a PR firm to solicit the swag. Do you imagine that PR firm volunteered its services? If they did, it wasn't in the quote, and seems the kind of thing a publicity firm would insist upon bragging about in print. So where did the fees come from to pay Nicole Cashman et al t0 troll for trinkets? Not out of the profits for the poor surely.
Could Live 8 not have given out goody bags of calligraphied IOUs, listing tony items as dollar amounts being donated to the cause? Well, no, because the manufacturer gets his own stuff at cost, and doesn't sacrifice the actual marked-up retail value. And such gifties for celebrity wearing are treated taxably as business promotional write-offs not charity. But it's not about the money and self-aggrandizment and Hugo Boss suits, okay, it's about the kids!
But soon it will be over (sigh), and criticizing the almost-guaranteed mismanagement and skimming to follow will be all I'll have left.