Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 634 posts

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#191

Post by lelandfe »

joshjje wrote: post #135
jonnycomputer wrote: post #57

I sort of feel compelled to quote the Bible here, though I'm not religious. "So when you give to the needy, do not sound a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do ... to be honored by men. Truly I tell you, they already have their full reward. But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father, who sees what is done in s…

"And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." So still selfish (if doing it for the reward), but that is human nature.

The way that CS Lewis puts this is essentially that if the reward becomes the motive, you're not going to get it:

> We are afraid that heaven is a bribe, and that if we make it our goal we shall no longer be disinterested. It is not so. Heaven offers nothing that a mercenary soul can desire. It is safe to tell the pure in heart that they shall see God, for only the pure in heart want to. There are rewards that do not sully motives.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#192

Post by onion2k »

maest wrote: post #124
slillibri wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mr Beast is a game show host. He’s not giving away his own money yet everything is framed as the giant act of generosity on his part. He’s giving away money much like Bob Barker gave away kitchen sets.

Honest question - how does he fund these giveaways?

He made $24m in advertising and sponsorship in 2020.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#193

Post by pcurve »

drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

Agreed. Even if did appreciate the gesture, I wouldn't want to be filmed without consent, especially for the whole world to see. He should've given her opportunity to review he footage at the minimum.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#194

Post by vinyl7 »

afavour wrote: post #143
phpisthebest wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.

Perhaps we're working to different definitions of the term. To me, virtue signaling is signaling (i.e. making publicly known) a virtuous act. To me that seems like an unambiguously good thing: it is likely to inspire others to similar virtuous acts, creating a feedback loop of people encouraging others to engage in good behaviour. "I voted! You should get out and vote too" feels like an example of positive virtual si…

The problem with public displays of virtue is that it comes off as seeking return value for the action. Virtuous acts should be done in quiet/secret and for the simple reason for it being virtuous. Seeking some other sort of value out of it (like social recognition, social credit, youtube views which end up with ad revenue) makes the act look dishonest. The act wasn't done because they were a nice person, the act was done because they were seeking to increase their own value.

The way to go about this is to do the thing without anyone knowing and without displaying it. To do it without expecting any personal gain at all. If a friend tells their friend "afavour brought me soup when I was sick, it was so sweet of them" or if someone asks you what you do in your spare time and you say "sometimes I serve at a soup kitchen." then that's fine because that kind of display, which was prompted by other people, can't really be seen as you seeking to cash out the value of the virtuous act.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#195

Post by CPLX »

maest wrote: post #124
slillibri wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mr Beast is a game show host. He’s not giving away his own money yet everything is framed as the giant act of generosity on his part. He’s giving away money much like Bob Barker gave away kitchen sets.

Honest question - how does he fund these giveaways?

The same way Bob Barker did.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#196

Post by [deleted] »

xorcist wrote: post #157
drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

Good thing it was just free flowers. Imagine if it had been a free puppy. "Here, just hold this" running off

[deleted]

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#197

Post by giarc »

naillo wrote: post #35
drakonka wrote: post #16

The video itself was quite off-putting when I first saw it. He didn't even just kindly offer her flowers. He _tricked_ her into taking them by making it sound like he just wanted her to hold them for him. She was actually being kind to him by doing him a favor, and then he basically ran away and stuck her with them. That's not kind at all, it's pushy and exploitative. As someone who doesn't usually like to accept gif…

It's funny how these videos say they're intended to spread love and encourage random acts of kindness, but the actual effect of them is decreasing trust in strangers (that they might be filming us for their tiktok). This makes me not trust anyone that goes up to me in the street.

Let's be honest though, they aren't intended to spread love and kindness, they are intended to get views. It's nothing more than a ruse to get views. If the creator was so inclined to spread love and kindness, he'd donate some of the millions he makes off these exploitive videos to charities.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#198

Post by azinman2 »

whiddershins wrote: post #147
joshjje wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"And your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you." So still selfish (if doing it for the reward), but that is human nature.

It's more subtle than that. Because God's reward isn't really in the same conceptual category as material reward or approval of your peers.

But it means you’re doing it because you think you’ll get something out of it.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#199

Post by crmd »

bumby wrote: post #67
nonrandomstring wrote: post #40

The reason this act breaks a moral boundary is that it subverts a principle of "ends" [1]. A genuine random act of kindness cannot occur if it's being filmed. Filming the act turns it into a virtue display. It also turns the subject into an object of utility, a means and not and end in themself. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Ends

Isn't a limitation of Kant's view that intention is all that matters? In other words, neither context or outcome change the morality of the action?

His intention was to film and monetize a viral video.

Re: Woman ‘dehumanised’ by viral TikTok filmed without her consent

#200

Post by jcpst »

sva_ wrote: post #176
naillo wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny how these videos say they're intended to spread love and encourage random acts of kindness, but the actual effect of them is decreasing trust in strangers (that they might be filming us for their tiktok). This makes me not trust anyone that goes up to me in the street.

With the amount of beggars in cities, I already highly distrust anyone who comes up to me to speak to me. 99 out of 100 times it is someone who tries to somehow enrich themselves.

When I was poor and eating at the soup kitchen, I spent a lot of time with people that lived on the street. Most of them were decent people in a bad situation. Sure, a healthy dose of distrust is smart. But I think it's worth it to not totally distrust anyone who is that hard up.
Post reply on HN