Celebrity charitable donations have always been in the spotlight. In the face of disasters, many celebrities have reached out to help and donated money and materials. Their generosity adds a touch of humanity to the entertainment industry.
However, as more and more celebrities join the ranks of charitable donations, some netizens began to doubt the authenticity of them, and even pointed out that individual celebrities may have launder or fraudulent donations through charitable donations.
Internet celebrity Li Jiaqi was once controversial because of the sentence "** is expensive", and now he donated 5 million yuan to the disaster area in Gansu.
However, his previous negative events caused him to hype up after this donation, causing dissatisfaction among netizens, who thought that he took the opportunity to repair his image, and even suspected that he also wanted to avoid taxes through charitable donations.
Singer Na Ying has also been questioned because of the negative incident. Although she donated materials to the disaster area in Gansu, due to the damage to her reputation, the donation aroused questions from netizens.
At the same time, the controversial actress Angelababy also encountered similar doubts. Although she also donated materials to the disaster area in Gansu, she was still whitewashed and accused by netizens.
In addition, some netizens also exposed the phenomenon of fraudulent donations in the entertainment industry.
For example, Cao Yunjin announced a donation of 200,000 yuan, but it was found on the official website of the Charity Federation that the actual donation was only 691 yuan, of which 591 yuan was donated after Cao Yunjin posted the donation record, which means that he posted it.
When the donation record was issued, the actual donation was only 1 yuan. Cao Yunjin donated 200,000 yuan, but the act of claiming to have donated 2 million yuan is really incredible, and it can even be said to be a fraud.
However, just when the public questioned Cao Yunjin's fraudulent donation, the China Charity Federation released a message confirming the fact that Cao Yunjin actually donated 200,000 yuan, and posted his donation certificate.
Prove. Although the China Charity Federation confirmed the fact that Cao Yunjin donated 200,000 yuan, it did not explain why the information about Cao Yunjin's donation of 200,000 yuan could not be queried on the platform.
In fact, not only Cao Yunjin's donation information cannot be queried, but even the information of Xiao Yang, who donated 12 million yuan, and Li Jiaqi, who donated 5 million yuan, cannot be found.
It is speculated that the ** may have blocked some donation information.
Therefore, in this case, a little rational person will not carry out "fraudulent donations", because the authenticity of these donation information can be known by the other party only needs to be checked.
Especially for these public figures, it is impossible to tarnish their reputations because of this. After all, if the involvement in false charity activities is exposed, it will directly lead to the identity of the problematic artist, and it will be impossible to profit in the entertainment industry in the future.
Therefore, Cao Yunjin also issued a statement to clarify after the fermentation, denying that he had fraudulent donations, and pointed out that some users ignore the facts, spread rumors, and only try to hype and seek benefits for the sake of personal quantity and interests.
Use traffic for ill-gotten gains. Eventually, he angrily denounced the rumormongers for their lack of humanity. It is true that some people take the opportunity to speculate and gain benefits.
As for the original intention of these celebrities' donations, it's not that Confucius thinks that it doesn't matter. Whether or not they are sincere in clarifying their reputations, the money and materials they donated have indeed helped their compatriots in the disaster area.
Therefore, we should support and encourage this kind of behavior. Whether their philanthropic actions will affect their future stardom is another matter. What do you think?