What you think of children in need

Just watch children in need. What you think of children in need do celebrity use for self-promotion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony1

Just watch children in need. What you think of children in need do celebrity use for self-promotion.

---

Children in Need is the biggest fund raiser in the UK & Northern Ireland. Everybody pulls together, events take place over the months before the programme is aired, it's a great night & the results are life changing for many. I doubt that anyone in UK & Northern Ireland is not aware of Children in Need. Celebrities of every age take part therefore there's something for every generation during the programme. Everybody does there bit to raise money for those who need it, each year the donations surpass the previous, it's incredible that the general public can do some much when motivated.

Sandy x

It raised £32.6m

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30041599

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveB

It raised £32.6m

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30041599

---

So far but the total always increases, I find it so uplifting that it does so much good. During the programme they mentioned that the majority of the money raised is given by ordinary people donating £10/20 etc, they don't get many philanthropist's donating huge amounts.

Sandy x

To be fair, if I was a celebrity, I would use my status as a means to raise money too. People are obsessed with fame and celebs, and there are already so many local groups working that not that many people care or pay attention to. Celebs seem to give these events some credibility; for example, if it was 'Sports Relief' and David Beckham and Gary Lineker were hosting the fund raiser, everyone would pay attention, but if unknown 'David Watts' and 'John Murphy' from down the road was hosting it, they would have to rely on who they know and their networks.

And if it relaunched my career, it wouldn't hurt either.

Yes I agree celebs are important regarding fund raising, but I believe that not all of them give their services for free, which for me is not on. I was involved in a fund raiser and it was hard work but I was happy to be involved. I do not think any celebs should be paid for charity work, isn't that wrong ??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by samlad

To be fair, if I was a celebrity, I would use my status as a means to raise money too. People are obsessed with fame and celebs, and there are already so many local groups working that not that many people care or pay attention to. Celebs seem to give these events some credibility; for example, if it was 'Sports Relief' and David Beckham and Gary Lineker were hosting the fund raiser, everyone would pay attention, but if unknown 'David Watts' and 'John Murphy' from down the road was hosting it, they would have to rely on who they know and their networks.

And if it relaunched my career, it wouldn't hurt either.

---

But you are a celebrity.

I do welcome it and its because of the celebrities maybe that so much money has been raised, its a great success it seems.

I think it's a great way to support the small charities that wouldn't get much publicity so well done to children in need xx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tony1

Just watch children in need. What you think of children in need do celebrity use for self-promotion.

---

Children in need are very annoying!:)

People giving their time to local good causes would be better. Money will always go missing, be misused or lost to lawyers and accountants and overpaid management.
Whether a public service broadcaster should be involved is good question. No in my view, it is an arm of government paid for via a tax. The UK gives £12Bn in aid and also contributes billions through the UN and EU for charitable works.

The Great British rake-off... what really happens to the billions YOU donate to charity: Fat cat pay, appalling waste and hidden agendas
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...n-agendas.html