ChatterBank0 min ago
Will It Soon Be "arise Sir Fogle" For Your Work With Charities?
50 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Many people are honoured for their work, some are largely unknown to anyone outside their local area or the field in which they work/volunteer.
Here are the details for nominating someone.
https:/
Here are the details for nominating someone.
https:/
Robbie Williams - a star reviled by many as something of a buffoon has donated millions of pounds to the Donna Louise Hospice in his home town, which is where I live.
It is only knows about because word has spread locally - he has never told the media about it, but were he ever to turn up to a fundraising, and be paid by the company organising it, you can be sure The Mail or other media would be trumpeting about it the next day.
Celebrities doing good with their money is not 'news', celebrities being perceived to be immoral, is.
It is only knows about because word has spread locally - he has never told the media about it, but were he ever to turn up to a fundraising, and be paid by the company organising it, you can be sure The Mail or other media would be trumpeting about it the next day.
Celebrities doing good with their money is not 'news', celebrities being perceived to be immoral, is.
I'm not sure I'm really following this very well.
Is the gripe about Beers the Builders spending a reputed but disputed sum of £25,000 of their own money and raising £4,200 for Zoe's place Hospice?
They could of course have hired a lesser known speaker and attracted fewer donations, who knows if that would have been the case.
Or is it that Ben Fogle may one day get an honour?
Is the gripe about Beers the Builders spending a reputed but disputed sum of £25,000 of their own money and raising £4,200 for Zoe's place Hospice?
They could of course have hired a lesser known speaker and attracted fewer donations, who knows if that would have been the case.
Or is it that Ben Fogle may one day get an honour?
I think the spin put on the story by the Mail infers that the funds being raised are a quarter of the fee paid to Mr Fogle for speaking.
As you quite rightly point out, the company not the charity paid the fee, and that is between them and Mr Fogle.
What is also ignored is the possibility that Mr Fogle may have donated his fee, and done so without alerting the media about it.
And why would he - they would have switched horses midstream and gone for 'Millionaire donates fee he certainly doesn't need ....' and so on.
But for me, the crux of the argument is this perceived notion that there is some imaginary and un-defined cut-off point of wealth whereafter an individual should donate all their time and labour to anyone and everyone free of charge.
I do not believe this argument morally holds water.
If it did, let's drop the 'cut off point' to a level where every single person who owns a communication device and has internet access is judged wealthy enough to donate to ten per cent of their income to charity.
What would be the reaction then - since that would encompass every single individual on this site?
As you quite rightly point out, the company not the charity paid the fee, and that is between them and Mr Fogle.
What is also ignored is the possibility that Mr Fogle may have donated his fee, and done so without alerting the media about it.
And why would he - they would have switched horses midstream and gone for 'Millionaire donates fee he certainly doesn't need ....' and so on.
But for me, the crux of the argument is this perceived notion that there is some imaginary and un-defined cut-off point of wealth whereafter an individual should donate all their time and labour to anyone and everyone free of charge.
I do not believe this argument morally holds water.
If it did, let's drop the 'cut off point' to a level where every single person who owns a communication device and has internet access is judged wealthy enough to donate to ten per cent of their income to charity.
What would be the reaction then - since that would encompass every single individual on this site?
Naomi – that is not comparable, and I am surprised at you for suggesting that it is.
Had every single person on the night of Mr Fogle’s speech worked for the day and into the night for nothing at all, and he alone had been paid a fee, and when exposed, denied that he even knew he had a fee, then you would have a viable comparison.
But I think it’s a fair bet that the waiting staff, the kitchen staff, and all the company personnel, picked up their wages as usual, and so they should – and so should he.
Your comparison doesn’t so much not fly, as to be too weak to even look at taking off!
Had every single person on the night of Mr Fogle’s speech worked for the day and into the night for nothing at all, and he alone had been paid a fee, and when exposed, denied that he even knew he had a fee, then you would have a viable comparison.
But I think it’s a fair bet that the waiting staff, the kitchen staff, and all the company personnel, picked up their wages as usual, and so they should – and so should he.
Your comparison doesn’t so much not fly, as to be too weak to even look at taking off!
Naomi – before I forget, to make your comparison truly accurate, Mr Fogle would need to trouser his twenty-five grand and know everyone else was working for nothing, for eight years in a row, rather than just the once, and the try and laugh it off with what supposedly passed for twinkly Irish charm.
Your comparison won’t be attempting to fly now, it just died of shame.
Your comparison won’t be attempting to fly now, it just died of shame.
mikey - There is a lot we don't know about this incident -
We don't know if he was paid £25,000, in fact we don't know if he was paid at all.
There could be a dozen other activities tied into the fee for his speech which were not announced to the media.
He could have donated his fee and not told anyone.
The list goes on, but as Mamya advises, there is more to come, so let’s hang fire on the condemnation until we have the facts, which thus far have not got in the way of a bad story.
We don't know if he was paid £25,000, in fact we don't know if he was paid at all.
There could be a dozen other activities tied into the fee for his speech which were not announced to the media.
He could have donated his fee and not told anyone.
The list goes on, but as Mamya advises, there is more to come, so let’s hang fire on the condemnation until we have the facts, which thus far have not got in the way of a bad story.
Imagine this for a scenario – ‘Hey Mr Junior Employee at the sponsoring company, how much is Ben Fogle being paid? I’m a journalist, so I need to know for our ‘newspaper’ … ‘
‘How much, heaven knows, twenty-five grand probably! No, seriously, I have no idea who much he’s getting, I know he does a lot of these for free, but I don’t actually know anything. You’ll have to speak to someone in charge.’
‘That won’t be necessary, I’ve got everything I need for now …’
‘How much, heaven knows, twenty-five grand probably! No, seriously, I have no idea who much he’s getting, I know he does a lot of these for free, but I don’t actually know anything. You’ll have to speak to someone in charge.’
‘That won’t be necessary, I’ve got everything I need for now …’
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.