I know this is going to sound like some clickbait bullshit title, but I’m genuinely curious, asking in good faith. My two oldest sons are enamored with him, and he seems like a genuine guy, so I’m asking - is he a nice guy? If you google the question, you get a bunch of reddit hate, which I don’t always trust, because…it’s reddit. I have not watched much content (not my thing, I’m old) but I’m just curious what the fediverse has to say.

  • SHITPOSTING_ACCOUNT@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    There is at least one video (maybe an interview, not necessarily on his main channel) where he talks out of character about how he runs the channel etc.

    His on screen persona is just that, a persona. This is something your kids should understand (and they can, if you find one of those out of character videos).

    That said, I believe Jimmy Donaldson (the person behind the on-screen persona) does genuinely seem like a good guy, who is also smart and knows how to run a successful business while entertaining people. He also talks a bit about clickbait and how he tries to not make it too extreme but has to play the game.

    Depending on how old your kids are, it may also be worth talking about the business aspect (sponsors, merch, the various brands he creates, how Beast Burgers actually works with ghost kitchens etc., Feastables) - no need to criticize or put it in a negative light, just explain that it’s also a business.

    Wikipedia has some notes about controversies and criticism.

  • applejacks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    kinda cringy, but seems like a nice guy.

    sure, he does his philanthropy “for views” but that’s what allows him to continue doing it.

    not a fan of his, but he’s alright.

    • LukeMedia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      He also does a lot of philanthropy that doesn’t get made into content, which leads me to believe he is just a philanthropist. Making content out of it isn’t negative in my mind anyway, it just allows more philanthropy to take place.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ask yourself this: Does he offer the same “generosity” off camera ?

    If not, then he’s an actor who’s only doing what he does to continue his acting career.

    If your kids watch him because he’s entertaining, then I wouldnt worry too much.

    But if they are trying to emulate him (I.e. trying to garner internet clout by doing “good deeds”, but only on camera), then that would worry me as a parent.

  • habanhero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I would ask a different question - is Mr. Beast a good role model for the kids or not? Whether he’s a “good person” or not is largely irrelevant, the fact is he is doing good.

    Personally I’m a big fan of his philathropy, but I don’t think he makes for a good role model. He’s found a way to influence and doing good for the world, but I don’t think it’s easily replicable nor should kids try to emulate him - because to be Mr. Beast, you need to be in the influencer / clout-chasing game, which can have roads that lead to success but at the end of the day, it’s an endless game of trying to get eyeballs and capture attention.

    I would encourage the kids to forge their own path and not necessarily emulate Beast, but try to make the types of impact he makes in the world.

  • justdoit@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    My personal take is that content creators and celebrities in general should never be judged as “people” in the sense that you might deem a teacher or a neighborhood kid as a “good” or “bad” influence. Rather, you should treat them as “media personalities”. Content creators are characters. They’re personas meant to drive engagement and clicks. Some achieve this by engaging in risky behavior or drama. Some just do wacky challenges. The motivation is the same in that the persona presented on the screen is a combo of the creator and the engagement from their community meant to drive up click rates and brand-building.

    Mr Beast has kind of a “wacky semi-wholesome” image. Odd challenges and charities that hand out cash to random people for views. That’s a cynical take, but at the end of the day he’s a content creator, that’s it. If handing out free surgeries to correct childhood blindness didn’t drive engagement, he wouldn’t do it. If anything, the fact that his community is interested in seeing that project reflects more on them as people than on him.

    So in my opinion the better questions for assessing his influence on your children are things like “why does his content appeal to you?” “What about his character do you find likable?” “What aspects would you want to emulate in your own life if you could?”

    Again, just my personal view.

  • Sanyanov@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    We can go into big depths on how he’s actually a corporate slave making his business on sponsorships instead of promoting big systemic changes, but that misses the case you make on how it affects kids.

    On the kid side, he can be a somewhat good role model, a generous philanthropist sharing what he has to make people’s lives better. I’d say the effect his may have on kids is mostly positive.

  • Eisenhowever@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    General takeaway is: letting your kids be enamored by mr beast is teaching them to get clout. Teaches them that to do nice things, they must be recording themselves doing it. Its different if youre an adult that can think for themself

    “If i cant record myself helping this person out then ill wait till i can find a camera.” Theres a good chance thats the type of thing your kids are gonna unconsciously think about.

  • trouser_mouse@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think deep down he is, although he has the moral compass of a 4 year old.

    Edit - oh I thought you said Mr Bean

  • Zozano@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    This comes down to the old debate over which philosophical framework is the basis for ethics and morality.

    If you’re a deontologist, you might say that Mr. Beast is not a good person because he intentionally exploits people when he provides medical care for someone, by uploading their reactions for engagement.

    However, a consequentialist would say that the outcome is more important; the means by which people receive medical care is irrelevant, and in this case, their treatment essentially necessitates compensation via engagement.

  • palitu@lemmy.perthchat.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It would be good to know. But then Austin does it matter? There are plenty of terrible celebrities, as long as they are putting out decent role modelling for the kids, they get to keep their private life

  • TheGreatFox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    The main problem is that his videos are like “I saved 1000 kids from the orphan grinding machine!”, and I’m just like, why is the orphan grinding machine even a thing.

    Like when he restored sight to 1000 blind people. It’s a good thing, but also, it’s a drop in the bucket and why isn’t public healthcare doing that for all blind people?

  • Arotrios@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Definitely better than Andrew Tate from what I’ve seen. While he’s clearly a very savvy clout chaser, and he’s overtaken Pewdie Pie as the most popular YouTuber, he has made a serious effort towards philanthropic acts. The fact that he’s using these acts as a marketing tool to further increase his influence is clearly intentional, but he’s doing real good with his clout. He’s also shown considerable evolution throughout his career, including:

    In an April 2022 interview with The Daily Beast, Donaldson announced that he was no longer an evangelical Christian and identified himself as an agnostic. He also stated that he had long disagreed with his church’s position on homosexuality. He states that during the time he grew up in “the heart of the Bible Belt”, he had religion “beat into [his] head every day”, and was taught that “gay people are the reason God’s going to come and burn this Earth”. Although he considered anti-LGBT rhetoric to be normal growing up, he has disavowed it since then, stating: “I realized, ‘Oh, this isn’t normal. This is just a weird place I grew up in.’ So, that type of thing, I [wish I could] go back in time and be like, ‘Hey, stop’.”

    Donaldson considers himself strictly apolitical, saying that “I don’t want to alienate Republicans and Democrats. … I like having it where everyone can support [my] charity. My goal is to feed hundreds of millions of people … it would be very silly of me to alienate basically half of America.”

    …and…

    In April 2023, Chris Tyson came out publicly as gender non-conforming and revealed their struggles with gender dysphoria. In response to claims that they would become a “nightmare” and distraction for the channel, Donaldson defended Tyson and said, “Chris isn’t my ‘nightmare’ he’s my fucken [sic] friend and things are fine. All this transphobia is starting to piss me off.”

    This isn’t to say he’s perfect, but he’s a helluva lot better than some other personalities your kids could be listening too.

    • Kichae@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      he has made a serious effort towards philanthropic acts

      Ehhhh. He engages in a mix of pity porn and charity-as-self-promotion/criticism shield. Never trust a wealthy person’s donations when they have their name attached to them; there’s always a reasonable chance that they came with strings. Doubly so when those donations are to charities they actively control.

      I can appreciate that he’s funnelled his money into things people actually need, instead of into grants so charities can buy supplies from tech companies he’s invested in, but it’s still PR, not philanthropy.

          • Kichae@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            That’s naive. Leaving the rich in a position to “save” the poor is nothing more than enabling a power fantasy for them. It leaves them with all of the power and control.

            • Eisenhowever@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You cant force someone to save anyone, its their choice

              You seem to truly believe theres no rich person who would give out of the kindness of their heart

  • Ballistic86@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Mr Beast is fine. His content is fine for kids to watch, that is his demo. He demonstrates that doing good things with the money you have is the best thing to do. Mr Beast gets a lot of flack for his videos but as far as online entertainers go, he’s a good one. Are his videos entertaining to me? No. Are they entertaining to millions of others? Yes. Is he a negative influence on children? No. The only real PUBLIC criticism for Mr Beast is he supports LGBTQ people and his video “exploit” medical problems of people.

    Edit since it seems people think me mentioning he supports LGBTQ. Criticism for his support for Chris exists in the world. OP didn’t mention their politics, I mentioned the two things Mr Beast has received criticism for in the public space.