Celebs in Children In Need

124»

Comments

  • nathanbrazilnathanbrazil Posts: 8,863
    Forum Member
    Well, they have make CIN a yearly event, and there is really nothing wrong with it. I just feel like people want to complain for whatever reason, whenever celebrities are involved in anything.

    Not me. I know of - and have worked with in a previous life, as it were - many celebs who do good deeds. Or perhaps I should say people of influence. Great folk. The big difference is that these people do their good deeds, without having to be in a spotlight. Unlike most of those on CiN.

    As for CiN being a yearly event, why would that stop them varying what charities benefit? No one is saying that CiN is unworthy or doesn't need help. But there are other very good causes out there, which touch a lot of people. Why do the BBC get to decide on one charity and stick to it with no chance for the public to vote?
  • [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    All public charity work is good PR, though, even if there is not straight up benefits from it at that given moment. When we hear the name Angelina Jolie, many of us think about charity work straight away. The charities do want celebs to represent them, because the celebs attract attention to the charities. I just don't see anything wrong with it.

    No. When I hear the name Angelina Jolie. I think "smug cow with a penchant for married men, who was once a lesbian who cut herself."
  • tediouslyrandomtediouslyrandom Posts: 809
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    downtonfan wrote: »
    No. When I hear the name Angelina Jolie. I think "smug cow with a penchant for married men, who was once a lesbian who cut herself."

    Bi, she's always been the bi who cut herself. :D
Sign In or Register to comment.