Cohen's earlier movie, Borat has promoted Kazakhstan's tourism as many did not know the country or even where it is situated on a map. Madonna helped in making Malawi known but Sacha Baron will even do a better job because Bruno will shed a negative light on Malawi. Any attention be it positive or negative is always welcomed. The Warm Heart of Africa, Bingu Wa Mutharika or even Lake Malawi are names that every Malawian know, but not people in the West. They will definetely want to visit after watching Bruno, who knows even to adopt a Malawian little child from Nkhoma in Lilongwe or Chichiri in Blantyre. The sad part is that Bruno's lead character is a black Jesus who is wearing a revealing thong....Not good..Not good Borat.
As if that is not enough Sacha Baron Cohen poked fun at Madonna this past Sunday at the Golden Globes Ceremony. His comments were not appreciated by some celebrities like Salma Hayek and Sandra Bullock. Cohen said: "This recession is affecting everyone, even celebrities. Victoria Beckham hasn't eaten for three weeks. Charlie Sheen has been forced to have sex without paying for it. It's true. And even Madonna has had to get rid of one of her personal assistants. (pause) Our thoughts go out to you Guy Ritchie."
That is fine as long as Bruno brings some publicity to Malawi.
4 comments:
I like your optimism, but I don't think this will help Malawi, as it endeavours to diminish and ridicule the idea of taking an interest in Malawi and helping it out. It actually works on the basis of those in The West who have used the Madonna/Malawi connection as a source of ridicule and spite, so though it may keep Malawi in public consciousness, it plays against the idea that this consciousness will lead to anything, because it makes fun of it leading to anything.
What Madonna does in and for Malawi is very positive. I do not see any positivity for Malawi in Cohen's vulgar humor.
Well you may be right. I think of Kazakhstan, it is true that everybody had a negative image of it. But tourism has increased after the movie Borat.
The charity (PR firm) 'Raising Malawi' founded by Madonna AND TWO OTHERS three years ago held fund raisers for over two years before finally getting registered as a non-profit. In other words, Madonna and the others were free to squander the lion's share of that funding any way they saw fit for those first two years. She also pleaded with her fans worldwide for donations along the way. In the meantime, she toured the world to promote her latest CD and raked in another $280,000,000 in just over 12 months. To date, the basic financial info for 'Rasing Malawi' still hasn't been posted on the website or anywhere else. The 'progress' page only tells of the collective works by over 20 seperate charities. Each of which have their own sources of funding and may have recieved some sort of promotion or support from 'Raising Malawi' in order to be considered 'partners'. But no indication is made how much of their funding came from 'Raising Malawi' or how much of their progress if any could be directly attributed to 'Raising Malawi'. The fans/donors have no clue how many millions of dollars were raised in that first two years, no clue how much Madonna herself chipped in, and no clue how the money was spent before they finally registered as a non-profit. No clue what tiny little fraction of funding or works listed on that 'progress' page could be directly attributed to 'Raising Malawi'. Nothing to go on but the vague word of Madonna. But I can tell you this: I called their office in an attempt to verify some sort of efficient financial operation (310) 867-2881 or (888) 72-DONOR). I got nothing but recorded messages and hangups. So I did some research on my own. 'Rasing Malawi' still hasn't been given any kind of rating by ANY independent charity watchdog like Charitywatch.org. The vast overwhelming majority of 'celebrity' foundations never are. In general, they are inneficient and riddled with corruption. Like the promotion of CDs, world tours, commercial websites, entire lines of jewelry (not just the single piece from which proceeds are donated), and high end fashion retail flagship stores. Celebrity foundations are also notorious for squandering much of their funding on travel and super high end accomodations for their celebrity figure heads. Its legal but not noble or efficient by any stretch of the imagination. In general, 'celebrity' foundations are a twisted inefficient mutant of charity and PR crap. So if its not rated, then don't support it. Instead, support a top rated charity like those given high ratings at Charitywatch.org.
Post a Comment