The discussion of Binky’s story in the media continues. According to a comment article in The Guardian, although the sign the star posted said: “Please follow @barnardosretail on Instagram”, Binky herself was discovered not following the charity account. Aha, another example of one’s words are not matched by deeds! This corresponds with the moral framing in DailyMail coverage.
This has become one of the ways celebrities get involved with charity work. Many scholars described it as “clicktivism”, poverty, inequality or other global development issues are simplified into a single action(Dieter and Kumar, 2008; Littler,2008; Boykoff &Goodman, 2009) without investigating the reason and factors which influence the reproduction of these issues.
Apart from the main focus on the star and charity, the use of other sources can be very suggestive as well. HuffingtonPost provides a shorter story but shows similar attitude with DailyMail. The first few paragraphs mainly cited negative responses about this paid charity work. It also quoted The Sun about the reaction of charity visitors that they would “think twice before donating again”. This is a powerful use of secondary source because it points out the direct result. Then the comment from an MP has also been used to criticise in a strong tone( “an insult..”), even an “unnamed friend” of Binky thought that “To take money from a charity to help it is morally repulsive”.
Word count: 242