Flipping through television channels the other evening after a long day I came across this week's episode (or one of them) of "American Idol". This, apparently, was the "Idol Gives Back" episode, in which the producers of this cash generating series, which has made multi-millionaires out of some semi-celebrities, pretend to care about poor people. The entire two-hour program was little more than a mini-telethon geared toward extracting as many $20 or $30 donations out of the American viewing public as possible. My understanding is that $30 million was raised to help worldwide poverty, which is great, but why exactly was this show labeled "Idol Gives Back"? I didn't see any of the producers or directors of this program writing a check. I would give the producers a pat on the back but, as the saying goes, their own hands are in the way. Simon Cowell, the acerbic Brit who helped bring this show over from Europe is probably worth hundreds of millions of dollars. I watched as, in a pre-taped segment, he toured around poor African villages waxing indignant about the extreme poverty but, other than helping a sick woman into a car headed for the hospital, it is not clear what difference Cowell's presence made. There was no indication he made a donation to the cause. Another segment showed U2 crooner, Bono, imploring all of us to do our part to eradicate poverty; little more came from Bono, though, as he hid behind his darkened eye shades. A reasonable guess might put Bono, the front man for one of the most successful rock bands in history, as worth several hundred million dollars himself. The celebrity barrage continued in the program: Ben Stiller; Goldie Hawn; Celine Dion, etc. Heck, even Elvis made an appearance from the grave in the form of a hologram which sang a duet with Ms. Dion.

I know this veers toward the cynical side but, as I've gotten older, I just can't help becoming somewhat miffed whenever I see pampered celebrity elites on the air somewhere telling all of us what we have to do to make the world better. Drive less, use less, get by on less, etc. while these privileged souls live a life of excess by any reasonable standard. The annoyance reaches a crescendo in my mind when these people attempt to manipulate average Jane and Joe into sending in their hard earned money for "the cause". Please understand, that I am all for charity. Personally, my wife and I give a significant percentage of our income to good causes, from cancer research to helping orphaned children. As a conservative, I feel any way that each of us can provide help where it may be legitimately needed reduces the likelihood of government to feel the need to tax us so it can ostensibly do the same thing. A big central government will never be as efficient, as effective or as caring as private charity in terms of administering to the needs of the less privileged among us.

I recall a Bruce Springsteen concert I attended a few years back where The Boss stopped the music and implored each of the 35,000 fans, who had already paid somewhere in the neighborhood of a hundred bucks (or more) for their tickets, to give $10 to some cause. My first impulse was to yell back at him and ask how much he had given, which is exactly what I did, much to the chagrin of some people around me. Of course, I did not get a response from Mr. Springsteen--our seats weren't that good.

It is not the charitable aspect of these charades that is the issue to me, and I am not against celebrities using their fame to bring some attention to needs which otherwise may not receive much focus. Also, I am not questioning the amount of money stars earn in their jobs. People are worth whatever someone is willing to pay them; there is no such thing as being "overpaid". Rather it is the apparent disingenuous nature of the celebrity participants which stands out as the problem. Each of the stars who appeared on "American Idol" this week could donate just five percent of his or her net worth, a mere pittance to them in the whole scheme of things, and my guess is the sum would easily surpass the $30 million raised from the viewing audience. Heck, Simon Cowell himself could probably write a $30 million check tomorrow and not even miss it. I am not saying these individuals should be legally or morally compelled to give their own cash; they are free to do as they please with their earnings after all. It just seems that their own actions should fall in line with what they appear to be requesting from their audience. The producers of the show this week magnanimously called the program "Idol Gives Back," but I do remember seeing plenty of commercials aired during the show; the cash machine kept churning, even as they took credit for "giving back". Somebody needs to recheck the definition of that phrase.

	Web useless-knowledge.com