[LINK] High school students coerced into non-optimal philanthropy via psychological warfare

Dallas

From the article:

For someone who isn’t a fan of teen idol Justin Bieber, being forced to listen to one of his songs over and over again could be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

At Evanston Township High School this week, they called it a fund-raiser.

To motivate their fellow students to donate money for a struggling cafe/arts center popular with ETHS kids, seniors Charlotte Runzel and Jesse Chatz persuaded administrators to let them blast Bieber’s hit “Baby” over the school’s loudspeaker system at the end of each class period — and not stop playing the song until Runzel and Chatz had met their goal.

...

Perhaps not surprisingly, Runzel and Chatz, who were given one week to meet their goal of $1,000 for Boocoo cafe on Church Street, were able to raise the money in just three days.

“It made me smile to look at what we can do and look at the money we are raising,” said Chatz.

Link. (Chicago Sun-Times)

I wonder if this atrocity is going to go unpunished?

From the article:

For someone who isn’t a fan of teen idol Justin Bieber, being forced to listen to one of his songs over and over again could be considered cruel and unusual punishment.

At Evanston Township High School this week, they called it a fund-raiser.

To motivate their fellow students to donate money for a struggling cafe/arts center popular with ETHS kids, seniors Charlotte Runzel and Jesse Chatz persuaded administrators to let them blast Bieber’s hit “Baby” over the school’s loudspeaker system at the end of each class period — and not stop playing the song until Runzel and Chatz had met their goal.

...

Perhaps not surprisingly, Runzel and Chatz, who were given one week to meet their goal of $1,000 for Boocoo cafe on Church Street, were able to raise the money in just three days.

“It made me smile to look at what we can do and look at the money we are raising,” said Chatz.

Link. (Chicago Sun-Times)

I wonder if this atrocity is going to go unpunished?

As horrific as this particular variety of dust speck torture is, I'm more worried about the way people with the best of intentions and halfway-decent luminosity/transparency still manage to shut down conversation about efficient charity.

Step 1: People see warm fuzzy charity opportunities, and want to donate.
Step 2: People don't donate as much as they'd like to, because they're selfish/lazy/akrasic.
Step 3: People invent gimmicky signaling mechanisms that help correct for akrasia by aligning medium-size donations to warm fuzzy charities with personal self-interest.
Step 4: A substantial minority of people, who get less benefit from signaling or who underestimate the value of signaling, complain about the fundraisers and act like 'party poopers' because they'd rather not donate at all.
Step 5: The fundraisers' organizers feel perfectly justified in heaping shame on anyone who objects to participation in a fundraiser, since they see themselves as helping to correct for the complainers' akrasia rather than engaging in actual coercion.
Step 6: Anyone who would prefer to save their funds for efficient charities hesitates to speak up about this, because the content of their suggestion will not be listened to -- as soon as people realize that they are on team "don't donate to fundraiser," they will be dismissed as party poopers.

"I applaud everyone's altruism, but I'm donating the same amount to charity X instead because I think it does even more good, and I invite others to join me" is, I think, a way to talk about efficient charity without being a party pooper.

(I noticed, while writing this, the vast gulf in connotation between saying "X does more good" and "X does even more good", so tact is important.)

23TheOtherDave15y

Does anyone else find the idea of "I'm not coercing you, I'm just helping you correct for your akrasia" deeply chilling?

10

[LINK] High school students coerced into non-optimal philanthropy via psychological warfare

10

10

10

[LINK] High school students coerced into non-optimal philanthropy via psychological warfare

10

10