Title: Oprah Winfrey
Description: Philanthropist or Idiot?
HombreSabio - January 18, 2007 02:41 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE |
Oprah Winfrey is firing back at critics of her decision to build a $40 million school complex in South Africa - saying she didn’t build it in the U.S. because inner-city kids here don’t appreciate the value of a free education.
“I became so frustrated with visiting inner-city schools that I just stopped going. The sense that you need to learn just isn’t there,” the TV talk-show maven says in the current issue of Newsweek.
“If you ask the kids what they want or need, they will say an iPod or some sneakers. In South Africa, they don’t ask for money or toys. They ask for uniforms so they can go to school.”
The tough talk comes as the famously philanthropic Winfrey unveils her Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls in South Africa - a sprawling, 28-building complex for impoverished teens that features a yoga studio and beauty salon, among other luxuries.
The 22-acre complex has taken more than five years to build and has raised eyebrows in the U.S. and abroad, she said.
“I understand that many …feel that I’m going overboard, and that’s fine,” Winfrey said. “This is what I want to do. I wanted to take girls with that ’it’ quality and give them an opportunity to make a difference in the world.”
Winfrey handpicked the 152 girls who will attend out of an application pool of more than 3,500. Winfrey has also supplied millions of dollars to educate needy children in the U.S. through the Oprah Winfrey Scholars program.
Critics say:
$40 million could have built hundreds of schools. Do schools anywhere else in this world have yoga studios and beauty salons? It’s nice that Oprah wants the girls to experience these lavish things, but what could have been done with that money? Lives could have been saved. A million more could have been educated.
Regular, plain sheets are good enough for me and most people anywhere in the world. Why do thread counts matter? $5,000 can support an entire school, salary and all. With $40 million, Oprah could be completely supporting 8,000 schools in Africa. Instead, she is helping all of…152 children. A $40 million investment for a graduating class each year of 152 girls?
For donors who want to help children get an education in Africa, they will think that $40 million and 200 count fiber sheets are needed to make a difference. People will never know how much good can be done with $10 or $30.
Who are the teachers in the school? They are being brought in from other countries for short-term teaching assignments. What about TRAINING THE TEACHERS IN SOUTH AFRICA to create a sustainable source of well trained teachers? Is it really beneficial to rely on foreign teachers? What does this say to the young girls? They will certainly think that teachers from their own country are not good enough. Sure, some foreign teachers could be brought on a short-term basis, but most of the teachers must be local. Flying teachers into this school is unsustainable and dangerous for the perception of education by South Africans. South Africa has excellent universities, and they certainly graduate excellent teachers of the same quality as teachers from other countries.
People favouring Oprah say:
It’s her money. If she wanted to build a girl’s school on the moon, that’s her choice. Oprah is free to blow her money as she chooses. She has done a lot more than the average person to help others. The fact that she has helped 'someone' should be enough. As long as the under-privileged people getting fair treatment, nothing else should count. |
Link-------------------------------------------
I think it's nice and all that she's building a really nice school. But $40 million to be used for a mere 152 people, restricted only to females. It seems that this money could be spent much more wisely. She could have built countless schools and educated hundreds, maybe thousands of children with this money.
And to say that inner city kids don't deserve it because they want material items? Really, now the reason the children in South Africa want an education is so that they can better their lives, so that they can actually have a comfortable lifestyle, i.e. money. It seems that she's splitting hairs here.
Nikomikiri - January 18, 2007 02:58 AM (GMT)
Now let me get this out of the way, I've never liked Oprah.
Giving a school to a relatively small amount of girls in South Africa, and saying that inner city kids just don't want one, is complete bullshit.
Yeah, maybe alot of kids in America don't see how important a good education is, but she's not helping that by giving up on them.
And what the hell is up with adding a beauty salon and all that? Last time I checked, that's not a requirement for a good education. She spent that much money on a school that is probably not going to teach these girls the lesson that she hopes it will. She could have taken half of that amount and built a school with more size to it and more teachers, etc. Then she'd even be able to accept more students, and further the education of even more girls than she has at this point.
I don't think it's a big deal for her to spend her money outside of the US, I do think that she went about spending it in a very wrong way.
HombreSabio - January 18, 2007 03:10 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (Nikomikiri @ Jan 17 2007, 08:58 PM) |
| I don't think it's a big deal for her to spend her money outside of the US, I do think that she went about spending it in a very wrong way. |
Bingo.
Dragon Darkness - January 18, 2007 04:27 AM (GMT)
The Colbert Report I believe had a short segment on this that rolled to a clip of Oprah giving everyone cars after her materialistic remarks. The school is a travesty not based on the fact that it is not in the US but for how much money was spent and how poorly it is being used. Hombre and Niko have also echoed this sentiment and I believe everyone else that comments on this will agree.
xplay25 - January 18, 2007 10:52 AM (GMT)
You know Hitler said "He who controls the youth, controls the future."
My children wouldn't set foot in a school building. Unless it became law, in which case I would hopefully gain that foresight and opt not to have children.
Dragon Darkness - January 18, 2007 10:56 AM (GMT)
| QUOTE (xplay25 @ Jan 18 2007, 03:52 AM) |
You know Hitler said "He who controls the youth, controls the future."
My children wouldn't set foot in a school building. Unless it became law, in which case I would hopefully gain that foresight and opt not to have children. |
Uh so you were homeschooled then? At least in America home schooled kids are socially stunted individuals in most cases and have a really hard time interacting with other kids.
xplay25 - January 18, 2007 12:35 PM (GMT)
Only for a time.
I know as well as anyone that schools are full of decadent scum, who've had it easy riding on the backs of their forefathers. Totally ignorant, hedonistic, it's the road our younger generations are traveling. And I think that public school has so much of this negative influence, that it's actually become increasingly dangerous. It's not all bad, and there are good kids in schools(that's going to depend on your personal viewpoint anyway) but my point is that homeschooling, if you have the means to do so, is a far superior option.
For those with social issues, that's something parents need to make a priority issue. It's good to be selective in your children's association when they are young. Hoping that one day, when they are old enough to make the decision on their own, they will be very selective about who they befriend.
Homeschooling itself is very impractical for today's society. David Rockefeller once made the comment that the women's lib movement was designed in part, to get more kids into the system, into the schools, where the state can mold them to their will. Fathers are working, mothers are working, therefore there is little practicality in homeschooling your child. Of course, that wasn't totally successful because there are many stay at home mothers still.
One of the mistakes is actually leaving them alone with a computer and a few programs or something. If you are going to homeschool them, it has to be an extensive, well designed learning program/environment where you are hands on, and teaching your child the way they are best taught. Clearly though, this is an ideal, not a reality.
Kitty - January 18, 2007 05:20 PM (GMT)
Homeschooling is actually very practical if you have the patience and time to do it correctly. Plus there is no more emotional immaturaty with homeschooled children than classroom taught children if you allow your kids to talk to and visit with other kids and adults. Its really only people that are anti-social and really don't interact, or allow thier kids to interact with, other people that have children that are stunted socially.
xplay25 - January 18, 2007 10:35 PM (GMT)
Indeed, if you have the time.
Cloud3514 - January 19, 2007 12:41 AM (GMT)
I agree with Xplay, if I ever have kids, they're being homeschooled. not because I want them to have as little social life as me, but because I hate the school system. Its all about state assessments and how much a student can do, not what they learn. Take it from me. My teachers love me because I learn the material and have tons of charisma, but I have really low grades because its not about learning the material anymore, its about how much work you can do. Its bullshit and if I ever have kids, they shouldn't be forced to deal with it (and I know homeschooled kids just need the right push and their social lives will not fail, I personally made that push in the social lives of three of my best friends (all brothers) by introducing them to good friends of mine. I didn't think anything of it at the time, but now I realize I made the lives of three people better.)
As for Oprah, I think her heart is in the right place, but how she's doing it is all wrong. She accuses inner city kids of being materialistic and then she goes and spends $40 million on a school for only 152 girls that she handpicked? well, if she runs for president, she lost my vote.
Her first mistake here was her claims that Americans are materialistic. Sure, if you ask an average student what they want, they'll say some video game or Mp3 player, which she has a point with, but she overracted. A well raised child will know better, though it may not come to thought when they are asked. And $40 million? I complete agree with the critics that lives could have been saved and hundreds, no, thousands more could have been educated for that amount if it was used wisely.
