For those of you who think socially (in the make it better, not get popular sense) this mag is pretty much the non-denominational bible. It supports tons of Non-Profits, promotes advertising from mostly responsible companies, allows subscribers to select which charity they would like their subscription to support and is constantly seeking out news that is interesting, inspiring and unique. Holy, that's not a bad review, huh?
Anyways, this article slags the owner and founder of GOOD for being a rich kid, who's having a hard time keeping his vision alive... and has hired some industry expert to help improve revenue sustainability... I think that's a nice way of saying that he doesn't want to sink any more money into the company, although he will if he has to.
The article is interesting... and completely biased, but it's been on my mind all day. I guess my questions are:
If you are rich, do you have to be obsessed with money, and making more of it? Why does society brand you as a heartless, moralless, exploitative fuck if you have money? The guy's spending his trustfund on bringing underpublicizied news to the socially aware population of North America. Sheeeesh.
Anyone care to share their thoughts?
Or maybe this is only interesting to me, i don't know.
H.
4 comments:
Thanks for the tip, I'll check it out for sure...mind you I'm always looking for ways to make myself more popular :-P
I do find this article interesting, but only to the extent of watching someone be so self-righteous while they attempt to slam a person on the same charges.
When I read an article like this, I always check out the comments section. I use the comments as a scope to see who the author writes for. Low and behold, the author writes for a less than progressive bunch (read comments section). Now, I wouldn't put so much emphasis on the comments section for this site if it wasn't for this adorable attempt at trying to appear intelligent and progressive: This blog makes people "audition" to see if they are good enough to leave comments! If the comments are deemed "obnoxious" by the author, they will be removed. Clearly, this author's tolerance for obnoxiousness is higher than most. Comment Auditions
Anyways, the author really isn't much to worry about and the Observer article was flattering, so that is good.
To go back to your thoughts on rich people, I think the reason some people assume the rich are always pricks and without moral can be partly explained by what my mother use to tell me: "They are just jealous, dear."
Much love,
Chris
that's a good point to ponder. Maybe people are bitter because at the end of the day, even if he sinks in a whole bunch of money, he'll still be pretty financially secure if the mag fails. So almost by default he doesn't have the same personal investment. maybe?
anyway, I do love that mag, and it's got a great website too.
really? people think im a heartless, moralless, exploitative fuck?
haha i kid.
Post a Comment