Donations are frequently "reversed". Can't you start crowdfunding if you have a car and a house?
Can I start crowdfunding if I have a car and a house?
Recently, a fund-raising event for a burned family in Shunde, Guangdong caused controversy.
The two families traveled in the same car and were sent to the hospital for emergency treatment when they encountered a car fire accident.
Facing huge medical expenses, he initiated a fundraising request on an online public welfare crowdfunding platform, and quickly completed the fundraising goal of 6 million yuan.
Subsequently, the burned family named Liang, who received 4 million yuan in donations, was exposed by netizens to have a house, a car, and an industry, and some netizens questioned it.
(Voice of China August 13)
In this controversy, the claims of the burned family and the questioning netizens are reasonable.
The injured brother’s brother said that his brother’s family opened a workshop with a self-built house and a car. The family situation is not bad, but it is not wealthy. “It’s not enough to pay the huge medical expenses of several million yuan. ".
In the eyes of some netizens, their previous practice of not telling the family's true situation blurred the boundary between giving charcoal in the snow and icing on the cake, and they would feel deceived.
The most critical reason for this dislocation of knowledge is the asymmetry of fundraising information.
Since donors cannot truly and comprehensively understand the basic family status of the fundraiser during crowdfunding, once this information is exposed and it is discovered that they are not so difficult, it is easy to have a negative feeling of being consumed in good faith.
In fact, looking back at the controversial cases such as the Luo Er incident, the death of Xiao Fengya, and the "selling of miserable anti-cancer upholders", the lack of key fundraising information has caused the incident to "reverse" repeatedly and the parties (family) were An important reason for backlash.
On the one hand, in order to obtain more donations, some help seekers deliberately present themselves selectively, deliberately highlighting their particularly "miserable" and "not easy" side, and concealing personal information that is "not conducive" to arouse sympathy.
Especially under the narrative and emotional expression from the media, the softest part of the public's heart can easily be triggered, and generously donate after the "tear point" is accurately hit.
On the other hand, such concealment and misleading are likely to pave the way for the subsequent "reversal."
When the situation of help-seekers becomes the focus, the lack of relevant information will leave too much room for "brain supplement" and even become a breeding ground for rumors.
In the Xiaofengya incident, the parents of the sick girl were once accused of giving up treatment after using the child's illness to raise funds.
As the questioning of fraudulent donations has risen, unfounded claims such as "Xiao Fengya was abused by her parents" and "patriarchy" have also become popular, making the originally well-intentioned fundraising activities eventually become a feather.
Truth is the basis and prerequisite for carrying out public welfare activities.
In the case of a burned family in Guangdong, people will only make judgments based on the necessity and urgency of the matter only if they understand the real economic situation of the family, and then decide whether to donate or how much to donate.
If the information is not fully disclosed, it will actually cause damage to the authenticity and disrespect for the right of caring people to know.
In many cases, some help seekers have concerns that they will not be able to obtain sympathy from the society after they announce that they "have a house and a car."
As the public welfare expert Wang Zhenyao pointed out, the public generally have particularly miserable and helpless imaginations about the recipients.
We must also realize that with the improvement of the overall living standards of society, the background and actual situation of help seekers are also very different.
In the face of unexpected disasters that cost millions of dollars at every turn, not being “poor” at home does not mean that there are no difficulties.
Especially when a large amount of money is needed for medical treatment in the short term, even if you have a house and a car, it does not mean you can get the money all at once.
In this regard, the public's concept of charity should also keep pace with the times, and have more understanding rather than demanding for those who are in trouble.
In recent years, the development of Internet public welfare crowdfunding platforms has indeed provided an important channel for the public to convey goodwill and help the poor.
However, similar cases of public welfare being marketed and used in good faith also put forward higher requirements for the professionalism and scientific nature of platform operation.
To effectively solve the problem of asymmetry in donation information, we still have to start with the design of the system.
For example, for key information such as the basic family situation, users should not just fill in the front-end truthfully. The platform should also do a good job of fact-checking, and do its responsibilities as a reminder of information risks.
Regarding the flow of donations, we should also try to be open and transparent, and earmarked for special purposes, so as to avoid making the funds a mess.
The goodwill of the public is the expression of beautiful emotions.
But such feelings should not be deliberately incited or abused casually.
It should become a consensus to return public welfare to a rational and professional track and reduce the misunderstanding and harm caused by information asymmetry.
Ren Guanqing Source: China Youth Daily