Ian On The Red Dot

Ok, I got spammed by this Singapore company Brew Creative. Apparently, I might not be the only one getting spammed.

Now, I took a closer look and tried to figure out who was responsible for the mail:

And realized who this Vicki Lew of Brew Creative was. She is the lady behind the infamous AWARE EOGM T-Shirts.

So, that might be the connection. I followed the AWARE saga quite keenly, and probably added my email somewhere during the whole period for some X show of support for the old AWARE guard, or during the aftermath, foolishly added my email on a list that I thought was affiliated with AWARE and related charities.

Oh, wait, so that’s why I might have got the email. Because this email is about raising funds for a charity.

Or is it?

Let’s look at the mail:

60% of the profits for each t-shirt sold will be donated to the CCF.

Look, volunteering to help a charity is a commendable effort. Giving money to a charity deserves a hearty pat on the back if the warm fuzzy feeling you have inside you isn’t enough.

But trying to make money off your efforts to help a charity. This stinks of NKF-entitlement complex. 40% of the profits go to the designer. WTF.

A charity isn’t a marketing tool to hawk your products. We aren’t asking you to make a loss. The printing company should be compensated for cost. And maybe, I’m being generous here of course, the printing company can make money. But if the designer (I’m assuming Vicki is the designer here) is going to put her name out there and saying she is going to help raise funds, then, seriously, there is something wrong with this picture here.

It is perfectly fine to say, look, I’m running a business. That business is designing T-shirts. I’m going to design a shirt for Singapore’s first Twestival (why why why am I think Twatival) and I’m going to sell it. I hope to make some money. After I make some money, I’m going to give a part of that amount to a charity.

But you start with,

Brew Creative and Printeet.com are lending a hand at Singapore’s very first Twestival, where the Twitter community gets together to aide a charity.

Singapore Twestival 2009 aims to raise $5000 for the Children’s Cancer Foundation (CCF).

And only in the last line of the 3 paragraph do you disclose your profit-making intentions on the back of a charity,

To help raise the money, Brew has specially-designed 3 Twitter-related tees. 60% of the profits for each t-shirt sold will be donated to the CCF.

If you (whoever is reading this) can’t tell the difference, you shouldn’t be in marketing.

Oh wait, maybe you should. And that is how our sad pathetic world rolls.

Update:

Vicki has left a comment in reply:

Profit from each t-shirt:
$29.90 – $19.90 = $10
60% to CCF:
$6 per T-shirt
40% to Brew:
$4 per T-shirt

What does this $4 go into? It goes into covering our operational costs. We are, after all, a small studio and running a T-shirt campaign has us on Twitter and Facebook a lot of the time, answering enquiries and requests. We will also be manning a T-shirt booth at the TwestivalSG so there will be some logistic costs that need to be covered.

That $4 looks like a (valid) cost to me. So this is really about the wording. Do check out the sites, and if you do want to support the cause, get the tickets for the festival here and/or buy the shirts here.

Putting my inner cynic aside, the $4 seems fair (of course, if they sell like a thousand T-shirts, the absolute amount does seem big). The questions really boils down to these:

1. If I am volunteering to raise funds, how much financial cost should I bear?

2. Can the time spent be quantified to a monetary amount?

3. Should I be compensated for my time?

Put it another way, if the CCF paid Brew Creative $4000 to raise $10,000, would we be comfortable with this arrangement?

Tough questions all around.

I know where I stand but what do you guys think?

A few years ago, a simple yet brilliant idea called the ‘Million Dollar Home Page‘ netted its creator Alex Tew a cool million dollars. Now, Singapore has another similar site trying to cash in on the idea.

However, this time, unlike the many other copycat sites that proliferated the net, the creator is doing this for a good cause.

Named ‘Singapura 123‘, the site aims to sell virtual parts of Singapore to raise funds for the ‘Straits Times School Pocket Money Fund‘

I felt cheated when the NKF scandal broke. I felt cheated when I saw the lady who just begged for some money take a cab with her stylishly dressed daughter while carrying shopping bags. I felt cheated when people told me horror stories about the skinny Indian lady who begs at Orchard road.

I think I’m cursed. Or maybe people see something in me that screams ‘can be conned’.

Who knows? But let’s just share some incidents that have happened to me.

1. When I was working in Tampines, there was this guy who would go around Century Square and Tampines Mall asking for money to eat. He is a well-dressed middle-aged gentleman. When he approached me as I was leaving the Tampines Mall Food Junction, he told me he was waiting for a Christian friend who hasn’t showed and he was hungry and didn’t have any money to eat. He asked if I could give him some money.

At first I refused. But as I was going down the escalators, a thought came to mind ( I’ll share what the thought was later ) and I went back up to the food court to give the gentleman some money.

2. When I was crossing the road from Wheelock Place to Shaw Center, a young lady approached me. She was dressed rather shabbily, wearing slippers and her teeth was in terrible shape.

This was the point when I started thinking maybe there was something about me that attracted such people (the Chinese gentleman above wasn’t the first).

A curse?

You see, out of the mass of people that crossed the road, she zeroed in on me. I wasn’t even walking at the front of the pack.

Anyway, she told me a sob story about how her mom was in hospital and she needed money to eat. I told her I didn’t have any money, which was true because I hadn’t withdraw any money and my wallet was empty, and walked away.

I then stopped, turned around and told her if she was willing to wait, I could give her 10 dollars. I walked to the ATM and withdrew the money for her.

3. When I was at AMK central having dinner with my gf, we saw this elderly Chinese gentleman going around the tables at S11 eating leftovers. He was also collecting discarded tissue paper. I approached him and gave him 10 dollars asking him to get something to eat.

My mom told me this was the wrong thing to do. She said that what I should have done was asked him if he wanted anything to eat and buy the food for him.

4. When I was walking along the pavement behind Newton MRT, a middle-aged Indian gentleman approached me. Again, I was the only one along that stretch of pavement that he approached.

He reeked of alcohol.

I gathered from him that he was poor, had nowhere to stay and was going to a petrol station for a bath ( I’m slightly hazy about this story because I couldn’t really make out what he was rambling) .

He asked me if I could give him any money for food. I said I couldn’t but I was willing to bring him to Newton Food Center to get something to eat if he wanted. He said he had to go somewhere first ( I think to bathe) before eating. I refused to budge and said I’ll bring him to eat if he wanted but wouldn’t be able to give him any money.

He refused my offer. Anyway, I would walk pass him a few more times on other nights. Each time he would be wearing the same outfit when I first saw him.

I’m not sure when the newspaper did an expose on fake beggars but when I read that, I started wondering if I was indeed helping anyone who really needed help by providing financial aid to those individuals I was approached by on the streets.

Ok. So after that article came out, as I was walking along Orchard, I saw an amputee begging for money. I wanted to give him some money when I remembered the article and decided not to. As I walked passed him, the thought that I had earlier mentioned entered my mind.

I walked back and dropped a note on his mat.

The thought I had at both occasions was this. Out of the many cases, all of them could be cheats. But so what? What if there was one among them that indeed really needed the money, then what?

But no one likes to be cheated. No one likes to be a patsy. And so we refuse everyone who knocks on our door.

Then I remembered something I learned when I was young – let the sin be on their heads, not mine.

I admit, it is a very very selfish reason.

If I have the capacity to help someone, I would. However, in this case with random strangers, when I don’t have the full picture, I do not withhold giving not so much because I want to help them but because I do not want to be faulted for not helping someone who might really need help.

This, of course, comes back and bites me. Why? Because I start thinking one shouldn’t do anything for selfish reasons and thus I become slightly more reluctant to give anything because giving should not be about myself but the other person and until I can arrest that fear of being faulted, I shouldn’t give.

Oh well…

So what does this have anything to do with the question about whether Singaporeans won the silver medal in team table-tennis at the Beijing Olympics.

You see, when I see Li Jiawei, I see a foreign talent and not a Singaporean. Sure, she is a Singapore citizen, but I doubt whether her heart has any place for Singapore. I see someone who is a mercenary. Feng Tian Wei’s case is much less redeeming.

Part of my indignation stems from the fear that they are just taking Singaporeans for a ride. They are just trying to clean us out. Sure, some may argue that we are using them too. Wrong. The powers that be are the ones who are using them. The ordinary citizens foot the bills.

But who really knows what is in their hearts?

No one. Gosh, sometimes an individual won’t even know what’s in his or her own heart.

Graciousness. A forgotten quality.

And so, as I try to reconcile within myself how to react to the silver medals that were won, I’m starting to think I should learn how to be gracious.

Sure, maybe we should question the policy that got them here, even review it, maybe change it, but since none of us really have the monopoly on the truth about the hearts of these individuals, now that they are here, we should treat them as one of us, as a Singaporean.

Let the sin be on them, not us.

Update:The last line above is causing me grief. What I should have said is this, “if there is any sin to be committed, let them be the one to commit it. We should not be the ones who be ungracious (thus committing the ’sin’) for whatever (?unreasonable) fears we have within us. If they (referring to not just our table-tennis players) do indeed turn out to be just mercenaries out to take us to the cleaners, then let them be answerable to themselves and whichever higher power there might exist. Let them be the one who commit the ’sin’ and not us if there is any ’sinning’ to be done.

If it is not clear from this post as well as something I wrote in an earlier post,

For example, I’ve already a certain perspective on the world. It could probably be right. It is most probably wrong. But I recognize that it is this perspective that makes me see Li Jiawei as a FT and not a citizen. If we could quantify and measure (good) citizenship and Singaporean-ness, Jiawei could probably smack me hands down. Who knows?

1. I’m wondering why I still don’t see Li Jiawei as a Singaporean.
2. I still have the impression she and Feng Tian Wei are here to leech off us.
3. I recognize the above impression has no real basis except from some (very likely) illogical fear(s).
4. I recognize this perspective must come from somewhere, some assumptions, some bias that I’m assuming is fundamentally flawed.
5. It probably (rather most definitely) has a lot to do with some sort of fear I cannot articulate.
6. I must address this (these) fear(s).
7. I have to learn to be gracious despite the fear(s).
8. The end result is to reconcile the conflicting thoughts I have about citizenship, being a Singaporean and individuals like Li Jiawei.

To put this into some perspective, I have acquaintances who came to Singapore in Primary School. More specifically, there is one of them who came in Primary Five. He is a successful individual to date. I see him as a Singaporean. I’m trying to understand why I look at these two individuals so differently.

I, and possibly, other Singaporeans may not be able to overcome our bias. But that shouldn’t stop us from being good gracious neighbors.