He is an evil individual who fails to address systemic issues or assist people for their own benefit.

As a game show host, he humiliates and exploits participants, boasting about his own virtues without any regard for the contestants.

Examples:

I believe legal intervention is necessary to limit his actions towards people and prevent him from exploiting them for personal gain.

Quick note: while I believe that results of some of his videos is good ( which he did to show how good of a person he is), that does not change the facts about his evil videos, the same way bezoz donations does not make him a good person.

  • @papertowels
    3•4 months ago

    How DARE he provide voluntary game show contestants that chance to win money as well as the ability to walk away at every moment.

    It’s almost as if the contestants have their own motivations and reasons driving their willing participation in the video.

    Like, honestly, half the times that shit just sounds fun. Wife and I found out that NASA was literally doing the same thing as the 100 days in a box challenge as part of a simulation for mars, and we were hyped to do it. Throw in a cash incentive? Even better.

    But here’s the kicker: if we weren’t going to do it together, we wouldn’t want to do it, and that’s A VOLUNTARY DECISION I JUST MADE. Some folks would have fun participating given their situation. This isn’t squid games where participants are facing harm.

    OP is just mad. Their arguments really remind me of “the unborn are a convenient group of people to advocate for”. You’ll notice OP has absolutely no evidence that the participants believed they were taken advantage of.

    EDIT: I googled “mr beast taking advantage of contestants” and the results are generally: others taking advantage of Mr. Beast and discussions about the morality of Mr Beast, but I don’t see an article about how a contestant says they were taken advantage of.