How Could You Not Like Oprah's Big Give? Here's How

I have now seen three episodes of the new reality show Oprah's Big Give. It's good that Oprah isn't full of herself, isn't it? To be fair, she probably doesn't want to confuse it with anybody's else's big give.

The basic idea behind this show is more than admirable. It's quite spectacular, actually. A group of people are given the opportunity to touch the lives of people in real need. They are given resources, tools and time to figure out a way to be as generous as possible with a person or family each week. This is not just a gift to the one in need. It is a gift to the contestant, to meet and understand the depth of need and to feel the real and palpable emotions that come with giving. The audience, by extension, reaps that benefit as well.

It is when you put all of this into the context of a competition that the concept goes horribly awry. The person who is the nicest, who raises more money than the other contestants wins. And of course to get there, each person is judged on his or her actions and one philanthropist is voted out each week.

I'm guessing that I have a unique perspective because I ran a non-profit organization for nearly a decade, because I serve on the board of national nonprofit (where I am the co-chair of the fundraising committee) and because my partner and I have the good fortune to be able to give generously to a few organizations we care deeply about.

Each week judges critique contestants' philanthropic works. Think about that for a minute. Each week, someone gets made to feel really, really bad about making another person feel really, really good. We hear things like "You only raised $5,000,″or my favorite "You got lost en route to your family's house and lost valuable time."

These contestants have just returned from these remarkable experiences -- helping in whatever way they could. The notion that you can measure the value of a generous act based largely on the total dollars donated is terribly short sighted and sends a message quite contrary to the one I expect Oprah intended.

Many of us know from experience that an afternoon working in a soup kitchen can have more lasting impact on the volunteer than had that same individual written a $500 check. It's not just about the money. It's about showing someone you care, it's about reaching out in some real and tangible way, it's about generosity in the broadest sense of that word.

Imagine if you are a family that has been touched by one of the contestants voted off. I would be pissed off. Don't you tell me that Mary wasn't generous enough! Don't you tell me that Bob didn't spend enough time with me? Who the hell are you to judge anyway?

It's something so right that just feels so wrong.

I know it's too late and that the series is already in the can. And I know no one thought to ask me when the show was in development. But HAD THEY ASKED ME, I would have recommended a very different "big reveal" at the end. Or should I say "Oprah's Big Reveal."

Don't select a "winner" at the end. Surprise all the contestants, bring them all in and split $1,000,000 among them. As I recall, the contestants didn't know there was a prize anyway. So $100,000 would be quite nice thank you very much. Maybe Oprah could use some of her ga-zillion dollars to bring in some of the families helped throughout the series. Be sure to include some families that were helped by those voted off. Use it as an opportunity to celebrate everyone who participated.

That would be your opportunity to make sure that no one who gives big ever feels small.

Comments

[breaktheterror]

Okay, wait a minute, wait a minute, wait a minute.

First of all, I agree that the competition format isn't that great, and I understand peoples' complaints about all the contestants being pretty, etc.

But the fact of the matter is that in this myopic society, Reality TV SELLS, horrible as it is to the thinking population.

The Oprah brand also sells. So if Oprah Winfrey is able to harness this hideous medium to inspire a segment of the population (those who actually LIKE this hideous medium) to give more of themselves, then I say more power to her.

[GothamTomato]

You actually missed the worst thing about the show: The fact that they chose only pretty people to be on it. I went to the open call in NYC, and I can tell you that those people on the show do not represent the people who were there. Can only pretty people contribute? I would bet that there were better candidates, smarter, more creative, more giving, but they were not chosen because they were not pretty enough.

So while the Oprah show talks about accepting yourself, being your best self, and complains about the media sending negative signals, and impossible physical ideals, to young girls, Oprah does the exact same thing on The Big Give, and in the name of 'charity'.

[IdaBWells]

Thank you for verbalizing my feelings...I am very disappointed in Harpo Productions. Even if one did critique the 'performance' it would be lees distasteful if it were used as a 'teaching moment' rather than the point where someone is 'voted off the island'

[Boobaloo]

Okay so .... Im not an Oprah-head, I dont follow her and dont particularily consider myself a fan although I do admire her, she's an extraordinary woman.

The reason her name and image is on everything is because she is the brand; it's called branding. People are fickle and lazy and want to know exactly what they're getting when 'purchasing' a TV show or a magazine so, when they see Oprahs mug or name on something, they know exactly what it's going to offer them and they sign up like a bunch of empty headed sheep.

Just saying. Oprah is no different then any other actor/talk show host/celebutante.

[ibivi]

I find the whole concept quite distasteful. When and how did helping people become a reality show? Please Ms Winfrey do philanthropic works but not like this.

[samandally]

Have never watched and from your reaction doubt if I ever will. Also I agree, Why Oprahs big give?Oh ya that's right she can't give without all the attention to herself.

[katlade]

So totally agree. When she built her school, she had to have an hour long TV special about it. Real generousity is done quietly. From the sounds of all the homes that Oprah owns (you can only live in one at a time), she should give some more. Or maybe she should open up one of her many homes to those families who don't have homes. If you really care about those more unfortunate than yourself you don't live the lavish lifestyle that Oprah does. You wouldn't want to.

[toocoldout]

Maybe we should be giving more. Oprah's already the most philanthropic black in American history according to Business Week, having given several hundred million of her own hard earned money to charity. Lots of celebrities raise money, but Oprah's one of the few that backs it up by giving hundreds of millions of her own hard earned money. And she was born and raised with every disadvanatge; poverty, black, female, sexually abused, teen pregnancy, illegitimacy, and yet still she manged to become a much much greater philanthropist than all of us combined, so why do you feel the need to judge her?