Empathy, empathy! They've all got it empathy

I'd champion an ability to empathise over most human traits but in some circumstances can it actually hinder the progress of humanity?

Previously, I've waxed lyrical on the readiness of celebrities to associate with charity but on reading this article last week, I've finally been able to put my finger on a different aspect of prime-time fundraising television that has always disconcerted me...

"The concept of empathy—putting yourself into another's shoes—has fuelled political and moral thinking of late, inspiring presidents and academics to hail the feeling of another's pain as necessary to curing the world's ills. Crucial to empathy is "victim identification", by which we come to know the human face of tragedy. As a result, we are far more likely to give donations to a person whose picture we see on the news than seek solutions for systemic problems, such as underfunded hospitals, that affect the lives of far more individuals. In other words, empathy can result in the sacrificing of the many for the one." - The Case Against Empathy - bigthink.com

Children In Need and Comic Relief clearly fall into this trap because of their desire to show the "human face of tragedy" so forcefully. In doing so they miss a key facet of what should be the overarching question i.e. 'why have the political powers responsible not addressed the issues that led to this suffering?'

I always suspect the organisers (and the public for that matter) are far more concerned with which BBC newsreaders will be wheeled out for the annual dance routine. At least Bob Geldof physically and metaphorically loomed over Thatcher in the run up to Live Aid. He wasn't just looking on dutifully as an African child showed him round their woefully inadequate home. He wasn't just yelling "Give us yer money!"

It's this lack of focus on the 'systemic problems' that I can't abide. After all, isn't prevention always better than cure?

Children in Need alone raised over £26million in 2012. A fantastic sum. However, put into context (and this is where I wave the red flag), UK bankers bonuses alone totalled £13billion in 2012. That's more than the total GDP of Equitorial Guinea; a country, lest we forget, crippled by the cost of its debts to us in the developed world.

"Even though Africa has only 5 percent of the developing world's income, it carries about two thirds of the debt - over $300 billion. Because of this, the average African country spends three times more of its scarce resources on repaying debt than it does on providing basic services" - allAfrica.com

The funds and awareness that charities raise for their cause are extremely important; the good will and kindness of those that work for a charity is to be commended, yet, however good the intention, when we ourselves donate, I wonder whether we aren't just letting our politicians off the hook? Whether we aren't just perpetuating the status quo (and I don't just mean prolonging the careers of Francis Rossi and Rick Parfit. I've moved on from Live Aid now)?

Contrary to the article I quote here, I don't really think that empathy is the problem - you can't have enough of that in society to my mind - rather it's the action this "victim identification" catalyses.

It's an objective and politically engaged response we need rather than a guilt relieving, emotive knee-jerk reaction. After all, however much we raise financially, we won't cure the problem. 12 months later we'll see the same upsetting images on our TV screens again.

Next year I suggest that, instead of Bill Turnbull and Charlie Stayt performing Abba for our amusement, we should demand David Cameron, Ed Miliband and the rest of the House of Commons take their place. We might suddenly find there's a permanent change for the better. A change that money can't buy.

Wogan Worry

After a pleasant after work drink or two with the new Dr Watts in Covent Garden, I arrived home about 8 o'clock and settled down with Laura for an evening of Children in Need. It was full of the usual guff - singing newsreaders, dancing Eastenders etc, etc. but one thing struck me amongst all the goodwill and generous donating - Sir Terry.

Is it me or has he turned into the loosest canon since Bobby Ball's sidekick last paid a visit to his local? I know it was live telly, but if people think Brucie's doddery, they should have seen Wogan!! Either he's really lost it or he just simply doesn't give a toss anymore. Frequently, he would be openly unaware of to whom he was supposed to be linking, what item was next on the agenda and, at one point, was in completely the wrong place in the audience to meet a particular group of fundraisers. At this realisation, he comically looked to those seated around him, "This lot know less about why I'm here than I do!"

It was great to watch him snipe and snide his way through an evening supposed to be given over to goodwill, criticising celebrities for being unable to read out the donation telephone number correctly - somewhat hypocritically in the circumstances - and talking over co-presenters as they tried to hold it all together. At one point, I'm sure Terry had simply had enough and walked off. Hilarious, but it won't do him any favours.

Regardless of whether this was rebellious eccentricity or woeful incapability, I salute you Terry Wogan. It takes a lot to make Bruce Forsyth look slick!!! Still, I'd take either of those ageing masters over the awful Patrick Kielty or BBC golden boy Graham Norton.

Over our post work pint, Gaz mentioned his high regard for Jimmy Carr, suggesting he was the most likely of the current crop of comics to take over the mantle of the Monkhouse, Wogan, Forsyth generation. I hope so. Some are gone and others won't be around for much longer. I, for one, will miss them.