TODAY’S CHARITY: THE BRIGHT SIDE, THE DARK SIDE, AND THE ROOT CAUSES.

Ever since humans learned to live in communities, the act of mutual aid has been an inherent necessity in social life. Stepping into the modern era, charity is no longer just an act driven by moral instinct; it has become a major social phenomenon with a powerful ripple effect. Whenever a natural disaster occurs, when a community faces a crisis, or even when a sick individual needs support, society almost immediately turns its attention to charitable activities, as if it were a civilized instinct formed in the collective subconscious. However, precisely because of its profound influence and sacred nature, charity has also become an effective tool for whitewashing reputations, manipulating public opinion, and even profiting financially. This analysis comprehensively examines the issue from multiple perspectives—sociological, psychological, philosophical, and theological—to explain why charity always garners attention, why it is easily exploited, and the distortions that increasingly worry the public.

Charity in the Social Structure: Why Does It Always Attract Attention?

In social life, any behavior related to sharing holds a strong appeal because it touches upon humanity’s core values: compassion, solidarity, and the existence of the community. Society operates based on the connections between individuals, and charity is proof of that connection. Sociologists view charity through the lens of “social capital,” a form of soft power built through the act of giving, which helps the actor increase their reputation and gain trust. Therefore, when a celebrity, a business, or an organization engages in charitable work, the action immediately attracts interest as a sign of ethics and social responsibility.

Moreover, modern media makes all charitable activities easily shareable. Images of the poor being helped, and moving stories about the miracles of kindness, often create a strong effect, drawing deep public interest. Society favors the image of the “modern hero,” and charitable activities are often placed in that frame. Meanwhile, issues like social injustice, wealth disparity, or flaws in public policy are harder to articulate clearly, making it easier for the public to view charity as a quick and emotional solution.

Charity is thus both social and symbolic. It reflects the belief that humans still have the capacity to save each other in an uncertain world. And this very belief makes the public willing to follow, share, and even expect more from those involved in charity than the expectations placed on official social support systems.

The Psychological Perspective: Why Are People Attracted to the Act of “Giving”?

Social psychology indicates that charitable behavior satisfies a range of fundamental human psychological needs. First is the need to express self-worth. When helping others, people feel better, more useful, and this increases their internal satisfaction. This is a very natural psychological mechanism, known as the “warm glow effect”—the pleasure felt when doing good. This effect is why charity spreads easily, as each act of giving provides an immediate spiritual reward.

In parallel, evolutionary psychology suggests that helping behavior is a survival strategy. Groups that build a spirit of solidarity tend to survive longer, leading humans to develop a natural tendency toward cooperation and support. When we see someone engaging in charity, we tend to judge that person as trustworthy and ethical, because the brain has learned to associate acts of giving with good character.

However, these very psychological mechanisms become “loopholes” that allow charity to be easily exploited as a promotional tool. People often judge each other’s ethics through superficial expressions. Therefore, upon seeing the image of a public figure handing out gifts, a business supporting flood relief, or an organization raising billions of VND, the public quickly labels them as moral without much mechanism for verification.

This unintentionally turns charity into a “reputation market”—where the giver receives social recognition and can also achieve personal gain. When the community’s psychology emphasizes gratitude and admiration for the giver, that very psychology becomes the foundation for more sophisticated image manipulation in the age of social media.

The Philosophical Perspective: Charity as an Expression of Meaningful Existence

Philosophers since antiquity have viewed charity as an expression of moral life. Aristotle saw helping others as an act of exercising virtue, while Kant considered benevolence a manifestation of “good will”—acting for others, not for personal benefit. Eastern philosophy, conversely, emphasizes the connection between good deeds and inner balance. Confucianism praises renyi (benevolence and righteousness), and Taoism views helping as an expression of wu wei—doing what is right without claiming credit.

Entering the modern era, the philosophy of kindness remains crucial. People living amid the rapid pace of industrialization often feel empty, and charity becomes a way to fill that meaning. It helps individuals feel that their lives are not solely about material things but also create spiritual value for the community. Thus, both the rich and the poor find meaning in giving.

However, the philosophy of kindness is challenged when society places too much expectation on performative charitable acts. When an individual uses charity to assert their status, it is no longer seen as the anonymous act of virtue championed by traditional philosophy. This increases the conflict between ideal and reality, making the public sensitive and prone to suspicion toward any charitable activity linked to the media.

Theology: Major Religions and the Sacralization of Benevolence

In most major religions, charity is not just a moral act but a sacred duty.

Buddhism views dana (giving) as one of the six paramitas (perfections), a path that helps people shed greed and accumulate merit. The Buddha taught that giving not only helps others escape suffering but also helps the giver achieve inner liberation, provided the act stems from a pure heart, without seeking fame or profit.

Christianity views helping the poor as fulfilling the commandment: “Love one another as I have loved you.” Charity (agape) is central to the entire doctrine, and every act of sharing is seen as an expression of God’s love.

Islam has the Zakat charitable system—one of the five pillars—which requires adherents to share a portion of their wealth with the community. This is not only a religious obligation but also a social mechanism ensuring fairness.

The “sacralization” of charitable acts by religions makes them elevated in the collective consciousness. As modern society increasingly drifts away from spiritual values, the sacredness of compassion remains a pillar that helps people find faith in humanity.

But this very sacredness also places charity in a sensitive position. When someone exploits religious faith to manipulate donations or whitewash their image, the public reaction is many times stronger, as this behavior not only violates the law but also offends the community’s spiritual beliefs.

Why Has Charity Become a Tool for Image Promotion?

In a society where reputation holds great economic and political value, charity becomes a powerful communication tool. A celebrity can quickly improve their image by stepping forward to help the community. A business is viewed more favorably when allocating budget to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). And a political organization can solidify support through charitable activities.

Sociologically, this stems from “symbolic capital”—a term by Pierre Bourdieu, referring to the intangible value an individual or organization gains through community recognition. Charity is a quick and effective way to create symbolic capital because it taps into the public’s positive emotions.

From a psychological standpoint, the public always wants to believe in good people, and thus they are willing to accept the beautiful image being presented. A celebrity appearing before the camera while delivering gifts can have a stronger effect than dozens of marketing campaigns. Therefore, businesses and celebrities invest in charity not only for social responsibility but also for media benefits—a legitimate benefit that is easily abused when transparency is lacking.

Theology also helps explain this. When society views charity as a sacred act, the giver naturally receives a moral halo. Without an oversight mechanism, this halo can be turned into a shield to conceal other motives.

Consequently, charity becomes fertile ground for image display, and simultaneously an arena easily exploited if transparent oversight mechanisms are absent.

Distortions of Charity in the Modern Context

When society places too much expectation on charity but lacks oversight mechanisms, a series of distortions emerge.

The most common distortion is the ambiguity in donation calls. Many individuals or organizations without legal standing still call for hundreds of billions of VND without committing to an independent audit. When community trust is high but verification data is low, the risk of misappropriation arises. Several public scandals show situations where money is solicited in one way but spent another, or billions are held in personal accounts without transparent reporting.

The second distortion is using charity to evade taxes. In some countries, charitable funds can help businesses reduce taxes. When oversight is lax, the charitable fund becomes a facade, and the benevolent activity is merely symbolic. In some places, the phenomenon of “family funds” also appears—where money remains under the owner’s control but is recorded as a charitable contribution, turning tax obligation into a tool for asset optimization.

Another distortion is charity becoming an excessive means of self-promotion, diminishing the true meaning of the act of giving. When an individual’s image is more important than the person in need, when the number of livestream viewers matters more than the effectiveness of the aid, charity loses its inherent soul. In the social media environment, this is exacerbated as every charitable activity is staged like a media production.

These distortions make the public less trusting, creating a general wave of skepticism toward all charitable activities, even though the majority of people involved in charity are sincere and serious.

Public Concerns: The Crisis of Trust in Charity

When scandals involving ambiguity, misappropriation, or image exploitation repeatedly occur, the public begins to fear a commercialized culture of charity. The first fear is the loss of faith. When people no longer believe in calls for charity, those truly in need will suffer the greatest disadvantage. A society that loses faith in charity is a society that can no longer save itself in times of emergency.

The second fear is the decay of moral values. When charity is turned into a tool for profit, the sacred nature of the act of giving is eroded. This causes deep damage to the moral structure that religion, philosophy, and culture have built over thousands of years.

The third fear is the replacement of the role of public institutions. When society relies too heavily on charity, the state may face less pressure to build a robust social security system. If charity lacks transparency and the state also lacks clear responsibility, the public will fall into a support gap.

The final concern is the use of charity by some individuals as a media weapon to attack each other. When charity is linked to scandals, accusations, and image disputes, it is no longer a symbol of solidarity but becomes a dividing flashpoint.

Charity Needs Protection From Its Own Popularity

Charity always attracts social attention because it reflects the most beautiful values of humanity. Psychology proves that giving brings a sense of meaning, philosophy views it as an expression of virtue, and religion honors it as a sacred duty. But it is precisely because of this symbolic power that charity becomes a tool of abuse, leading to distortions stemming from a lack of transparency, personal ambition, and management loopholes.

What society needs is not to reduce the spirit of benevolence, but to protect it from ostentation and manipulation. Charity is only truly meaningful when focused on the person in need, not on the donor. It requires a transparent oversight system so that trust is not stolen. And more importantly, it needs to be restored to its original meaning: an act stemming from compassion, not turned into a tool for fame or financial gain.

Only then can charity maintain its proper role—as a bridge connecting people, as a light shining on the dark corners of life, and as a reminder that in a world of many changes, compassion remains the most enduring value.