Typhoon Kim K. Blows Charitable Auction. Sort of.


November 23, 2013 by gregrabidoux2013


90% for me. 10% for them. Is there a problem here?

First, I come not to bury Kim Kardashian. There are a number of reasons why even thinking of any of the “Special Ks” irritates me. Not the least of which is “Mama K.” Honey Boo-Boo’s Mama June seems downright motherly compared to the Kardashian matriarch. And don’t get me started on the faux Kris-Krossed nuptials that allegedly bagged a cool $15 million for Kimmy and her siblings.

No, I must first applaud the soon-to-be Kimye West on at least the following;

1. Taking time from her various reality show-fashion empire to recognize or be made aware there was indeed a typhoon tragedy in the Philippines. So far so good.

2. Choosing several gently used designer-baubles to auction off on E-Bay for charity. Proceeds to help the Typhoon victims. Sweet. Maybe I’ve misjudged Kimye.

3. Selling aforementioned designer duds and pocketing 90% of the sale. Wait, what?

So, Kim keeps 90% of all the proceeds and 10% apparently will actually (hopefully) get to the victims towards staples like water, food, medical aid and shelter. It’s still a nice gesture, no?

Well, in the court of public opinion the verdict has been swift and nearly unanimous. The general blowback has been that she’s a greedy, self-serving fashion-wannabe who just parlayed her fame into (yet) more riches at the expense of victims of a disaster. Kim’s lawyer (uh-oh, once lawyers enter into the equation little good seems to follow) argues that essentially, Kim gives year round and this is the Kardashian standard operating charitable giving procedure. Thanks, we are all feeling better now.


Not sure if it’s baby North or bottles of champagne in there. Either way it’s well wrapped.

But, as I said at the top I come not to bury nor to throw effusive praise on Kim’s designer adorned back. As someone who has been involved with charities and non-profit advocacy organizations for over 20 years (just was in N. Africa this summer on relief work) public perception about giving and how much (or how little) actually gets to its intended recipients IS a problem. Both figuratively and literally.

Fact is, not enough donors or the organizations they give to do a good enough job when it comes to full disclosure. Far too many also eat up way too much of what they take in on administrative costs, salaries and expenses they could cut through smarter, more efficient and effective management. The good ones get it and make full disclosure and full share of donation to its intended recipient a priority. The ones not as good complain and say no one appreciates what they do. Sort of how many celebrities feel when they choose to give, all or partial to charities.

I’ve worked with a number of celebrities. Some on their way up, some already up, and some on their way down. Like many of us, they have a variety of reasons for giving. Some out of guilt, some for career positioning, some to be competitive with their peers. Honestly, I could care less their reasons. What matters though are really two things. One, the greatest amount of donation gets to the greatest amount of victims or folks who need the help the most. Two, the public sees that donations celebrities give or ones that regulars folks like you and I can scrape up to share are getting to where and whom it should and not gobbled up by bureaucracy, swollen salaries, elite lifestyles or worse, blatant corruption.

Just like the best charities, the celebrities that get it have learned that when it comes to giving it’s best to take control. Whether it is Bono of U2, Matt Damon, George Clooney and Don Cheadle, or Brangelina (Brad Pitt in the New Orleans re-build or Angelina Joile with refugee relief) they don’t just write checks or make a bit of space in their closet and auction items on E-Bay but they have a clear plan and a vision. They find experts to help with the plan and they make it their own cause-celebre. All of which tends to raise the odds that the PR is nearly as good as the giving and doing.


Say what you may but Brangelina are givers. Sorry, Team Jen.

Matt Damon

Forget Bourne’s legacy. Mr. Damon is leaving us all his own charitable legacy

So, to Kim and all the rest of the “Special Ks” I say if you want to be seen as genuinely being and doing good deeds do what you’ obviously already know how to do. You parlayed a salacious sex-tape and vicarious OJ trial fame into a reality-fashion empire. How? Have a clear plan. Take control. Make sure it’s in people’s faces nearly non-stop. And be ruthless about it.

It’s just that this time it would be for the greater good and not just for the Kardashian greater good.

But whatever you do, Kimye, don’t stop giving. Even if it hurts a bit. Because the world needs charitable giving a lot more than it does more designer bags encrusted with diamonds in the shape of a “K.”

Of this I am convinced.


Hollywood book by Greg R

Hungry for more on celebrities, politics and giving? Then go to www.amazon.com and click for my book on this dynamic subject. Go on Tiger, don’t be timid.






10 thoughts on “Typhoon Kim K. Blows Charitable Auction. Sort of.

  1. Aaliyah Houston says:

    I believe that giving is a great thing! I work for a non-profit organization and go to school full time with no pay. Yes, we are about to start a celebrity closet with proceeds going to the foundation but we’re also here helping families that the government isn’t helping. Kimye should definitely continue to give back. I rather it be from the heart but the main thing is that it’s being given.

  2. Christina Dixon says:

    First off, let me say this, wow. I enjoyed reading this article because it was serious but funny at the same time which kept me interested in continuing to read this. I think it is wrong that she is getting majority of the profit when really she should be getting less than 50%. I understand that she has been doing this for a while with all her profits when working with charity events however, she is already rich. The point of charity is to give majority of the profit so that it can make a big difference in other people lives.

  3. Aaliyah and Christina, serious and funny, yep, that sums me up all right! But more importantly, I agree with you both, people should keep giving AND majority of the donations must get to those who need it the most. How true.

  4. Brandon Braddock says:

    This article was very interesting, not really a surprise to me who has watched several episodes of her TV show. Kim just proves to be a selfish woman who pretends like she cares about other people problems. Most of the money should go to the charity it was meant for. She’s already loaded in my opinion, why does she need to keep 90%?

  5. Aaliyah Suggs says:

    Reading this article was pretty interesting because of the author’s sarcasm and attitude towards Kim k. I thought she should give a bigger percentage for the needy because normally all the proceeds would go to charity. According to this article, Kim k is not coming from a good place by being greedy compared to other celebrities giving back to help others and not themselves. I feel if a celebrity wants to get involved in a charity then he or she should give most of the donations to the needy while the rest goes to any costs needed to maintain the organization.

  6. chelly says:

    sad, very sad. the fake bubbled life style that leered us in and then.. popped right in our face with this revealing 90% point.. a big loss of what respect I had left after she become higher than thou and ghetto at same time with WEST ( his ego needs to get checked down to his height level) she tried pulling this one off with all her selfies and: what im doing today”… “look I have my body back thanks to starving myself and a personal trainer and chef telling me don’t eat..and my mom as a fulltime babysitter’ ” under all that…she is still starving for more money..90% .take what you can when you can how you can kim. . maybe have another 15 million dollar wedding to West ( oh ya NORTH is the “baby” GIRL ..strange again…) .. everyone DESERVES TO KNOWWHT is in that head when you decide… no lawyers, YOU DECIDE..why/how do you have to keep 90% from a DISASTER CHARITY, people still missing. the fans and others deserve an answer asap! don’t hide in you mansion house, or behind big tough West (lol) re this classless act and insult to the disaster and there people. with respect: would your dad approve of this lifestyle? or would he be ashamed?? he seemed to be the only level headed one re staying grounded. god bless him, and please do something about your daughters real heart .

  7. Cameron D'Aquila says:

    It’s all bullsh*t. All of it. What happens is the PR rep for the family . . . or for those zillionaires out there, tells them they need to give in order to up the ante on their so called stardome. IT makes me sick.

    I woke up one day and was absolutely inundated with Kardashians everywhere. And why? None of them are attractive. And as far as giving to the typhoon victims, whatever. Want to give to the victims? Give up one month of botox and have the proceeds go to the victims. That would surely be a quite nice yank of money. Not sure how much botox costs these days, though. Guess I will have to price check that one. And I will believe the Special K’s are giving to the needy just as soon as Paris Hilton actually obtains a real job and quits riding the coat tails of her parents.

  8. Dylan W says:

    I just don’t understand the Kardashians, famous for being famous is how I see it. As far as Kim’s “charity” work is concerned, in my opinion, its great that she’s giving SOMETHING in a effort to help someone other than herself. My problem is the fact that she is already wildly rich but still assumes that she should keep a whopping 90% of the profit from this “charity” work. She could obviously afford to give up a few more percentage points (say maybe 5, 10…or 60% more) and put forth a little more effort into actually trying to make a difference or help.
    I guess that’s what you can expect from a reality-TV star. Not trying to be rude, but I mean their baby’s name is North West. That’s the equivalent of if Alicia Keys named her baby Car…

  9. Casey Holcom says:

    When only 10% is donated, even if it does involve a cool goodie or whatever I’d much rather just donate to the cause. Unless she says upfront that only 10% is donated then I find it to be a rather cruel thing to do.

  10. Candus K. says:

    The reason the rich are rich is because they do not share. The Special “K”s are no different. She donates 10% of the proceeds to charity because that is what she can write off on her taxes. It’s actually sad that people that don’t have it are more willing to assist others than those that do. That goes back to the reason the rich are rich is because they do not share.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: