selfies

You've said it all - especially thatbags and rosesarered so I don't need to add my own reservations about the inherent narcissism of this campaign. At the risk of alienating breast cancer sufferers and survivors, however, I hope all cancer charities stand to benefit as there are many dare I say less high profile cancers (bowel, pancreatic, lymphoma to name just 3 close to my heart) which do not attract the same publicity and even sympathy . I would rather donate to Cancer Research- either sponsoring participants in the Race for Life, or even doing it myself as I did the year DH was diagnosed with Lymphoma, raising over £1000 from incredulous supportive family and friends.This latest campaign is clever marketing and I am not knocking fundraising or the supporters of cancer charities, but rather like wearing a pink ribbon to "raise awareness" I don't basically get it.

Cancer Research UK covers all cancers.

I know it does - which is why I fundraised for them when DH had Lymphoma. Does the money raised by these "selfies" go to Cancer Research then?

It does soutra and tonight they've announced that the selfie campaign has raised over two million pounds. Which is amazing.

Dragonfly said it does. Don't go on facebook myself.

Yes, I think it does, Soutra

crossed posts

I've just posted CRUK's photo from earlier on the thought for the day thread.

Sali Hughes in the Guardian says...

From the Independent...

I'm another who doesn't like the make up free selfie thing on Facebook, I'm uncomfortable with the idea that it is brave to be seen barefaced. It does seem to me that the expected response is to tell the poster how 'stunning' she looks anyway. I've been nominated but ignored it.

Who cares what these people say? It's just their opinion and they are professional journalists not gurus.

We're grown woman and can make up our own minds whether to post selfies or just donate. I'm sick of being told what to do or not to do. As it happens I wouldn't want to post a selfie with or without make up, but FFS what's all the fuss about?

Live and let live.

I like to know other people's opinion's, aka, especially if they happen to write well too. I deliberately posted links to two different outlooks on the selfie phenomenon.

Besides, I think such articles reflect opinions in the rest of society. I don't think newspapers lead our thinking; I think they reflect it.

Thanks for the link bags.
Good analysis from Sali Hughes.

I felt quite brave putting my bare face on FB as I look awful (in my own opinion) with out any makeup.

As I have already said, I wear very little but I feel better with it. In no way am I sad or a victim - I just feel better with a very small amount of make-up.

I think the media lead many people's opinions.

I might need to read newspapers or watch the news to get an idea of the ongoing crisis in Syria, or the facts about the budget (in fact where else would I get this information?) but I do not need anyone else's opinion to make up my mind on little issues like this and neither do most of GNetters

I agree with you Aka, so that's why it's so important for the media to get their facts right or things get out of hand.
Sorry - getting away from the original thread here.

Thanks for the links B. Interesting to read differing views.

There's a saying that says 'every picture tells a story'. Well, it depends upon what one sees. Perhaps some see selfies as a narcissistic, armchair led and lazy way of promoting fund raising. It can also be fun.

So what lies behind the bare face. I have a friend. A young mother with two teenage children, a husband with inoperable spinal cancer. She is an upbeat, funny and outgoing young woman, who involves herself in raising funds for cancer research. Just does it. Doesn't bang on about it. She posted a selfie on fb. I don't have a problem with that. The picture itself isn't brave, but how she lives her life is.

No question of needing, aka. I expressed my views yesterday on here before I'd read or heard anyone else's in the media. So, for me, it's just a matter of information about others' views when they become available.

I looked at the Telegraph and the Daily Mail too.

There's a radio programme called "What the Papers say", isn't there? That suggests that quite a few people are interested in other people's views. Plus the fact that people read newspapers and listen to TV news programmes, etc etc.

I' think this issue is less about facts than about ideas. I am aware that the news media often gets very low marks, so to speak, on accuracy of reporting.

I think it's called having an interest in current affairs, this reading newspapers malarky.

If people weren't interested in what other people think, as well as news, Radio 4 would have gone off the air long ago, and many publications would be out of print too!
Please don't include me in your generalisations Aka!

I'm sure a lot of people, like me, donated without putting a barefaced selfie on facebook so it's been a successful campaign and has raised a lot of money that has taken CRUK by surprise.

It can only be good but I do agree with some of the sentiments in the articles.