This is his wife blogging!

So George Clooney Endorses Nespresso, Doesn’t Mean He’s Insincere In Humanitarian Efforts

In case you’ve stumbled on to this post from an outside source, Here’s the context: a blogger at 66witches says why she thinks George Clooney’s humanitarian efforts are moot because he associates himself with Nestle–a crap corrupt corporation to the core (responsible for 1.5 mil infant deaths in Africa) while endorsing Nespresso–an environmentally degrading machine nobody in their right minds ever freaking wanted. I explained the whole thing about what the fuck is wrong with George Clooney endorsing Nespresso in the previous article.
Though an year too late, here’s my response for the article in 66witches:

Well, you can see me as clooneyfan here and I am not ashamed of being one even after reading your articles, many points of which I agree with.
In his defense George Clooney never claimed he was an environmentalist because he flies in private jets. He ‘publicly’ prefers convenience over all else.
But that is no excuse to prefer/endorse Nespresso’s machines. Surely anybody who had more than one cup of real coffee wouldn’t want such vacuum cleaned automated crap called coffee. I don’t. But since when have consumers world-wide started demanding products which they only absolutely need? Surely you’ve lived long enough to have heard people say they did not need computers!! And had the activism prevailed we would’ve been in a different world, wouldn’t you say? Definitely the Information Age, we so love right now would never have surfaced.
So if the generations to follow decide to prefer shiny aluminium (or hopefully some other Environmentally friendly packaging material) pods to coffee beans, could you hold it against them when you have given up on the sensibility of handwritten mails to the automated signatures of e-mails?
Pardon me, but this is how I would like to justify the existence of those wretched pods to myself, because at the end of the day, rant as much as I want, I would have control over my preferences alone and no one else’s.
(I would ask you here to think as a normal person who’s choices are based on ‘likes’ and ‘conveniences’ rather than an activist who’s choices are based on ‘what is right’)
So whether it is ‘necessary’ or not, George Clooney’s endorsement of the Nespresso machine is justified as far as the functionality of it is concerned.
So, those are my thoughts on 2 of your points:
1. The Environmental issue which I don’t have a stand on as long as George doesn’t proclaim himself to be an out and out Environmentalist.
2. The issue of whether we need the machine or not which I cannot summarize but you get the point.
Coming to Nestle’s widespread corruption, you are bang on. It’s nothing new, all these allegations on Nestle and I heartfully wish for the damn corporation to go down the drain. I have been an activist for Greenpeace’s campaign against Nestle “Ask Nestle to give rainforests a break” myself and have done a whole lot of reading regarding the same.
I also agree with you on the assumption that George Clooney knew all about Nestle’s wrongdoings having read Baby Milk Action’s press releases  among other justifying reports. He was definitely in the wrong in associating himself with a company like Nestle and I really hope George Clooney would stop endorsing the company’s products soon.
<Interruption from my original response at 66 witches>

As great (Oscar Winning) an actor George is, I can tell when he’s acting and when he’s not. In this video, for example, he is so not. You can see in every utterance, the earnestness to get the people in UN to hear. George is a smooth actor. When he’s acting he doesn’t stutter. SO PLEASE, HE IS NOT PRETENDING TO CARE

<Done fuming. Let’s go back to where we were.>

On the other hand, advocacy is the right of every concerned individual. And by individual I mean the simplest definitions of it which does not include multi-million-dollar-corporate-representations or a thirty-million-fanbase. I’ll come back here, but first consider this.

You might just be wrong that George Clooney ‘does not need the money’. It is estimated that 90% of his income originates from his endorsements. So, it would be a considerable dent in his earnings if he lost his biggest endorsement, wouldn’t it? You might not agree with me, but I’m sure his personal finance manager does and so would his investment partners and advisors.
Which is why I ask you to consider him as an individual alone and not what he represents or the finer (minuter) points of his income generation and its usage. It is a completely personal choice and it is utterly ridiculous and communist to discuss ‘how much he should earn’.
In a gist, about Nestle all I’m saying is, in addition to mouthing ‘Hollywood Whore’ I might also want to add ‘Business is Business’. Just to be fair.
So if such an individual who is moved by a cause dons the role of an advocate and dares to go against a lot of forces in voicing the troubles of an obscure nation of sufferers, I would totally support him despite what his lackings are.
At the end of the day, people in Darfur have been benefited, the situation in Chad had been enlightened and victims in Haiti have received relief! And what did George Clooney get from that except a felicitation here and there and a lot of flak because the way he earns his money is not 150% pure?
Someone who only ‘claims to care’ would not take off unassisted and unprotected to Chad with Pulitzer winner Nick Kristof. Someone who could be defined by the word ‘whore’ would not sacrifice the so-called personal gain for more than five years working for a losing cause, even while accepting he is losing it. Someone who ‘does not need the popularity’ and ‘is not running for president’ would not do what all George Clooney is doing unless he/she genuinely cares about a cause.
So please do not undermine his efforts where they directly matter just because he erred elsewhere along with some thirty-thousand-odd people also earning from the same place.
PS: No, I am not doing this to profess my undying love for George Clooney and I might or might not have done this for some other personality. But, I just wanted to throw some light on the positive aspects of his humanitarian efforts because a.I knew all about it and b. I am a bigger fan of reason than of George Clooney.
So I’d like to see if you can reason me out of this one 😛
<back to fuming, my fav pastime :D>
Just because he looks nice and suave doesn’t mean he’s slick or insincere.

George Clooney on Darfur

Maybe you’d like him more if he’s not his usual absolutely-terrific self. Throwing a beard on and some sad eyes good enough?

George Clooney on the Hope for Haiti telethon

Ok, fine, here’s One Hundred percent grungy! Let me know your thoughts.

George Clooney in Syriana. Screenshot

2 responses

  1. Joanne

    Just to clarify I am not a huge George Cloony fan nor am i a hater of him. I was probably leaning towards being a fan because, well he’s good to look at and from what i’ve seen hes a good actor, and although i knew he is a hollywood actor who’s job means he contributes in some way to an industry that isn’t always best for the environment, i’ve never really critized him alot because he doesn’t really come up in conversation in my life that is unless its about a film or chat show he was on and because his causes are so specific whereas i look at more causes and answers as a whole which i can acheive myself.
    However when he so publicly promotes (which encourages people to give money to this company) a product for a company that does and has done so many bad things to the environment and to many humans, how can i justify this action.
    “So George Clooney Endorses Nespresso, Doesn’t Mean He’s Insincere In Humanitarian Efforts”, your probably right, George Clooney does sincerly believe that he cares about human aid and human rights, perhaps he also believes he is not doing anything wrong by promoting a Nestle product. If he didn’t believe he was doing the right thing then surely he wouldn’t do it…? So if he genuinly cares and doesn’t think he’s doing anyting wrong then he must just be ignorant of the truth, even after all he knows about these issues?
    Luckily because as a fan you can ignore certain truths and facts and use random, unsubstantiated or estimated figures or ‘facts’ so that you can paint a picture that looks mostly positivily on your desired ‘celeb’, but then your arguments aren’t wholly based on reason as you said but are based on biased information which you gained firstly as a fan. Unfortunatly if you look at ALL the facts the ends up looking picture looking quite different.
    It is true that everyone makes mistakes and gets things wrong and it is easy for people to critize you when your famous.
    It is also true that George Clooney is not the only celebrity out there who is called a humanitarian or environmentalist or animal rights activist etc. and either makes a mistake in their life which they are slated for in the media or has abused his/her right to be called a humanitarian etc. by ignoring all those things they preach in public, in their personal lives.
    But in this case we are discussing Mr Clooney’s actions so i will keep on point.
    Why did he choose to say yes to promoting a company that has abused the environment and human rights repeatadly? I find it hard to believe that after all his supposed work for human aid that he doesn’t know what kind of company Nestle are, or why didn’t he research this kind of company beforehand before blindly agreeing to the deal. Is he that ignorant? Lets hope so because otherwise it means he didn’t care and gave up his principles for the money. Did he really ‘need’ this money? Was he really lacking in so much money that he HAD to promote this companies product? I highly doubt it, if you look at his incomings from movies and other endorsements then i doubt he would need this money unless of course he is as bad with money as he is with his choice of companies to endorse?
    I suppose i haven’t considered all his outgoings, that private jet that you mentioned, that must be expensive to look after and his homes and staff etc. Ok maybe he did ‘need’ all that money to pay for all those expensive things…but i’m still fairly sure he could of chosen a different project or company to work for, one that doesn’t go so directly against those issues that he is supposed to care about. Or maybe he could budget better or curb his spending like many others do, so they don’t have to work for companies that so obviously do bad things which they disagree with.
    On your other point, perhaps Mr Clooney has never claimed himself to be an environmentalist, but he hasn’t completly disregarded the need to care about the planet and you don’t need to commit yourself to a cause to care the planets ‘health’ in this way…but if you know anything at all about the abuse of human rights and the need for human aid then you would know there is a often big connections to many of the environmental issues too (some are obvious like issues such as flooding due to global warming and deforestation) and you would also know that a huge amount of abuse to humans goes on because of the oil and fuel industries! You infered that he isn’t bothered that he publicly cares more about his conveinience (by carelessly using lots of fuel for his private plane) than the environmental issues because they are not the issues he’s claimed to care about in public. You and he are admitting that they have no correlation to the human right or aid issues, which is i’m sad to say quite wrong. Going by what you’ve said, both you and he are disregarding the glaringly obvious connection that both the enviromental issues and many of the human right issues!
    Obviously he would have to take trips in planes for his job, and even for his ‘humanitarian’ work but it would be better for the enviroment and better for human rights and better for his fight in solving human aid if he did these trips using a shared form of transport, much like the average person using a bus or car pooling, he could use a plane where other people have paid to use it too and are then sharing that fuel making it ‘go further’ as more people are using it.
    You also mentioned his need to be more popular, no he didn’t need to be more popular by becoming a ‘humanitarian’ or by promoting another product but i can’t remember the times i’ve heard his name and ‘humanitarian’ put together like it was being pushed by his PR team. He also gets more coverage this way too as he now gets mentioned on the news, and in newspapers, you’d be surpised how good these things are for careers. I must also say that don’t believe all you read or hear in the news. How do you know he went unprotected to these places, the media? He is not the only celeb that is trying to fight for causes that might be hard or battles which are taking a long time, maybe you have not heard of them because they don’t seek the spotlight or you aren’t a fan of them. Remember George Cloony has got great PR looking after him and helping him keep his appointments. When George Cloony does good things it is never without the help of others but he would gain the biggest spotlight. I am not saying he doesn’t care about some issues but the problem is he seems to of picked certain causes to publicly fight for (which is great in many ways) but such as on this occasion it seems as though he is willing to put his ideals aside for money. You can’t tell people how they should earn their money but how can you trust someone who puts aside their principles to sell a product.
    As for the ‘need’ for this product he is promoting, well, that is a whole other issue that unless i make this comment even longer than it already is, needs to be saved for another time and place.
    So in conclusion, George Clooney can still promote Nestle products but in the end he is doing it for the wrong reasons and he is doing it in detriment of his fight for human aid and rights because many people will and have questioned his knowledge of these issues and also his (in your words) sincerity.

    May 22, 2011 at 9:46 am

    • Thanks for your comments Joanne. Duly appreciated. Sorry I took so long to approve!

      June 10, 2011 at 2:06 pm

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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