[ SECRET POST #2634 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2634 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[Lady Gaga]


__________________________________________________



03.
[free!, attack on titan]


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.
(Panic! at the Disco)


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.
[Anarky]


__________________________________________________



10.
(Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D.)


__________________________________________________



11.
[Frozen]













Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 013 secrets from Secret Submission Post #376.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 1 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[fscom]

02. http://i.imgur.com/OInvC22.jpg
[Lady Gaga]

[(Anonymous)]

Woah, what the hell? Link?

[diet_poison]

Seconding.

LINK

[(Anonymous)]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2579040/Lady-Gagas-Born-This-Way-foundation-earned-2-3-million-paid-just-5-000-2012.html

Links

[(Anonymous)]

Googled and this is what I found so far:

http://www.showbiz411.com/2014/03/11/lady-gaga-foundation-spends-more-on-lawyers-publicity-and-consultants-than-on-charity

The tl;dr version:
http://gawker.com/lady-gagas-charity-donated-just-5-000-of-its-2-1-mil-1542463284

http://jezebel.com/lady-gagas-mother-defends-allegations-against-born-thi-1542959668

[(Anonymous)]

So when will it be investigated for fraud and Gaga thrown in the slammer?

[(Anonymous)]

It won't. From what I have read this is a non-issue.

[(Anonymous)]

Wouldn't be the first charity where the "administrative costs" take the lion's share of the money.

[(Anonymous)]

Probably never. A lot of charities do this: take in donations without people realizing that only a percentage of the money they donate goes to the actual cause and a lot of it goes to "administrative costs". I don't know that it's technically illegal even if it's really douchey.

[(Anonymous)]

Oh? Does anyone have the whole story?

[(Anonymous)]

Sources, please? I'm having trouble buying this.

Okay here are some sources

[kaijinscendre]

It seems that it may not just be a matter of "OMG they only spent $5000 on the charity!"

http://nypost.com/2014/03/12/lady-gagas-charity-short-on-actual-charity-tax-records/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cynthia-germanotta/speaking-out-for-lady-gag_b_4952424.html

http://www.theguardian.com/music/2014/mar/14/lady-gaga-denies-born-this-way-foundation-funds

Re: Okay here are some sources

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you for some sources I'm not embarrassed to have in my browser history.

Re: Okay here are some sources

[iggy]

Our activity has included The Born Brave Bus Tour, which has travelled to 23 communities, interacting with more than 19,000 young people and raising awareness to the tune of more than 300 million media impressions.

...That alone would cost uh---- far more than 5k, obviously.

I thought I already replied to this

[elephantinegrace]

Apparently not. Well, the point is, thank you for the links. The information will further my research into which charities to donate to, if I have any money left over.

[fauxkaren]

So basically it was a tax shelter for her money/promo for her album and tour masquerading as a charity?

[forgottenjester]

...Really? Why is this not on the news?

But really folks, check what you're donating to.

[(Anonymous)]

Why is this not on the news?

Because the news doesn't care what you're donating to.

[(Anonymous)]

Because it seems to be the result of a misunderstanding. They gave $5000 to other charities, they spent a lot more money on their own charitable activities. (I'm not sure how impressed I am with their charitable activities, but they were activities.)

[(Anonymous)]

TBH, I'm wary of any charity whose mission is "raising awareness about _______". It's not that the goal itself is worthless, it's just that it's really vague and could mean ANYYTHING. I could start a foundation about raising awareness about abused animals, raise thousands of dollars, then rent a billboard for a couple hundred bucks that says "Puppies are abused every year blah blah how awful blah please don't ever do that blah blah" and then pocket the rest as "expenses".

I like charities with concrete plans. Are you going to build a shelter for vulnerable LBGT teens? Fantastic! Fund an emergency hotline so they can get counseling/assistance? Great! But uh, you're going to rent a bus, ride around the country and randomly spread a warm fuzzy message about self-acceptance? No. Just, no. Not that this isn't a nice thing to do, but it's not a nice thing to do with millions of dollars donated to you by people who think you're going to accomplish more than what is, realistically, preaching to the choir.

[(Anonymous)]

Same here. I will admit in the past I have donated to a few actors favorite charities - but it has almost always been directly to the charity itself - not to the celebrity's foundation.

[rbhudson]

Have you met Gaga stans? They're pretty delusional

[(Anonymous)]

I'm not surprised at all. There are only two reasons that cunt does anything at all: money and attention. Is it any wonder she would hijack a good cause for both?

[(Anonymous)]

150 comments. Of which roughly a quarter are made by one anon attacking someone over posting a link to the daily Mail, another 25% by other people getting into a discussion with said anon, some other comments and less than half about the actual secret. Good times.

[(Anonymous)]

I know, right? It's like, why do I always miss all the good drama on F!S?