Mitchell Gibbs, the director of development at Front Steps, the shelter that houses the project volunteers, said he advised Mr. Radia on how best to set up the program. He said he was surprised by all the criticism of the project, which he said had inspired an “entrepreneurial spirit” among its homeless participants.
“It’s an employment opportunity, regardless of who is offering it,” Mr. Gibbs said.
The human hot spots seemed unconcerned as well. One volunteer, Clarence Jones, 54, said he was originally from New Orleans and became homeless in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
“Everyone thinks I’m getting the rough end of the stick, but I don’t feel that,” Mr. Jones said. “I love talking to people and it’s a job. An honest day of work and pay.”
We’ve come full-circle on this whole thing. Probably the best take we’ve seen on this debate is from Megan Garber of The Atlantic, who argues that it’s not as bad as it might seem. “Yes, it’s gimmicky; yes, it’s weird; yes, it’s initially kind of offensive,” she writes. ”It’s right that our gut reaction to Homeless Hotspots is disbelief and disgust; it’s right that we’re alarmed at the idea of turning people into platforms. It’s also right, though, that we take the next step to ask ourselves: What’s the alternative? That we go on ignoring homelessness?” If we had to choose between the two, the bigger problem here is not the hotspot, but the homelessness. Having seen the results and getting feedback from readers, we can say this: This is a gimmick, and in the end, one more effective at causing anger than solving the problem; homelessness is the real deal. The thing you should take from all this is that you should figure out a way to help, sans gimmicks. (ht Melissa Weigand)
Earlier today, shortformblog defended its moral compass in describing the enlistment of homeless people to follow visitors to SXSW around as human 4G hotspots - for $2 - as cool, innovative and well-intentioned. Turns out that the people behind the initiative aren’t some charity, but the New York branch of the global advertising agency, BBH.
A fact which they do not hide:
Since then, we’ve stayed interested in the homeless issue. One particular aspect we find intriguing is Street Newspapers, which are print publications created and sold by homeless populations as a form of entrepreneurial employment. The model has proven successful enough to be adopted in cities spanning 30 countries. The issue however, is that like any print publication, these newspapers are under duress from the proliferation of digital media. How often do you see someone “buy” a paper, only to let the homeless individual keep it? This not only prevents the paper from serving as a tool for the individual to avoid begging, but it proves how little value people actually place on the publication itself. Yet the model isn’t inherently broken. It’s simply the output that’s archaic in the smartphone age.
So we decided to modernize it.
The organization has previously worked with homeless organizations, last year creating the Underheard in New York program, which gave the homeless a voice on Twitter. There is room to improve the basic idea behind this, but let’s be fair; this is not a new endeavor for them. Organizations have charitable arms, and this affiliation was clearly noted in the original post. I’ve long been a defender of the street newspaper model as a way to help the homeless get on their feet. When I saw the story this morning, I looked at it through that prism. Ultimately, the issue remains the same: How can you help the homeless and give them a way to sustain themselves, to pick themselves up? Perhaps this isn’t the idea that solves the problem; let’s use it instead as a jumping-off point to think of a solution. — Ernie @ SFB
Copyright 2009-2013 Ernie Smith • Ask us stuff! • E-mail us • Follow us on Twitter • Follow us on Facebook
