When sympathy becomes a currency

A video making the rounds on social media shows a man claiming he has lost over a crore of rupees in an online game. The scene is familiar — someone sitting distraught, narrating his misfortune, while the camera rolls. What usually follows is even more predictable. A flurry of social media posts appealing for donations, bank account numbers splashed across timelines, and, in some cases, families presented as victims to tug at our heartstrings.

But here is the uncomfortable question — does he really deserve help?
This is not a story of someone crushed by an unforeseen calamity, a sudden medical emergency, or a tragedy beyond their control. This is the story of the people who knowingly walk into a high-risk world of online gaming or gambling and lose big. Now, having played and paid, they seek public sympathy and, eventually, public money to bail themselves out.
In the age of viral empathy, the line between genuine need and self-inflicted crisis is blurring. Crowdfunding is now being misused to cover the cost of personal recklessness.

Should we, as a society, enable this trend? Should charity become a safety net for poor judgement?
Helping such cases does more harm than good. It validates irresponsible behaviour and creates a dangerous precedent. Make a video, go viral, and let collective guilt take care of your debts. Instead of pouring the money into such causes, the focus should be on regulating addictive gaming platforms, enforcing legal safeguards, and creating awareness about financial responsibility.

And let us be clear — this isn’t the first time we are witnessing such theatrics. Increasingly, social media is flooded with stories of individuals drowning in debt, making emotional appeals for help to liquidate liabilities through charity.
This raises two critical concerns.

First, where are the local community support systems and charitable organisations that claim to monitor and scrutinise such cases? Why is there no mechanism to verify the merit of these pleas before amplifying them?
Second, the trend of seeking financial help through social media — and worse, with the involvement of those who claim to practice journalism — sets a dangerous precedent. It normalises theatrics as a shortcut to charity while genuinely deserving individuals are left behind because they cannot stage-manage their helplessness online.

In the process, truth is being traded for performance, and empathy is being exploited.

Sympathy is a virtue. But when it becomes a currency for bad decisions, it is time to pause, question, and reset the rules of social responsibility.

Author is Sub-Editor at

Greater Kashmir