Just like many other celebrities that continue to make money of their lifestyle which isn’t something to applaud.
I believe Snoop Dog did his fair share of charity but I definitely don’t applaud his endeavors in pornography and drugs.
On the other hand I don’t have any idea if mr.Beast spends money on hookers.
But if I would choose which content should be more available on the internet I’d go with me.Beast not Snoop Dog.
Maimonides has a different viewpoint: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tzedakah
Is it better to give privately, knowingly kneecapping your capacity to do so again in the future?
Pablo Escobar gave free money away. Would you take the money? He also built schools.
Motive matters. His intents were to build loyalty masked as charity. MrBeast is building (or has built) something else, masked as charity.
I hope MrBeast never stop giving away money and curing people, but there are some considerations to make here, and not just taking as granted the reasons the very same person doing charity is clearly trying to transmit.
If Mr. Beast steals money to donate it I'd be against it regardless of motive.
Money given away doesn't have to have a "noble purpose", the act is good in itself. The people receiving it don't care about motive, I don't care about motive, and the only reason you care about motive is because you're threatened by another person doing good. There's no virtue inherent to giving anonymously. A piece of food or a warm house don't care about the intentions of the original owner of the money.
In fact the only reason I could see for someone pushing a narrative of "only some donations are good because of motive" would be to discourage donations, which I'm not sure why anyone would do unless they are utterly evil.