/Shaq Ignites Twitter Backlash Over Shameless $500 Contest – CCN Markets

Shaq Ignites Twitter Backlash Over Shameless $500 Contest – CCN Markets

NBA Hall-of-Famer Shaquille O’Neal ignited a Twitter firestorm this week when he launched what can only be described as the Kazaam of animation contests.

Shaq, it seems, needs content for a new show called Shaq Life. But rather than hire employees to do the work, he decided to farm it out to volunteers who stand to receive a ridiculously paltry $500 in prize money if their “Shaqtoons” get featured on Shaq Life.

Shaq made over $700 million in his career, and he credits Jeff Bezos with teaching him investing strategies that have helped him grow that nest egg even further.

Apparently, those strategies did not include paying the people who work for you a living wage.

Twitter Slams Shaq for Trying to Rob Artists

Anyone who nicknames himself “The Big Aristotle” should at least have the common sense to understand that the most patronizing thing you can do to an artist is ask them to work for “exposure” (read: free).

You cannot feed your family with exposure, let alone buy the expensive equipment necessary to produce Shaq Life-worthy animations.

Twitter was quick to call him out:

But wait, there’s more!

But like any sleazy contest, the deal gets even worse when you read the fine print.

If you thought winners got a raw deal, just wait until you hear what’s in store for the losers:

shaq animation contest
shaq animation contest
Like any sleazy contract, the Shaq Life contest gets even worse when you read the fine print. | Source: TNT

That’s right, on top of missing out on the oh-so-fantastic $500 grand prize, Shaqtoon rejects also surrender the rights of their submission to TNT.

This is such a disappointment coming from Shaq, one of the sports world’s most beloved personalities who went viral not too long ago for being an extremely generous tipper.

But why dole out $4,000 to your waiter when you can hire eight animators instead!

Disclaimer: The views expressed in the article are solely those of the author and do not represent those of, nor should they be attributed to, CCN.

Original Source