donor

Nov. 5 (UPI) — The disruption of federal benefits that help feed families spurred a Pittsburgh man to create a front-yard food bank to help others as the federal government remains shut down.

A.J. Owen. 36, resides in the Pittsburgh suburb of Whitehall, and initially started his ad-hoc food pantry after completing a $150 food run with his two sons about a week ago, according to TribLIVE.

Owen has large plastic bins containing canned goods and other foods placed on portable tables in his front yard for those who need food and for others to leave food donations.

“The amount of donations we received and the amount of people coming and getting food is both so gratifying and so horrifying,” Owentold TribLIVE.

“So many people need help,” he added, “and I’m so happy to be a resource for them.”

Owen said he initially started the food pantry to teach his sons about the need to help others, but it has become a much greater endeavor, as affirmed by a recent visit from Good Morning America and its cameras.

The single father notified others of his effort on social media, which resulted in additional food donations — including one donation that he said was thousands of dollars’ worth of $100 bills from an anonymous person.

He found the money stuffed in an envelope inside his mailbox with a note saying, “May God prosper and bless your food pantry,” Owen told ABC News.

“My body started shaking,” he said. “I started crying.”

He also said, “This was the best cry ever because whatever you want to believe, an angel truly came down and blessed us that day. And we’ve been good ever since.”

Owen didn’t say how much money was in the envelope, other than it added up to “thousands” of dollars.

He posted a video of the anonymous donation on social media, which drew millions of views and prompted others to visit and donate more food.

Among them were Pittsburgh Steelers defensive end Yahya Blackand his fiancé, who donated “tons of food,” Owen said on social media.

Owen did not say if his food pantry effort might outlast the federal government shutdown, which entered a record 36 days on Wednesday and temporarily disrupted funding of the federal government’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

President Donald Trump’s razing of the White House’s East Wing to build a ballroom has put some news organizations following the story in an awkward position, with corporate owners among the contributors to the project — and their reporters covering it vigorously.

Comcast, which owns NBC News and MSNBC, has faced on-air criticism from some of the liberal cable channel’s personalities for its donation. Amazon, whose founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post, is another donor. The newspaper editorialized in favor of Trump’s project, pointing out the Bezos connection a day later after critics noted its omission.

It’s not the first time since Trump regained the presidency that interests of journalists at outlets that are a small part of a corporate titan’s portfolio have clashed with owners. Both the Walt Disney Co. and Paramount have settled lawsuits with Trump rather than defend ABC News and CBS News in court.

“This is Trump’s Washington,” said Chuck Todd, former NBC “Meet the Press” host. “None of this helps the reputations of the news organizations that these companies own, because it compromises everybody.”

Companies haven’t said how much they donated, or why

None of the individuals and corporations identified by the White House as donors has publicly said how much was given, although a $22 million Google donation was revealed in a court filing. Comcast would not say Friday why it gave, although some MSNBC commentators have sought to fill in the blanks.

MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle said the donations should be a concern to Americans, “because there ain’t no company out there writing a check just for good will.”

“Those public-facing companies should know that there’s a cost in terms of their reputations with the American people,” Rachel Maddow said on her show this week, specifically citing Comcast. “There may be a cost to their bottom line when they do things against American values, against the public interest because they want to please Trump or buy him off or profit somehow from his authoritarian overthrow of our democracy.”

NBC’s “Nightly News” led its Oct. 22 broadcast with a story on the East Wing demolition, which reporter Gabe Gutierrez said was paid for by private donors, “among them Comcast, NBC’s parent company.”

“Nightly News” spent a total of five minutes on the story that week, half the time of ABC’s “World News Tonight,” though NBC pre-empted its Tuesday newscast for NBA coverage, said Andrew Tyndall, head of ADT Research. There’s no evidence that Comcast tried to influence NBC’s coverage in any way; Todd said the corporation’s leaders have no history of doing that. A Comcast spokeswoman had no comment.

Todd spoke out against his bosses at NBC News in the past, but said he doubted he would have done so in this case, in part because Comcast hasn’t said why the contribution was made. “You could make the defense that it is contributing to the United States” by renovating the White House, he said.

More troubling, he said, is the perception that Comcast CEO Brian Roberts had to do it to curry favor with the Trump administration. Trump, in a Truth Social post in April, called Comcast and Roberts “a disgrace to the integrity of Broadcasting!!!” The president cited the company’s ownership of MSNBC and NBC News.

Roberts may need their help. Stories this week suggested Comcast might be interested in buying all or part of Warner Bros. Discovery, a deal that would require government approval.

White House cannot be ‘a museum to the past’

The Post’s editorial last weekend was eye-opening, even for a section that has taken a conservative turn following Bezos’ direction that it concentrate on defending personal liberties and the free market. The Oct. 25 editorial was unsigned, which indicates that it is the newspaper’s official position, and was titled “In Defense of the White House ballroom.”

The Post said the ballroom is a necessary addition and although Trump is pursuing it “in the most jarring manner possible,” it would not have gotten done in his term if he went through a traditional approval process.

“The White House cannot simply be a museum to the past,” the Post wrote. “Like America, it must evolve with the times to maintain its greatness. Strong leaders reject calcification. In that way, Trump’s undertaking is a shot across the bow at NIMBYs everywhere.”

In sharing a copy of the editorial on social media, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt wrote that it was the “first dose of common sense I’ve seen from the legacy media on this story.”

The New York Times, by contrast, has not taken an editorial stand either for or against the project. It has run a handful of opinion columns: Ross Douthat called Trump’s move necessary considering potential red tape, while Maureen Dowd said it was an “unsanctioned, ahistoric, abominable destruction of the East Wing.”

In a social media post later Saturday, Columbia University journalism professor Bill Grueskin noted the absence of any mention of Bezos in the Post editorial” and said he wrote to a Post spokeswoman about it. In a “stealth edit” that Grueskin said didn’t include any explanation, a paragraph was added the next day about the private donors, including Amazon. “Amazon founder Jeff Bezos owns The Post,” the newspaper said.

The Post had no comment on the issue, spokeswoman Olivia Petersen said on Sunday.

In a story this past week, NPR reported that the ballroom editorial was one of three that the Post had written in the previous two weeks on a matter in which Bezos had a financial or corporate interest without noting his personal stakes.

In a public appearance last December, Bezos acknowledged that he was a “terrible owner” for the Post from the point of view of appearances of conflict. “A pure newspaper owner who only owned a newspaper and did nothing else would probably be, from that point of view, a much better owner,” the Amazon founder said.

Grueskin, in an interview, said Bezos had every right as an owner to influence the Post’s editorial policy. But he said it was important for readers to know his involvement in the East Wing story. They may reject the editorial because of the conflict, he said, or conclude that “the editorial is so well-argued, I put a lot of credibility into what I just read.”

Bauder writes for the Associated Press.

“Now You See Me: Now You Don’t” star Jesse Eisenberg may soon one-up the film franchise’s Robin Hood-esque Four Horsemen in the giving-back department.

This December, the Academy Award nominee and longtime blood donor will give one of his kidneys to a complete stranger, he said Thursday on the “Today” show. He slipped the news into a conversation with host Craig Melvin about a recent show-sponsored blood drive.

As Melvin and his co-hosts reacted in disbelief, Eisenberg said, “I really am [donating].”

“I don’t know why. I got bitten by the blood donation bug,” he said, adding that he was “so excited” to make the nondirected (a.k.a. “altruistic”) donation, wherein a living donor is not related to or known by the recipient.

According to the National Kidney Registry, approximately 90,000 people in the U.S. are currently in need of a kidney transplant, while roughly 6,000 people donate kidneys each year. Less than 5% of those already slim donations are nondirected.

Eisenberg said he suspected that if people knew how safe the process was, those numbers would go up.

“It’s essentially risk-free and so needed,” Eisenberg said in a separate interview with Today.com. “I think people will realize that it’s a no-brainer, if you have the time and the inclination.”

“The Social Network” alum added that prospective donors need not worry about forking over a kidney and later facing a situation wherein a family member urgently needs one.

“The way it works now is you can put a list of whoever you would like to be the first [relative] to be at the top of the list,” he said, referring to the National Kidney Registry’s family voucher program. The program launched in 2019, preceded by an earlier “standard” iteration that required the voucher donor to name a voucher holder who had some form of kidney impairment. (The standard voucher option is still available to donors as well.)

“Not only does this remove an important disincentive to living kidney donation, but it is the right thing to do for the generous people who are donating a kidney to a stranger. Donors can now donate a kidney and still provide security for their loved ones should they need a kidney transplant in the future,” Dr. Jeff Veale, who helped pioneer the voucher system, said in a statement at the time of the program update.

Recovery is also a non-issue for most kidney donors, who on average return to daily activities within a few weeks of the surgery, per the Mayo Clinic.

“Now You See Me: Now You Don’t” hits theaters Nov. 14, nearly a decade after the previous installment in the franchise premiered. Eisenberg stars alongside returning cast members Isla Fisher, Woody Harrelson and Dave Franco and newcomers Justice Smith, Dominic Sessa, Ariana Greenblatt and Rosamund Pike.