LETTER | In a country where kindness is often celebrated as a national virtue, it’s difficult to watch three Malaysian content creators proudly film themselves handing a homeless man a parcel of rice with nothing but leftover chicken bones.

The video, posted on Instagram, begins with the trio happily enjoying a KFC meal. Then, in what they claim was a joke or “social experiment,” they wrap up the scraps of picked-clean chicken bones and hand them to a sleeping homeless man.

When he wakes and discovers the contents, his face falls. They film it all. The internet, understandably, erupts in disgust.

Later, one of the creators claimed the man had been given a proper meal beforehand and agreed to act in the video. But that does little to change the moral calculus.

Even if the man was paid, even if he agreed, the core message of the video remains the same: that a person’s vulnerability can be turned into spectacle. That those who have little can be mocked in exchange for clicks.

This is not a prank. This is punching down. And there should be a moral red line when it comes to creating content online.

In a digital era where anyone with a camera phone can become a “key opinion leader”, going viral has become a drug.

Social media rewards attention and not ethics, empathy, or decency. And when creators lack real talent or ideas, some turn to outrage bait and cruelty disguised as comedy. This isn’t new, but it’s getting worse.

To be clear: I do not believe in state censorship as the first resort. Government over-regulation of content carries real risks to speech, creativity, and political dissent.

We must always be cautious when addressing online harm, ensuring that any efforts to regulate content do not come at the expense of free expression or public trust.

But we cannot stand by and pretend there is no problem either.

What we need is not a clampdown, but a cultural shift. One that demands moral standards from creators, platforms, and viewers alike.

We need to ask: Why do we reward content that humiliates others? Why do we give likes, shares, and algorithmic fuel to people who exploit the marginalised for laughs? And why are so many creators seemingly unaware, or worse, uncaring, about the power they wield?

The creators in question claimed their video was meant to raise awareness. But here’s the truth: awareness doesn’t require cruelty.

If your method of advocacy involves mocking, tricking, or emotionally wounding someone in need, then you’re not raising awareness. You’re just being cruel.

The line between satire and sadism matters. Satire, at its best, punches up by challenging the powerful, critiquing injustice, and shaking the status quo.

What these young men did was the opposite. They found someone at the bottom of society’s ladder and used his circumstances as a prop.

That’s not bravery. That’s cowardice.

Social media platforms must take responsibility, too. Algorithms must stop promoting content based solely on engagement, without factoring in context or ethics.

Social media platforms and agencies like the MCMC must help by supporting digital literacy campaigns and ethical content guidelines. They should not just ban content after it goes viral, but do more to cultivate a healthier online culture in the first place.

Ultimately, the burden lies with us, viewers, creators, and citizens. We must set the tone.

We must remind ourselves, and each other, that content is not exempt from conscience. That virality without values is hollow. And that the measure of a society is how we treat those who have the least.

So to any aspiring content creator out there: punch up, not down. Use your platform to challenge injustice, uplift voices, and speak truth to power. But never, ever trade someone’s dignity for your one minute of fame.

That’s not content. That’s cruelty.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.