Privileged viral math obscures real need

When affluent commentators recast poverty lines using misleading arithmetic, the resulting viral controversy distracts public energy from measurable deprivation and high‑impact relief options. Redirecting that attention (and donations) toward transparent, effective charities (e.g., GiveDirectly) both avoids analytic noise and produces concrete material benefits. — This reframes media storms about 'who is poor' as a governance and philanthropy problem—misleading viral claims can be countered by emphasizing validated measures and by nudging resources to proven interventions.