Since April 2014, Flint, Mich. has faced an ongoing water crisis. The event has been discussed by news stations, celebrities and politicians, yet remains unsolved. Now,
according to Deadline, the TV station LifeTime is planning a TV movie entitled “Flint” which covers the crisis. Though the movie has secured Cher as its lead actress, citizens of Flint have yet to secure clean water.

To recap the situation, the city has gone without clean water for almost three years now since it began sourcing water from the contaminated Flint River. Initially, the concerns were with the disease-causing organisms in the water, but in March 2015, it was revealed the water contained 397 ppb (parts per billion) of lead, according to CNN. The corrosive water of the river ate away at the lead pipes of the city, leading to rashes from the toxic water. Yet, despite this the“Flint”team still believes in making the movie.

To be fair, the “Flint” team said their goal for the movie is to shed light on the crisis. Additionally, Cher donated 181,000 bottles of water to Flint in January 2016 and has been active about the topic on Twitter. However, though this publicity will bring attention to the crisis, the revenue that is being put towards the movie could be better used.

According to IMDb, the  budget of a LifeTime movie is about $500,000, and according to the research company Nielsen, only 83,000 households receive the network. The movie may only have a limited impact on the small  audience it reaches.

Rather than spending $500,000 on a movie, LifeTime should take action and put the money towards the city. A 24-pack of Nestle bottled water costs $5.99, and with the predicted budget for “Flint,” LifeTime could donate about 2 million bottles of water. Better yet, it could donate to organizations that work to improve the water crisis .

In short, awareness of the situation is welcome, as keeping the issue in the minds of others may bring change. This kind of company has the resources to make real change if they care enough to do so, but as of now, it seems as though those involved with “Flint” would rather profit from a movie.