What a pointless argument.
People donate when it suits them, or when something prompts them to do so. How many donations are made by people who wake up one morning and think......"hmm I'll make a donation today, let me do some research so that I can find a deserving charity and support them in the long term"?
Not many. I assume the critics of people donating because of the Hammond accident have never given money to man in a shop-doorway, or bought a badge/flower/local equivalent from someone on the door, because it would be a donation made on the spur of the moment (the guilt-prompted kind of donation).
Besides all this: what gives anyone the right to questions people's motives behind a donation to a charity?
There are no "against" points when it comes to donations to honest charities.