A recent online debate has placed questions of originality, activism, and public attention at the center of discussion after comments made by environmental campaigner Truphena Stephanie Muthoni.
Her response followed the rise of similar endurance-based challenges that appeared after her well-known environmental action, which involved hugging a tree continuously for 72 hours to raise awareness about conservation.
While addressing her followers online, Truphena made it clear that she was uncomfortable with what she sees as people trying to compete with or copy her initiative. She chose strong language to express her position and relied on a popular saying to underline her point.
In her message, she referred to what she described as a Zulu proverb to explain that imitation can never truly match the original effort. She later added a line that quickly spread across social media, stating, “A photocopy can never be original.” The statement was interpreted by many as a call for respect for originality rather than an attempt to block others from activism.
Alleged response from Truphena Muthoni.
According to her message, people are free to take part in awareness campaigns, but she believes that turning such actions into competitions risks losing the main goal. Her concern appeared to be that copying or extending challenges for attention could water down the meaning behind the original message, which in her case was focused on trees, conservation, and climate action.
She first came into the national spotlight after completing the 72-hour tree-hugging challenge, an act that attracted wide public attention and sparked conversations about environmental protection. Many people viewed the challenge as a symbol of commitment to nature and a reminder of the need to protect trees in the face of climate change and environmental destruction.
Her recent comments came after a pastor attempted a similar challenge, aiming to hug a tree for 80 hours.
The attempt drew heavy attention online, especially after the pastor fainted at the 79-hour mark, falling just one hour short of his goal. Videos of the moment and reactions from the public spread quickly across social media platforms, fueling debate and comparison between the two actions.
Public reaction to Truphena’s remarks was divided. Some online users agreed with her position, saying she had the right to speak up and protect what they called her legacy.
They argued that copying challenges simply for attention can shift focus away from real activism and turn serious issues into entertainment. To them, her message was about originality and staying true to purpose, not attacking anyone personally.
Others, however, saw her comments differently. Critics accused her of being jealous and argued that no one owns an idea when it comes to raising awareness.
They maintained that different people should be free to support environmental or social causes in their own ways, even if those ways resemble earlier efforts.