Shaun Groves
HIV and AIDS. It seems like everyone with a guitar and four chords has sung to defeat them. Every politician has stumped against them. Every movie star has worn a red ribbon. Every magazine has put the diseases on its cover. HIV and AIDS are popular.
They’ve been responsible for the spread of a new marketing form even. Causal Marketing – a form of marketing that is often more slogan than substance, and may do as much harm to our culture as it does good for others. According to the Washington Post causal marketing “soothes the compunctions of a mass-consumption culture at the same time that it contributes to that excess. It allows us to be giving at the same time that we are selfish.”
The RED campaign, for instance, asks us to buy designer clothes to help those with AIDS in Africa. Causal marketing. But the RED campaign has raised 11 million dollars so far. Is that even enough to pay the bills of their marketing blitz? They’re not saying. Style over substance?
All this makes me a bit cynical (OK, a lot of bits cynical) when it comes to AIDS related “causes.” I question motivations and effectiveness.
So it’s good to hear straight talk from Transition Pete about AIDS and HIV. What can really be done to combat this horrible disease in places like Africa? Find out.
Rebecca says:
And yet, since the introduction of campaigns like Red and One, this U.S. administration has tripled the amount of funding going to these causes from the previous administration, due to increased pressure and lobbying.
Marianne says:
There is an article about (Red) in Vanity Fair’s special Africa issue (July) that I read last week where Alex Shoumatoff throws out the phrase “Humanitarian self-indulgence?”
He does quote a source in his article who says that the participating companies foot the marketing bill from their existing marketing budgets. Don’t know.
I guess it’s brilliant (business) but messed up at the same time. Like in the case of teenagers, I would much rather my daughter and her friends raise funds and give through sacrificing something (or just doing without) instead of obtaining a “prize” for their contribution. I don’t think that’s a good thing.
Katherine Coble says:
Heh.
Great minds think alike
Shaun Groves says:
My favorite lines from your post, Katherine…
“I’ve never been a big fan of bragging about one’s charitable deeds. To my mind once you tell people about it, it ceases to be charity and becomes publicity.”
That’s a great discussion waiting to happen right there. Once we tell are we being charitable anymore? Goes to motivation. Does motivation in giving matter? Do whom? To the kid who gets a life-saving vaccine? To bloggers? To God?
Hmm…
Katherine Coble says:
Once we tell are we being charitable anymore? Goes to motivation.
To my mind it’s all kind of the “whited sepulchres” school of thought.
It’s why I’m very careful to seldom if ever reference anything I’ve done for charity, and also why conversations about stewardship are minefields as far as I’m concerned.
Christianity Today had a good article on the project (Red) awhile back, and you might especially enjoy buylesscrap.org
I don’t necessarily buy all of the arguments at BLC.org, but I do truck with some of their thought processes, especially about the conspicuous consumption angle.
Rebecca says:
I worked for a nonprofit attempting to cure a deadly disease. I lost people left and right… people I cared about and knew and loved, who were really good people and didn’t deserve to die (any more than the rest of us, anyway). But for no other reason than where they were born or their gene pool, they got stuck with a death sentence.
I worked in communications for that nonprofit. I spent a large portion of every week trying to provide the highest quality of work for the lowest cost, seeking sponsors, doing grunt work you only do at a nonprofit at the professional level I was at. And after spending hours and days trying to come up with the most effective and cost efficient way to produce a piece, I would often receive what could only be described as hate mail attacking me for daring to spend donations on such flashy pieces. Simultaneously, I would receive personal notes from the patients and families I worked with thanking me for letting them know what their chances were at beating this disease and what progress had been made… they hung on my every word.
When it’s people you care about, DEEPLY care about, with their lives on the lines, a discussion of the means with which you are attempting to save them becomes a luxury. You will do anything you can within your power, whether it be shouting from the rooftops, serving in the trenches, or giving every cent you can, to save them. Someone you love is unjustly dying, and sitting around discussing the best way is a luxury you can’t afford. You simply have to act. In any way you can. Now.
I lived in Africa. I fell in love with the people. I will support any effort to expose the devastation HIV/AIDS is bringing to those people, and get more people aware and involved. When I think of how many people could converse with me about the topic when I returned from Africa 10 years ago and the number of people who can knowledgeably converse with me about it today… when I compare the amount of funding these issues received 10 years ago compared to the funding they receive today… when I think of the number of people receiving the medication they needed then to the number of people receiving medication today… I can only be grateful.
Fay says:
href=”http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-easterly6jul06,0,5290414.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions”>this</a> article also offers a different perspective.
The money quote?
“Why do aid organizations and their celebrity backers want to make African successes look like failures? One can only speculate, but it certainly helps aid agencies get more publicity and more money if problems seem greater than they are. As for the stars — well, could Africa be saving celebrity careers more than celebrities are saving Africa?”
Fay says:
oops. sorry about the bad linkage.
Katie Larson says:
The good thing about the red campaign and things like Bono on American Idol is that a whole heck of a lot more people are talking about Africa and Aids and Poverty. I think that is still a very good thing, since we have ignored it and chosen to be ignorant so long. Now we even have Laura Bush talking about Aids releif….
Katherine Coble says:
think that is still a very good thing, since we have ignored it and chosen to be ignorant so long.
Ahem. That is not the case. I don’t know who you mean when you say “we”, but the United States has led the world relief effort for the African AIDS crisis for more than a decade. That doesn’t even begin to address what churches in the United States have been doing behind the scenes for AIDS relief for more than 25 years.
Katie Larson says:
Well I grew up in the church and christian school and NEVER EVER heard anyone talking about AIDS relief
Katherine Coble says:
Well I grew up in the church and christian school and NEVER EVER heard anyone talking about AIDS relief
Like the tree falling in the forest, AIDS relief does happen even if you don’t hear the sound.
I also grew up in church life and Christian Schools and I’ve been aware of and active in AIDS relief for more than 20 years.
Katie Larson says:
all my original post was ment to say was that it’s a good thing more people are talking about these issues. and I don’t think it can be denyed that more people, even more people in the church, are talking about these issues because of things like the red campaing and Bono…..I don’t think we as a church or America as a country were doing, or even are doing now, all that they could do about AIDS and I wasn’t meaning to nullify or downplay the importance of the work that has been going on before this.
Katie Larson says:
all that my original post was ment to say was that it’s a good thing more people are talking about these issues. and I don’t think it can be denyed that more people, even more people in the church, are talking about these issues because of things like the red campaing and Bono…..I don’t think we as a church or America as a country were doing, or even are doing now, all that they could do about AIDS and I wasn’t meaning to nullify or downplay the importance of the work that had been going on before this.
Shaun Groves says:
all my original post was ment to say was that it’s a good thing more people are talking about these issues. and I don’t think it can be denyed that more people, even more people in the church, are talking about these issues because of things like the red campaing and Bono
Absolutely agree, Katie. These programs are great at bringing about awareness. Here’s my fear. And I’m confessing upfront that I’m a cynic. But I also really really want to see the positive on this issue. Here’s my fear…
Is the chic-ness of “charity” these days going to do more harm than good in the future? Are we setting ourselves up to create another Gen-X (I am one) that looks at the generation before them (like I look at Baby Boomers) and sees a lot of noise and no real progress and THEN decides to check out.
Are we putting the immediate above the ultimate by putting buzz above progress in our priority list? YES, I care about kids in the third world but NO I’m not willing to do ANYTHING to help them today. I want to help them long term, which means I have to be choosy about HOW the help AND awareness are generated. I don’t want to hurt the cause because I want quick big bag results.
I’m not saying the RED campaign is a quick big bang result splash over substance type of program. I don’t enough to judge it as such, but some think it is and that is already hurting the cause it wants to help.
I want whatever we do for people in need to work. If it works then the idea will spread and people for generations to come will invest in it. If it’s mostly PR and marketing and the results don’t come soon (a drastic reduction in AIDs in Africa, for instance) then people who have invested in these programs will be more reluctant to invest in better programs in the future.
Is that a reasonable fear I have or am I being a cynical Gen-Xer again? ; )
shaunfan says:
Reasonable fear in my opinion, especially since in the article there is no confirmation of the advertising budget, which could mean it is over the $11 million it raised. I am also a Gen-Xer and I also want to see long-term change not just short-term thinking about such important issues. As a parent, I also want to help my daughters understand about how to keep the work of my generation going, which is why I’m excited about them hearing you talk about Compassion in person this weekend.
Katie Larson says:
actually, I’m pretty sure that’s a reasonable fear
Shane S. says:
Dang, I just got a (Product)RED iPod today.
Once again, just as I was feeling good about myself, you sucked it away!
But I kid. Thanks for making us really think about our actions, Shaun.
afAriah Fine says:
Thanks for sharing your thoughts
As you can see I have similar feelings on the subject
uk says:
People these days don’t like to give, unless people know they have given!
Look at me im wearing RED designer clothing ive given to charity!
or
Look at my charity wristband, ive given to charity!
Why dont people just donate all the money they would have spent on these products to a charity, get a piece of paper and write “I GAVE $x TO CHARITY” and duct tape it to there t-shirt.
web development says:
There is no cure for AIDS, which makes prevention so important. Combinations of antiviral drugs and drugs that boost the immune system have allowed many people with HIV to resist infections, stay healthy, and prolong their lives, but these medications are not a cure.
treatment says:
And this is the way things should be. In order to establish a certain point of health in our lives we need talk, promote the effects that these disease have all the time.