While attending a family get-together the other night, I got into a bit of a spirited discussion with my younger brother. Somehow, the topic came around to corporate-sponsored charity drives in general, with the center of contention being a local Thanksgiving dinner-generating/food-bank-filling event sponsored by Rosauers supermarkets and heavily pushed on KREM (our local CBS affiliate), especially on and around their news broadcast, for about a month before the two-day event. While most at the table thought the month-long lead-up was just overdone, I took the darker view (as I often do) that those two corporate entities had effectively hijacked the whole proceeding, taking it from the realm of "let's help the needy" to "see how good we are, getting all of you to help the needy". My brother took umbrage at that, and argued the position that, since corporations can't be expected to act altruistically (which I fully agree with), they should be lauded for whatever charity work they do engage in, no matter how much they profit from the exercise (which I emphatically do not agree with).
Of course, as always, the possibility exists that I'm playing the ass, with respect to the norms of society... so, what do you think? Where do you draw the line between corporate charity and corporate self-aggrandizement? Is there such a line at all?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
One of the most successful corporate charity endeavors is the Pink for Breast Cancer campaign. And the reason most companies take part in the campaign isn't because there is a particularly large upswing in sales because of the altruistic possibilities, but because they can subtly associate their brand with breasts and thereby sex.
Also those "for every purchase you make, we will make a donation..." lines aren't real. Charities ask for a finite and defined donation in return for using their charity brand in a campaign. If you want to know how much, look at the fine print. Most will say "donations up to $100,000 or similar. That "up to" amount is the contract amount, whether you purchase the product or not.
So yay for corporations making large donations to charities. And boo for making people think they have to purchase products to make that donation happen (which, I guess you do if you want the company to make that type of donation again in the future).
I guess that's the line for me... I have no problem with purely "associational" charity, whether it's for "teh boobies" or something like game developer Naughty Dog, who sponsored a section of their local animal shelter, with only a sign at the shelter to announce the fact. Improving your company's standing in the eyes of your customers, whether it results in a direct up-tick in sales or not, is OK by me. Using a charitable event to drive business to your store, especially under the guise of "your purchase matters!", not so much.
Post a Comment