Thursday, May 10, 2007
An envoy appointed and a bit on CSR
A bit groggy this morning. Woke up at 5:30am to speak at a Rotary Club meeting early this morning.
I found this story within the news section of the GiveMeaning site.
It's long over-due and it will be interesting to hear Mr. Giujin's official statements.
In other news, I found this article through my Google Reader this morning talking about different approaches to Corporate Philanthropy. Though it is specifically referring to Australian companies, it's good reading for anyone in corporate philanthropy as it raises the question that I think needs more conversation around: "Are corporate donors dealing with the real needs of the sector or are they more inclined to fund high-profile, simplistic, and sometimes ineffective, feel-good projects?" is the question asked by Niall Mulligan.
The answer should be both and at first blush, it might seem unfair to generalize but I do see this distinct dichotomy that the author flags. There is a new breed of community engagement consultants who are emphasizing "high-touch" projects that can mobilize their client's employees in ways that a three-year capacity grant to a sexual assault centre can't do. When these high-touch projects are designed more around looking and feeling good then around an impact/investment ratio, there is cause for concern.
I've been harping on this theme all week - the "feel good versus the know good" which may in fact be the perfect play on words.
On point, I'll leave you with this link from - of all places - PerezHilton.com. It's a strange day when Clay Aiken has got something poignant to say about what was missing from Idol Gives Back"
I found this story within the news section of the GiveMeaning site.
It's long over-due and it will be interesting to hear Mr. Giujin's official statements.
In other news, I found this article through my Google Reader this morning talking about different approaches to Corporate Philanthropy. Though it is specifically referring to Australian companies, it's good reading for anyone in corporate philanthropy as it raises the question that I think needs more conversation around: "Are corporate donors dealing with the real needs of the sector or are they more inclined to fund high-profile, simplistic, and sometimes ineffective, feel-good projects?" is the question asked by Niall Mulligan.
The answer should be both and at first blush, it might seem unfair to generalize but I do see this distinct dichotomy that the author flags. There is a new breed of community engagement consultants who are emphasizing "high-touch" projects that can mobilize their client's employees in ways that a three-year capacity grant to a sexual assault centre can't do. When these high-touch projects are designed more around looking and feeling good then around an impact/investment ratio, there is cause for concern.
I've been harping on this theme all week - the "feel good versus the know good" which may in fact be the perfect play on words.
On point, I'll leave you with this link from - of all places - PerezHilton.com. It's a strange day when Clay Aiken has got something poignant to say about what was missing from Idol Gives Back"
Labels: causemarketing, charity, csr, idolgivesback, marketing, media, philanthropy
Friday, April 13, 2007
These guys are my heroes!
I have never been so excited about a group of people or an idea (other than GiveMeaning) as I am about the guys at DirectCurrentMedia
They are producing a series called 4Real that uses celebrities to bring exposure to some of the most amazing human beings on earth! I've blogged about my cynicism about pairing celebrities with cause.. What makes these guys different is that the celebrity is nothing more than the eyeballs. This is not about showing their halos, its about them just being participants in the experience.
The people that are featured on 4Real are community leaders who have made and continue to make massive progress on behalf of their communities despite conditions and environment conspiring against them.
I had a meeting scheduled with them yesterday afternoon and then brought them out for drinks late last night.
These guys are just getting going but I predict will be a major force.
They are producing a series called 4Real that uses celebrities to bring exposure to some of the most amazing human beings on earth! I've blogged about my cynicism about pairing celebrities with cause.. What makes these guys different is that the celebrity is nothing more than the eyeballs. This is not about showing their halos, its about them just being participants in the experience.
The people that are featured on 4Real are community leaders who have made and continue to make massive progress on behalf of their communities despite conditions and environment conspiring against them.
I had a meeting scheduled with them yesterday afternoon and then brought them out for drinks late last night.
These guys are just getting going but I predict will be a major force.
Labels: activism, causemarketing, directcurrentmedia, media, tv, world
Thursday, January 25, 2007
A word to the wise
I'm still trying to figure out which was worse: Jennifer Garner's new movie "Catch & Release" or the smell of the middle-aged woman sitting next to me who kept burping the most horrid smell. Combined, it was a lethal combination. Even though it was a free screening, I feel like I should be reimbursed for my time.
Speaking of movies, the Beeb posted this article on an Oscar-night celebrity promotional campaign being organized by the US Diamond industry.
According to the article, the campaign called Raise Your Right Hand Ring for Africa campaign will donate "$10,000 (£5,000) to African charities for each star raising a hand with a ring at events including the Oscars."
The article quotes the director of the recent movie Blood Diamond as pointing out the cruel irony "that the raising of one's hand and the using of one's hand to vote was the prompt for the Revolutionary United Front to chop off hands in Sierra Leone (where the movie chronicles the use of diamonds to fuel the bloody civil war that killed tens of thousands of people and displaced over a third of the country's entire population).
The spokesperson for the Diamond Information Center (the group organizing this promotional campaign) said in response to Blood Diamond's director: ""It's sort of strange that someone who is apparently so concerned about the needs of Africans is making public statements to stop jewellers from making large amounts of money available to African charities. It's unfortunate because it may be that people hear this and hear this very unfortunate connection that has been constructed, and decide not to do it."
The spokesperson goes on to say "The people who would be hurt by that are the beneficiaries of the charities."
Now that's quite literally a bloody cheek. Diamond Exporting from Africa is a hundred billion dollar business. If the Diamond Industry really was concerned about "beneficiaries," they'd concern themselves with the disgusting wages and working conditions of the diamond miners.
This is another example of "social responsibility done wrong." Listen, TMZ.com is the first site I read in the morning, I buy Us everytime I'm on a plane. So this campaign is geared at people like me, people who are influenced by celebrity culture. And I just hope that my fellow Us readers and TMZ surfers see this campaign for what it is. An ironic, insincere, and crude attempt at buying a little good PR.
From a cause-marketing perspective, the lesson here is that "poorly executed cause-marketing" does more to hurt your brand than help it. The idiots who conceived of this campaign are of the same ilk that thought-up Dove's failed attempt at stimulating viral but ended being mocked and angrily criticized by the YouTube community.
Speaking of movies, the Beeb posted this article on an Oscar-night celebrity promotional campaign being organized by the US Diamond industry.
According to the article, the campaign called Raise Your Right Hand Ring for Africa campaign will donate "$10,000 (£5,000) to African charities for each star raising a hand with a ring at events including the Oscars."
The article quotes the director of the recent movie Blood Diamond as pointing out the cruel irony "that the raising of one's hand and the using of one's hand to vote was the prompt for the Revolutionary United Front to chop off hands in Sierra Leone (where the movie chronicles the use of diamonds to fuel the bloody civil war that killed tens of thousands of people and displaced over a third of the country's entire population).
The spokesperson for the Diamond Information Center (the group organizing this promotional campaign) said in response to Blood Diamond's director: ""It's sort of strange that someone who is apparently so concerned about the needs of Africans is making public statements to stop jewellers from making large amounts of money available to African charities. It's unfortunate because it may be that people hear this and hear this very unfortunate connection that has been constructed, and decide not to do it."
The spokesperson goes on to say "The people who would be hurt by that are the beneficiaries of the charities."
Now that's quite literally a bloody cheek. Diamond Exporting from Africa is a hundred billion dollar business. If the Diamond Industry really was concerned about "beneficiaries," they'd concern themselves with the disgusting wages and working conditions of the diamond miners.
This is another example of "social responsibility done wrong." Listen, TMZ.com is the first site I read in the morning, I buy Us everytime I'm on a plane. So this campaign is geared at people like me, people who are influenced by celebrity culture. And I just hope that my fellow Us readers and TMZ surfers see this campaign for what it is. An ironic, insincere, and crude attempt at buying a little good PR.
From a cause-marketing perspective, the lesson here is that "poorly executed cause-marketing" does more to hurt your brand than help it. The idiots who conceived of this campaign are of the same ilk that thought-up Dove's failed attempt at stimulating viral but ended being mocked and angrily criticized by the YouTube community.
Labels: africa, blooddiamond, causemarketing, diamonds, entertainment, marketing, online, oscars
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]