Seeing Red
New York
Strolling through Times Square last year, Ben Davis was struck by the endless ads for (RED)—the Bono-fronted campaign that sends proceeds from the sale of red-colored, (RED)-branded products to the Global Fund, an organization devoted to fighting AIDS, malaria, and tuberculosis. He was bothered by the strange mix of charity and consumerism: “I thought, ‘Wouldn’t it be better to give money directly to the charity?’” That option, however, isn’t available at participating stores like Gap and Apple, nor can it be found on (RED)’s website. So he launched the Buy (Less) campaign, a tongue-in-cheek send-up of (RED)’s ads, with posters calling the program “meaning(less)” and a petition beseeching (RED) to allow giving to the Global Fund directly rather than merely as an afterthought when buying an iPod.
Like this article? Tell the world It's Good!
2 votes
Yes!
I agree, and I hope many more people will come to see that half-hearted idelaism with little to no real sacrifice is hardly what it means to do "good" in our world. I find it sad that in our country, we can buy a 5 dollar latte at Starbucks while donating 10 cents to charity and actually think we have really made a difference. It's all just consumer driven greed masked in guilt reducing opportunism. This has sadly become the hallmark of the socially confused, well intentioned but greedy, self-centered culture in which we live. I hope people like Ben Davis are able to educate us about what it means to trully give in a world of so much need. Not as an after thought to my brand new $300 IPOD, but as a $300 donation to someone who might not even know (or care) what an IPOD is.
Posted on June 13, 2007 — by bnfleming
0 comments
1 vote
Side note: $25 < $100
Gross of (RED)
In an article in I.D.'s June issue they state that (RED) "raised $25 million to date from consumer purchases after spending an estimated $100 million of it's corporate partner's ad budgets."
It just doesn't make any sense.
Posted on June 13, 2007 — by keriharvey
0 comments
2 votes
Seeing (RED)
I hope Ben Davis rankles everyone connected to (RED) so they rethink their approach. This campaign is second only to Bush's post 9-11 mandate, "let's go shopping". When we all watched the Oprah-Bono TV launch of the (RED) campaign, we were transfixed, but in a horrified way: B&O arrived in a chauffered limo and purchased stacks of (RED) T's -- all without any display of money -- then asked viewers to "buy RED". Buy (RED), no; see red, yes. Like others, we give directly to non-profits, bypassing the consumer craze entirely.
Posted on June 16, 2007 — by barbarella
0 comments
1 vote
manufacturing
I'd also be curious to see where, by whom, and under what conditions these "Red" t-shirts are being manufactured, not too mention the amount of oil that is consumed to transport them all over the world.
Posted on June 27, 2007 — by deborahbassett
0 comments
2 votes
From the "If you can't beat them, Join them" Dept.
I don't disagree with the basic notions behind the critiques of the RED campaign, namely that encouraging consumerism as a strategy to address a problem created, in part, by unchecked materialism seems like a short-sighted idea. However, let's be fair, it would be oversimplifying the equation if we argued "Why don't these companies just give the $100 million they spent on ads directly to the cause instead of spending it on marketing the RED products which generated "only" $25 million?" The same rationale could lead to: "Why does GOOD magazine "waste" their money on raising awareness? Why don't they just give the money it costs to publish a mag and maintain a website directly to a cause?" Last time I checked the Gap and Apple are into selling things, not giving their money away. My guess is the RED outlets never generated anywhere near $25M before this campaign and the teenagers buying the stuff had never thought to give a buck to a worthy cause like the Global Fund. That sounds like a win to me. As for promoting more consumerism than already exists...now that would be impossible.
Posted on July 12, 2007 — by wyzguy
0 comments
not yet rated
couldn't agree more...
After traveling through Kenya in June, seeing lots of poverty first hand. I also saw the lives being changed by good people with good motives who really just need people to be more generous. They need money to provide food and shelter and education for kids orphaned by HIV/AIDS.
Bono is not stupid though. He knows the people who he wants to give more money to the Global Fund. They are consumers, plain and simple. So in that way, it's a brilliant marketing campaign that feeds into the Western idea for more stuff. This would be a better idea if ALL of said proceeds were able to go directly to the people.
However, I also learned that much of the money sent towards monetary watch-guards gets hung up in administrative cost of running the operation. Meaning that only about 10 to 20 cents on the dollar actually gets into the hands of the child.
I think its a shame that you have to make it trendy to give money towards a good cause. I think that it's too bad that people giving out that money need Range Rovers to drive around in.
There's got to be a better way. There is an organization called Mully Children's Family doing great social justice work in Kenya. When you give directly to them, ever cent of your dollar is used to rescue, feed, clothe, and educate children from the slums of Nairobi. Check it out if you have the time.
Great article.
Peace.
Dan
Posted on July 28, 2007 — by danscott77
0 comments
1 vote
(RED) is Point(LESS)
I was so happy to see this article--finally an opinion voiced that mirrors my own. It's absolutely sickening to see the facade of philanthropy being fed to the American consumer through dontaing a miniscule amount of profits to a worthy cause. It's time that people dissassociate themselves with this incredibly flawed consumer mentality.
That being said, I do see a bit of a correlation between buying a product from the (RED) campaign and buying a subscription to GOOD magazine. While this is definitely my favorite publication, it's just ironic that an article like this would appear in a magazine that bases itself in gaining subscribers through the uses of non-profits, when in reality the increase of subscribers really helps increase ad rates.
Great article, though, and, as always, great issue.
Posted on August 9, 2007 — by orchards
0 comments
not yet rated
Problem/Reaction/Solution
Depleted Uranium has created sick soilders, sick babies, deformed DNA and leukemia from Bosnia to the Middle Eastern countries. AIDS was created in the Fort Detrick Maryland Army lab; added to the vaccines for small pox and administered to Africans. 40 million Africans are now dead. Malaria, carried by mosquitoes could be easily controlled with DEETs. It is not harmful, but very effective. And, Tuberculosis was under control and it's again an epidemic? These "diseases", "epidemics" and "viruses" are created by scientists. It is absolutely ludicrous that the people who create the problems, turn around and pretend to need monies for a cure.
Depopulation is their intended end.
Read Professor Carroll Quigleys " Tragedy & Hope". (I got my copy at Global Solutions) He was Bill Clinton's professor. Check out Cecil Rhodes also. He was a real creep.
The Military/Corporate/Industrial/Big Pharma Complex doesn't make any money off of healthy people. Oh, and let us not forget the big C. I can think of five cures/solutions off the top of my head for that one: 1) Bryomed.net (BryomiXal) 2) Apricot Pits 3)Essiac Tea 4) Hemp Oil 5) Rife machine 6) Vitamin B17 7) Millet 8) Grass
Check out the Environmental movement. Who started that one? Disheveled, disorganized, dirt poor hippies? NO, the Oil Companies. P/R/S The Problem: high gas prices (read Lindsy Williams "The NonEnergy Crisis") Reaction: Drill in the pristine Alaska Basin or _______ field PLEASSSSEEE! Solution: Oil Companies get around public outcry. The oil has naturally seeped into and refilled all the oil wells in this country. I have two friends who track the oil reserves in this country and we are set for 200 years. Russia is plush with oil also. Charities are a scam. Check out the Georgia Guide Stones and see the "ideal" population.
Posted on June 8, 2008 — by JohnYaYa
0 comments