So Matt posted a response to my Pink Ribbon blog
here.
He raised some questions which I will set aside time (hopefully) to respond to.
However, one point he brought up in the blog is an interesting statistic, portrayed by this graph from the centers for disease control of the top killers of women:
(click to enlarge)
He brought up an interesting point - breast cancer fundraisers are EVERYWHERE in some way or another (ex: buy this brand and a portion of the profits will go to the Susan G. Komen foundation). Breast cancer research even has its own mascot (see blog title).
So now, why is it that breast cancer research gets so much more attention than some other (more) prevalent issues? One could come up a multitude of reasons, however, I think there's one clear-cut answer.
Now, I know some are going to stand up and say that the breast cancer walks, etc., were started by people whose lives were affected by breast cancer in some way - but what about people whose lives were touched by heart disease (the number one killer on the chart)? Were they less inspired?
I doubt it. Perhaps the inspiration started out the same, but the campaigns took off differently because of how they were received by the general public and corporate America. Simply put, some causes are more marketable than others.
When I think of breast cancer, I think of a relatively young, cute looking soccer mom (be it accurate or not). When I think of heart disease, I think of a wheezing, heavier 'grandpa' like man. Nothing wrong with this, but it doesn't put me in the same mood as the previous image.
The general 'vibe' of breast cancer makes it easy for lots of companies to attach themselves to the cause - sponsoring events like the three day walk, donating a portion of their profits, etc. Since many people feel good about helping a charity, it's a win-win-win?? (charity gets money, huge corporation makes more profit, people feel good about spending money - everyone's happy, right?)
So what are the downfalls of this cause related marketing? Is it a big problem that some causes get a disproportionate amount of attention? These things I don't know.
However, I do know this - some real issues out there will NEVER get a substantial amount of attention because of their lack of marketability. Frankly, some causes and the imagery associated with them make people sick to their stomachs - which certainly doesn't put one in the 'mood to buy'. Anyone knows that associating your company's name with something with a negative connotation is a fatal sin. Not to be graphic, BUT - can you see an entire city shutting down for a giant 'colon cancer' event? Can you picture people sporting various colored 'ribbons for incest'? Do you see a major corporation posting pictures of soldiers with missing limbs next to their logo (even with 'a portion of your purchase will go to help in this person's medical bill relief' in big letters next to it)?
Didn't think so.