MOUNT LAUREL, N.J. — It seems just about every product you can buy — Indianapolis Colts mini-helmets and M&M candies, Avaya phone faceplates and Yoplait yogurt — is available in pink, or at least pink packaging, as part of a promotion to raise awareness and money for breast cancer research.
The companies say the “cause marketing” campaigns do good for the world — and they’re not bad for sales, either.
It may sound like an idea that’s hard to argue with, but all the pink has some people seeing red.
“Pink Ribbons, Inc.,” a book published last year by Samantha King, a professor at Queen’s University in Ontario, found fault with the way corporate sponsorship has put the emphasis in finding a cure rather than figuring out why the cancer rate is so high.
And for five years now, the San Francisco-based group Breast Cancer Action, which bills itself as the “bad girls of breast cancer,” has been running an anti-pink product campaign called “Think Before You Pink.”
The group’s executive director, Barbara Brenner, a breast cancer survivor who never wears a pink ribbon herself, says that in many cases corporate images get what she calls a “pinkwash” while the cause gets nominal donations.
“Awareness, we don’t need any more of,” she said. “We have plenty of awareness. The question is what we do now.”
The pink sales campaigns are probably the biggest and best-known efforts in the world of “cause marketing,” where companies team up with charities with the aim of bringing in more money for both.
The first blockbuster cause marketing campaign came in 1983, when American Express Co. announced it would contribute money to restoring Ellis Island and the Statue of Liberty based on how much its customers charged.
Applications for the card spiked, card use peaked, and $1.7 million was raised.
In 1982, the Dallas-based foundation now known as Susan G. Komen for the Cure started getting attention with its Race for the Cure. Some of the sponsors of the walk and run started marketing campaigns around the cause. Now, those campaigns are a juggernaut.
In the last fiscal year, which ended March 31, Komen says it brought in more than $58 million from corporate sponsors. Much of that money came from peddlers of pink products, though some was also from Race for the Cure national sponsorships.
Nearly 140 companies are currently running promotions to support Komen; additional companies are using pink and contributing to other breast-cancer causes.
In the past 25 years, Komen has invested nearly $1 billion in breast cancer research, education and support. The interest it has raised is one reason government spending on the disease has grown in that time from $30 million per year to about $900 million per year.
Though it’s hard to prove, Brenner says some companies spend more promoting their pink stuff than they donate.
As long as the contributions are substantial, that’s not troubling to supporters of cause marketing.
“They could decide that they’re going to put cartoon characters on their package and pay a licensing fee,” said David Hessekiel, president of Cause Marketing Forum, a Rye, N.Y., company. “And none of that money would be going to charity.”
Komen certainly does not mind if the companies that support it sell more because of it. “Cause marketing is one of the things people implement when they believe in doing well while also doing good,” said Katrina McGhee, vice president of marketing at Komen.
Both Komen and Breast Cancer Action give similar advice to consumers: Make sure you know which charities benefit and how much they will get.
Brenner takes it a step further, though. She says it might be better just to write a check to a charity rather than buy the blushed goods.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
