YouthNet blog
An insight into youth issues, volunteering trends, charity life and more from the UK charity YouthNet
All | Events | Youth | Technology | Volunteering | YouthNet | Charity World
Wednesday Mar 07, 2007
Is Bono running into the (Red)?
Unless you've been living under a rock over the last few years you can't have failed to notice the (Red) campaign to raise money and awareness to support The Global Fund's mission of fighting AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria in Africa.
This week has seen a really interesting reaction from advertisers, charities and (Red) themselves after the initial results of the campaign were reported. Since 2002, the campaign has generated $18 million for The Global Fund, soon to be $25 million when (Red) have completed their latest accounting.
Advertising Age gleefully reported that despite a marketing spend of up to $100 million the "Costly Red Campaign Reaps Meager $18 Million". In the article they ask the question:
"...is the rise of philanthropic fashionistas decked out in Red T-shirts and iPods really the best way to save a child dying of AIDS in Africa?"
I think this is a worthwhile question to ask about a lot of initiatives (have a read of Nick Temple's SSE blog post about Global Cool for a well put argument), and if you're asking which is better – everyone buying a (Red) product or the same amount of people making a donation to The Global Fund - then there's no question which is more effective.
However, in the case of (Red) I don't think it's as simple as that, and Advertising Age seem to have overlooked the point that maybe the majority, or even a significant percentage of (Red) customers may never have donated to charity before.
The overwhelming impression from the Advertising Age article is that this won't make any difference, and in fact may actually mean young people give less in the future. Trent Stamp, president of the Charity Navigator, says:
"The Red campaign can be a good start or it can be a colossal waste of money, and it all depends on whether this edgy, innovative campaign inspires young people to be better citizens or just gives them an excuse to feel good about themselves while they buy an overpriced item they don't really need."
Now I'm as cynical (if not more) as the next man, but I also think we shouldn't condemn the campaign already. (Red) have responded to the article on their site, and as they point out:
"There is actual data showing that when people become aware of crises, they give more money rather than less. Your writer doesn't mention that data. We believe (RED) will lead to more rather than less giving."
I hope they're right and I can't help feeling that there's an element of "Bono Bashing" behind the joyful reaction to the campaign raising less then they may have hoped for.
*UPDATE* I just (belatedly!) picked up on this post by Ann Hadley about Buy (LESS) Crap, a site created by WPI and Romantic Static - there's a great conversation about cause related marketing and the (RED) campaign going on - well worth a read!
Posted by Adrian Melrose on March 13, 2007 at 02:39 PM GMT+00:00 #