http://www.transparency.org/global_priorities/other_thematic_issues/towards_greater_protection_of_whistleblowers/the_need_for_whistleblower_protection

The links to PDFs of both the poster and the SI are in the blog post on the Selling Sickness conference.

Best,

Joana

Let me know if you have any questions.

Best,

Joana

Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts on this topic. You obviously have a different viewpoint on cause marketing in general. My views are derived from information learned from both personal experience over 14 years now as a cancer survivor, as well as several decades of professional experience as an advocate.

While a strong dynamic of group solidarity can come from the accomplishment of participation in a mass event, sometimes the public is mislead about causes and what real effect participation will have. Sports events themselves don’t affect environmental causes of cancer nor fix the inequitable health care system we still must put up with in this country. I know from my work as an oncology social worker, that funds raised by the mega-organizations do not primarily go to fund urgently-needed direct patient care, although some promotional materials may imply that they do. Komen primarily funds scientific research and gives some limited grants to community-based organizations, which in turn offers very limited aid to patients. That’s good, but groups like these, which get much of their funding from industry, do not work on issues like doing something about the the price of cancer drugs. Participation in these kind of events is a choice, and can be personally satisfying and fitness-enhacing, but we need to see them for what they really are.

I myself participate in fundraisers of all sorts on behalf of causes that I care about. I have personal experience too in participating in a major athletic event that was billed as a charity venue, and turned out to be something else . I’m referring to the 2007 Seattle Marathon, which was promoted as a benefit for the patient and family housing fund of the University of Washington Medical Center. This was a really big deal for me to train for and complete the Walking Half-Marathon, due to my own situation of having had lymphoma in all the joints in my body, and resulting long-term effects. After the accomplishment of completing the walk, it was a real shock to read the newspaper the next day and learn that almost all the profits from the marathon went to the organizing company, not to the charity

It is really offensive to me and many advocates to witness how Komen , with its corporatized governance structure and ample funds, tries to monopolize themes and exert control over genuine community-based efforts. Especially so as Komen itself “borrowed” the ribbon idea itself from a grassroots activist, volunteering her own time to address the need for prevention and cure of breast cancer on a national level.

You might like to read the following for some basic background:

History of the Pink Ribbon

Think Before You Pink

The Hidden Costs of Cause Marketing By Angela M. Eikenberry (2009)
Stanford Social Innovation Review, Stanford Graduate School of Business

The Assertive Cancer Patient: Pink Ribbons

Joana

Thanks for writing. I “enjoyed” your post . Guess nothing surprises me any more. Will be interesting to see if the widespread outcry brings any changes.

Best,

Joana