And the way the company works is easy to understand.
On the product website the progression goes from one smart shopper buying an iPod and consequently "[they] have a new iPod and helped save a person's life" because ten dollars of their purchase went to the Global Fund.
"$30.7 million has flowed directly to Global Fund financed grants in Ghana, Rwanda and Swaziland. In these countries this money is helping to finance comprehensive national HIV/AIDS programs led by the ministries of health, to provide antiretroviral treatment for children and adults, to assist in the prevention of mother-to-child transmission of HIV, as well as essential counseling and testing activities to reduce the overall risk of HIV transmission."
As I sit and read about Sipho in the BLOG(RED) I am moved by the story of a young child with AIDS. However, I cannot help but notice that the piece is littered with promotion of Product (RED). It is not a blog about awareness of ARVs and AIDS in general, it is about how RED's ARVs are making a difference. But I guess in the manifesto they really weren't kidding when they said "it [(RED)] is a business model."
Not to paint myself as a callous, bitter individual or anything. I was moved by the post of an emaciated boy who's life will undoubtedly be cut short and is obviously of a low quality because of AIDS. The blog does a good job of showing his helplessness: "his face was thin but creaseless, except for where his heavy lower eyelids rested against his cheekbones. He did not wear a smile and there was little evidence that he ever had, so creaseless was his face.
His expression was that of one who was accustomed to expecting the worst."
The blog also works to create a sense of obligation in the writer, "Sipho’s heavy-eyed gaze persisted. Looking up from my chart review, I suddenly realized that, as the pediatrician in the room, it was my turn to do something."
Those words, it was my turn to do something are undoubtedly moving, a call to action. However, they are preceded by as the pediatrician in the room which shows the professional obligation to the story. Product (RED) is not about a professional obligation, it is about a human obligation and actions we can take as ordinary Joe's in the Western World.
My beef with Product (RED) is it doesn't really change the way we act in a root causes sort of way. If we really wanted to change the way we act we would be buying fairly traded clothes that are not manufactured in a sweat shop. Or we would outright give money to charities without expecting anything in return. Or we would give our time to these causes and advocate for social justice.
(RED) shows that we are nothing but consumers. Is it true? Probably. Does it have to be? Definitely not.
"You, the consumer, can take your purchase to the power of (RED) simply by upgrading your choice. Thus the proposition: (YOU)RED. Be embraced, take your own fine self to the power of (RED). What better way to become a good-looking samaritan?!"
The above quote from the website does not emphasize being a Samaritan. It's just making a smart, and different, choice. We can just be Samaritans in and of themselves; being a Samaritan is now a by product of consumerism. We do not go into the Mac Store or the GAP with the intention of eliminating AIDS. We go in there because we want to look trendy. Helping to eliminate AIDS is a nice little bonus; it's like getting a free gift or a coupon for your next purchase. Only the free gift is an improved image. Not only are you trendy but you're a philanthropist. Wow! That's hot.
What happened to altruism? And doing something good because it was the right thing to do? Why must we always get something out of the deal? Why can't we do something good for the sake of doing good?
If you're going to buy Product(RED) anything, fine. Think of the motivation for your actions though. Why not just outright donate ten dollars to an AIDS org? Why not volunteer 10 hours with your local AIDS org and create awareness?
Wear your heart on your sleeve, not as a logo on your chest.
1 comment:
I'm glad to see this kind of analysis of such programs. On the one hand, I do see the material value because they do raise a lot of money. On the other hand, I agree with you that people should think about simply donating $10 or, better yet, doing something beyond giving money. Yet the sad fact is that in order to raise the money that's needed for various important causes, incentives are often needed. That's why I think we have to look with two eyes, one on the ideal and one on the material realities. We can push towards the utopian goals (I have to believe that) while at the same time doing what has to be done in practical terms.
Post a Comment