(RED) Out

So I had seen this about 30 minutes before anonymous posted a comment. Firstly "amuses" seems to be the wrong phrase to use if you ask me, but maybe that's me being a bit personal. So let's look at the bigger picture. Is the (RED) campaign flawed?

1) If the $100 million hadn't been spent would $18 million have been raised? There is an imbalance in the spending versus the returns. But $18 mill isn't a peanut, some good will have been done with that. And realistic it seems unlikely that the £100 mill would have been given directly anyway. So the fight against AIDS is better equipped than it would be without (RED).

2) $100 mill is a ridiculous amount to have spent on advertising? I think it does seem that way. But this is not a one off campaign. This is supposed to be a model for generating money to go to Africa. It requires investment in the brand. Brands take time and take money to build but once established the input can drop. The first year would always be the most expensive.

3) It is wrong to encourage shopping? I don't think that this is what the (RED) campaign is trying to do. It is giving people an option that if they are going to buy something then a donation is going to go to fight AIDS. Since I subscribed to American Express (RED) over £250 pounds has gone to the campaign because of my spending on the card (much of which is actually work related). I have not given that money so I am not using it to assuage my "guilt", and it isn't an excuse for me not to give to other charities. But it is £250 fighting AIDS that is there because of my action. I could have kept getting my Goldfish points, I was going to spend the money anyway. I don't buy things that I don't want because they are (RED), but I make a choice if it is available. Shopping is not a solution, it is not a reasonable response to human suffering, but no-one actually said it was.

4) Can't we focus on giving money instead? Yes, good idea. In the meantime, while we try to convince people to think about others, let's find a way to get some money out of their pockets. Changing peoples lifestyles is hard work, good to try and do, but an uphill struggle. Let's use their lifestyles to do some good. Stop pushing uphill, when we could all roll downhill.

5) It only raised $18 mill? Well yes, as above, it would be better if it was more. You know what, if we encouraged people to go (RED) then it would raise more so why not be positive and make our lives a force for good.

6) It doesn't count if it doesn't hurt? B.....cks. Just because it doesn't cost me to use the (RED) card doesn't mean that the money is of less value.

7) It stops people feeling they need to give to charity? I think those that normally give to charities will continue to do so even if they are choosing (RED). Those who don't give normally are at least helping a bit if they choose (RED). Overall improvement.