Results tagged “trends” from Uncivil Society
To complete today's charity ad trifecta, here's a thoughtful reflection from within the advertising industry on how the business views its charitable clients. The piece is rather eye-opening: according to the author, ad agencies see charity work as "downmarket" and design charity promos more to look good for awards than to be effective. Hence the post's provocative title, "Every time we make a self serving charity ad, a gay baby kitten dies of breast cancer"--
You could argue that, even if the main effect of these ads is to win awards rather than raise money or awareness, no one is really harmed. I’d argue against that. The same agencies that make creatively awarded ads know equally well how to make effective ads. Most of the time, though, they’re not the same thing. So every time an agency pours resources into making a beautiful, moving, and hopefully awarded charity ad, they’re choosing (consciously or not) not to make an effective one instead. They’re choosing not to make an ad that raises money for the charity and saves lives, cures diseases, finds homes for kittens or whatever it is the charity exists to achieve.
Cell phones, China's commodities purchases or misleading new metrics? An interesting question raised by Paul Kedrosky using data from Wolfram Alpha. One commenter suggests Kiva, but no one really seems to buy that explanation.
Check out Alwyn Young's 2009 study, The African Growth Miracle for more data suggesting that we may need to move past the stock images of Western charitable colonialism.
A rather nasty whomp on the head has of necessity kept things low key for me the past couple of weeks, but in my ongoing effort to get back to normal I did make it down to Tribeca for a few hours tonight to watch Lost at the showing sponsored by Slate. A most interesting event on several levels, not least of all for the way it exemplified the social theme pervasive in the show itself.
(spoilers ahoy)
As for the already notorious last episode of Lost, I could not help but compare it with the recently aired series finale of Ashes to Ashes, the sequel to the classic UK sci-fi drama Life on Mars. Both Lost and its UK cousins use mysteries connected to time travel to explore notions of purgatory, redemption, fate, freedom, self-awareness and personal meaning.
Lost appears to differ from the UK series in that it seems to make the physical world--real time before death--the realm of time travel and mysticism, but even that could be a swerve. It's equally arguable that the silent wreckage montage at the end of Lost is a not so subtle hint that even the main timeline was a collective fiction--everyone died, then came to self-realization through a shared mythic adventure as well as a more mundane form of purgatory. Think of it as Dante Wii with ascending levels and a side of suburbia.
Either way, what particulalry stands out for me is the subtle yet significant shift that both Lost and the UK series make in regard to personal meaning. Theirs is a distinctly social vision of salvation--we not only find meaning in overcoming our faults, believing in God, etc. etc., but in creating a communal reality with others.
Holographic realities and the social soul are themes that resound throughout human religion, philosophy and art--sure, Egyptians did this through pyramids and Christians, cathedrals, but even though we're pouring our millions into TV and movies at the core it's all the same thing. The individualistic turn of the past few centuries was a bit of swerve; shows such as Lost and Ashes to Ashes indicate that, as McLuhan predicted, the age of hyper-connectivity is retrieving a more tribal vision of the self.
Kissing a piece of paper for charity seems to have replaced the traditional kissing booth, which would today be seen less as a fun fundraiser than a hub for spreading the flu.
If the above vintage ad's strategy of prescribing carb-filled crackers to lose weight seems goofily retro (not to mention sexist), check out this new research on carbs as the dietary key to personal happiness.
While it may seem odd now for someone to be protesting support for a hospital, historically hospitals in the U.S. served a similar intended function as proposed national health care plans: to make health care broadly accessible by reducing costs through aggregation. The countervailing norm was private healthcare, such as personal care in the home or at a doctor's office. For a useful representation of earlier attitudes privileging home over group care, check out week two of this season of Mad Men, in which Betty Draper sees putting her father in a health care facility as a sign of failure.
The tension over social vs. private health care intensified in the late-1940s and early 1950s with Truman's proposal for mandatory national health care. In this regard panel three of the original PSA is particularly interesting in its depiction of government funding as an extension of nongovernmental cooperation. For an equally interesting blast from the past, check out this Kiplinger Changing Times article on the debate over socialized healthcare . . . in 1949.
Also, here's an interesting historic connection between Superman and real-world charity: Jack Liebowitz, DC executive and Jerry Siegel bete noire, used a good chunk of his personal profits from Superman and other comic characters to fund the creation of the Long Island Jewish Hospital.
Click the pics below for larger versions. Thanks Eric!
Last week on JustMeans I noted that the legal situation for nonprofits in Russia is more complex than the conventional wisdom would have us believe.
There was, of course, a method to my rhetorical madness. Here's an update on one important aspect of the Russian nonprofit world: reforms aimed at encouraging the formation of independent and financially sustainable nongovernmental NPOs.
A few months ago the Russian government formed a working group with a stated goal of facilitating the formation of nongovernmental nonprofit associations, which became a particularly pressing issue after restrictive measures enacted under Vladimir Putin a few years ago. Anyone familiar with Soviet rhetoric knows that sometimes words can have two meanings, and a leading governmental official promised that we'll soon see "many truly innovative proposals" for liberalizing current law, there was ample reason to be skeptical.
However, the first proposed set of amendments to the Russian law "On Nonprofit Organizations" finally went live a few hours ago, and it actually does lighten the regulatory burden in several significant ways.
A major focus of the proposed reforms is to rein in what some see as the unbridled authority of the Ministry of Justice--the state body that incorporates nonprofit organizations--to obstruct the formation and activity of nonprofit NGOs. The bill seeks to accomplish this in several ways, such as
- limiting the organizational documents the Ministry has the right to request,
- limiting the number of audits to once in a three years (as opposed to annually),
- limiting the grounds for the denial of registration,
- adding the option of suspending registration (as opposed to merely providing for denial), and
- requiring the government to explain reasons for refusal within a specific period of time.
The bill also has provides for the publication--in the mass media or online--of an annual report, with a simplified statement of ongoing activity for smaller organizations. This is also in keeping with the bill's announced purpose of "lightening but not eliminating accountability for NPOs."
Although the proposed reforms apply for the most part to Russian nonprofits--a subsequent bill is reported to be in the works in regard to foreign groups--the bill does include a welcome amendment in regard to branch offices of foreign NGOs: it would eliminate the current prohibition on foreign affiliates or representative offices deemed to be a "threat . . . to national uniqueness and identity [or] to [Russia's] cultural heritage."
Moreover, in a separate and equally significant legal development, a Russian appeals court recently held that grants made by foreign organizations to Russian nonprofits are exempt from the profits tax. This precedent could, if not overturned, put an end to questions as to whether tax exemption for foreign grants is limited to grants received from just a few charities specified on a list issued by the Russian government.
As Human Rights Watch indicated when the scope of the proposed liberalizations was initially announced, additional changes would be useful, but the proposed bill, if enacted, appears to be a welcome "first step for reform."
Over the weekend I posted my thoughts on the Wall St. Journal's lengthy article on Donald Duck in Germany. What struck me most: the stylistic contrast in relation to cultural identity:
The article ascribes the character’s popularity to the strip’s longtime translator, Erika Fuchs, an art history Ph.D. who rewrote Carl Barks’ dialogue to include references to German literature, myth and politics. . . .
Post-war Germany was in the process of restoring its identity after Nazi ideology raised serious questions as to the legitimacy of the country’s cultural heritage. A funny book provided a means for Fuchs to highlight the value of German traditions free from worrisome evocations of the Nazi’s use of German culture to establish ethnic supremacy.
Barks wrote in a radically different context. America’s literary heritage was not morally suspect; to have used Donald Duck to legitimize Melville or Dickinson would have seemed pretentious, if not bizarre. Barks’ visual and verbal rhetoric is instead far more pragmatic–Donald and his retinue are on a perpetual quest to succeed in a world full of baffling new tools and old ways.
As it happens, I'm in the middle of one of my periodic re-readings of Barks, so this stuff is fresh on my mind. Note particularly this observation
America’s literary heritage was not morally suspect; to have used Donald Duck to legitimize Melville or Dickinson would have seemed pretentious, if not bizarre. Barks’ visual and verbal rhetoric is instead far more pragmatic . . .
and compare it to the following scene from Barks' Snow Fun, a story in which Donald and his nephews raise money to buy one of the era's emblems of middle-class success, manufactured skis:
One of my pictures in the Barks post illustrates another dimension of Barks' examination of cultural identity. It's from Donald Duck and the Mummy's Ring, a brilliant (and funny) exploration of the question of whether the West should repatriate cultural objects to their country of origin. The kicker for me in the story is that it's more complex than a reductionistic tale of good natives and bad Americans--the Egyptians themselves are a blend of traditional believers and secular Westernizers, epitomized by a strategic nationalist educated at "Yarvard" in the States.
This may seem a bit goofy, but that's exactly why it works. As I concluded in my previous post,
What both the German and American versions of Barks’ work illustrate is the strategic value of junk media in remaking society. That so many people continue to view comics as little more than trash is not necessarily a bad thing–it frees the medium for creative expression outside the normative constraints of so-called high art, thereby retaining comics’ power as a cultural trojan horse.
Museums have come to see fashion and pop culture as effective means for generating financial support. One upcoming case in point: the Minnesota History Center's RetroRama runway show, Fashion Comes Full Circle, featuring the work of local designers inspired by designs from the 1920s through '60s. The event also features shopping at a vintage boutique.
RetroRama, www.mnhs.org/retrorama, is an event hosted by the Minnesota Historical Society to celebrate the popular culture of the twentieth century and illustrate how the past has influenced the present. Featuring fashion, décor, music, dancing and related activities, RetroRama transports young and old back to a time when the Barbie was born and American Bandstand was all the rage. RetroRama also offers attendees the chance to experience popular games and crafts. From pop-up books to placemats, the do-it-yourself craft stations allow event-goers to take home a piece of retro style.
Here's a taste, part of a longer assessment of recent work in developing reliable statistics, more efficient management and a shift from almsgiving to enterprise. There's a direct line from this to the rhetoric of, say, Muhammad Yunus:
Somehow I don't think the bunch in the picture above was officially licensed, but the branded fruit & vegetables in this Slate article were. My thoughts on the lesson for social enterprise over on JustMeans, along with a look at the business of charitable benefits.
McCann Erickson Polska designed this PSA series for the Warsaw Metropolitan Police, in which thought balloons protect cartoon riders.
I like the ads, though it does seem that the designers could benefit from this new graphic technology.
NONPROFIT COMICS EXTRA:
Metabunker has details on the formation of the new Danish Comics Council, which promotes comics art & industry in Denmark.
Almost everything about marketing is the opposite of the typical manager's approach to running a business. Marketing is illogical and definitely not analytical. Marketing is intuitive and holistic.
We're concerned, however, that this message is being ignored by the marketing community, who seem to be drifting from the right to the left -- from a right-brain approach to a left-brain approach. . .
Take leadership, for example.
Nothing about a brand is more valuable than its market leadership. If a brand loses its leadership, it loses its most significant advantage in the marketplace. That valuable position is worth protecting. And advertising is the best way to protect it. Nike in athletic shoes. Heinz in ketchup. Rolex in watches.
Suppose a leading brand spends $50 million a year on advertising. And suppose that brand's market share doesn't budge at all. Was that $50 million wasted? Not necessarily.
Advertising as insurance
Advertising is more like insurance than it is like an investment. What's your "return on investment" of a five-year term life insurance policy if you don't die?Zero.
But, of course, you don't buy an insurance policy to make money. You buy an insurance policy to protect your family in case you die.
The overall practice of marketing is not mathematically based, although subsets of the discipline may be: direct marketing, research, media selection.
Marketing is certainly not 70% mathematics. It's not even 1% mathematics. (As a math major in college, I don't think I've ever used integral calculus or differential equations or any other mathematical concept in our marketing practice.)
Marketing is a discipline that can only be learned by exposure to marketing case histories over an extensive period of time.
Mathematics is logical. Marketing is not. That's why marketing is so difficult to learn.
I was taking a break from end of semester class prep--just another Saturday night in April--so I decided to catch up on the latest "social enterprise" tags in Flickr. A series of the recent pictures came from the account of Shivani Mair, a broadcaster, producer and "bright young star" of social enterprise in the UK.
For more on her work in the essential area of youth and broadcast media, check out Creative Careers Surgery, which features the apt slogan, "Life isn't about finding yourself . . . it's about creating yourself!"
(Cross-posted from JustMeans)
Sean Stannard-Stockton has provided an excellent overview of The Center for Effective Philanthropy's three basic principles of, well, effective philanthropy:
1. Clear goals;
2. Coherent, well-implemented strategies;
3. Relevant performance indicators.
If you come to charity by way of the business world, this formula no doubt sounds familiar. In fact, it's the staple of many an intro entrepreneurship class--including my own--as well as the foundation of leading how-to books for start-ups.
Which isn't to say it's bad advice--quite the contrary. Whether you're running a charitable foundation or a social business funded by earned income, these three basic principles are essential for success.
However, that doesn't mean they're in themselves sufficient to succeed. As important as these principles are, the fact remains that a charitable venture can be faithful to all three and still end up a failure--not in spite of its goals, strategies and performance indicators, but because of them.
The problem isn't that these are business principles inapplicable to charity--that's a false dichotomy, as unhelpful as saying that the mundane rules of meter and rhythm are irrelevant for creating sublime poetry. Rather, the danger lies in reducing any corporate environment--whether charitable or commercial--to a set of tasks and rules.
Formulae such as this fall short of addressing the relation between part and whole. On one level, they tend to frame a social issue in such a way as to isolate it from its broader social context. In so doing they create micro-solutions that can actually exacerbate macro-problems, if not fail to reach the target goal itself.
Marshall McLuhan was wont to say that the specialist is someone who never makes small mistakes while moving toward the grand fallacy, and we tend to see a similar phenomenon in charity. As I've said elsewhere, it's like telling ourselves that we'll be happy if we reach our target weight--we can reduce philanthropy to a clear goal with coherent strategies and relevant metrics, and yet at the end of our diet find ourselves twice as unhappy as when we began.
This brings me to a deeper problem with such principles--namely, their insufficiency for creating an environment that relates to us as human beings. We consist of an array of transactional rules, from blood flow to heartbeat to language norms to systems of exchange. At the same time we are all more than that, from the collectives we inhabit to our inner sense of self. A business with a sterile mechanistic culture breeds dissatisfaction and in so doing generates systemic inefficiencies; a charity even more so, given its stronger transformative valence.
This, in short, is the irony of our present models of effective charity: the more we reduce charity to efficient transaction-based problem-solving, the less efficient charity is likely to become. For such principles to function as we'd like, we need to understand how they work together to create something more.
A 1938 Listerine ad in Home Needlecraft magazine positions that brand as a defense against life's dangerous moments.
Notice the intriguing gender dynamics. There's more going on here than a way to avoid a cold--Listerine gives women than strength to move past repulsive men and an attack of cold feet so they can live--and love--free from fear. She sleeps like a baby now!
Related rhetorical elements--the ad begins with a fresh breeze blowing, and the scene with the woman turning away from the man is conspicuously set on "Lex Ave." Not "Lexington Ave" as on real street signs, but Lex--with lex, of course, being the Latin word for "law." I really wish I could meet the person who designed this--it's brilliant counterculture.
Utah Tap :: Here's to the World from Mike Morris on Vimeo.
One of my refrains re higher education is that it should shift from a culture of info consumption to production--college should be a place where students go to learn by creating, not by taking tests & writing reports that no one but their professors will read.
The BYU Ad Lab "is a student-run, professionally mentored ad agency" where undergrads create PSAs. Their animated Utah Tap project has been getting a fair amount of good press.
Via InfoAesthetics, which provides an explanation of this interactive graph.
\
A couple years ago at the Book Expo I chatted with the folks at the booth for Plenty. I wasn't too happy with their cover slogan--"It's Easy Being Green"--which I thought glossed over the difficulties faced by real-world green entrepreneurs.
Happily the magazine dropped the glib slogan, but, sad to say, it also learned the bigger lesson. Gawker reports that the magazine--though not the website--will be shuttered. Employees were reportedly laid off today after the latest bid for funding fell through.
Still using the break to gain some perspective. In the meantime, here are a few news items that stick out:
- This article has been making the rounds in design circles, and it really is a must-read for do-gooders of all stripes. I've been writing about the link between design and social benefit for a while, and it's a theme whose importance will only grow.
- Bruce Nussbaum on the shift from innovation to transformation. I have much more to say on that--in fact, I've already said a fair bit about it, if you read my articles carefully. What social enterprise folks should note: it's not just the talk about earned income & learning from hedge funds that face obsolescence.
- FilmLA has been in the news due to the decline of filming in Los Angeles. What I hadn't known: that a nonprofit coordinates movie, tv & ad shoots in the area.
- When can museums sell their works?
- Shaolin monks inspire controversy with their temple management franchise initiative.
- BBC announces the next Doctor today!
