Hans Rosling reinforces the idea of not to viewing
Thanks Mr. Vyas for sharing this video with me!
"Being good is commendable, but only when it is combined with doing good is it useful..."
Hans Rosling reinforces the idea of not to viewing
Thanks Mr. Vyas for sharing this video with me!
“In almost any gift-giving situation, there is some expectation of return, whether is it a tax deduction, a named building, or an enhanced reputation. That’s why anonymous gift giving is so rare. Giving always occurs within a social context that makes a gift reciprocal in nature. Perhaps corporations that give with some expectation of return are only being more strategic and explicit than predecessors who gave with equal expectations but said less about it - or who gave without planning. For a gift to be genuinely altruistic in nature, that is, for it to demonstrate other-centered love, it must have benefit to the recipient as its primary motive and purpose, but not necessarily its only motivation or purpose. Therefore, strategic or “smart” giving may be regarded as ethical.”
from: Media Ethics: Cases and Moral Reasoning. Christians, Clifford. 2001.
My Response.....enjoy:)
For decades, various corporations in the United States have used gift giving as a form of social marketing. Most organizations realize that when done correctly, giving back to the community or to a cause will yield positive results in terms of increased business, increased awareness and ultimately, an increase in profit and market share. In fact, studies show that organizations that practice some form of social marketing or social good, almost always do better than their competitors who do not participate in such practices. The passage in question revolves around the idea of gift giving and in what context or situation it can be considered ethical. According to Clifford Christians, “smart” or strategic gift giving may be regarded as ethical because its primary motive is to benefit the recipient, however, it is not the only motive. I agree with Christians’ analyses that those organizations that say they are purely giving just to give, are less ethical, especially when that is not the truth. To be truly philanthropic, a corporation should be open and honest about its intentions, those that are selfless and selfish. Moreover, companies that are open about their intentions are more likely to do better than those who are not. Consumers can easily spot spurious attempts at social marketing and will easily see through the feigned good-will.
Home Depot is an example of an organization that uses strategic giving in an ethical manor. The organization donates materials and volunteers manpower to the building and rebuilding of affordable homes to families in need. They also give back to the communities that their associates and employees live in. Although such acts are clearly beneficial to those who are receiving the aid, Home Depot is benefiting as well. By helping the local communities, Home Depot is establishing valuable and lasting relationships. Families and individuals who receive aid become patrons of the organization as well as advocates.
Exxon/Mobile demonstrates gift giving as well, however, strategically it is not on point and does not make a connection to the consumer as efficiently as Home Depot’s approach. Exxon/Mobile spends money to protect tigers as their logo (sometimes) features a tiger. This attempt at philanthropy comes off as completely phony and unauthentic. Besides having a tiger as a logo, Exxon/Mobile and their product have absolutely nothing to do with tigers, or any animals for that matter. In fact, Exxon has been accused several times for destroying the environment and violating human rights. With a history like that, it seems like hypocrisy, as well as a futile attempt to do damage control on their already tainted image. This would definitely be an unethical and counterproductive attempt at social marketing.
Finally, Microsoft is an example of an organization that is giving back to the community in a strategic manner; benefiting both the organization and those receiving the aid. Microsoft focuses its corporate social efforts on providing software, computers, training, business opportunities and other technological assistance to those living in areas of the world that would not normally have access to such things. Because Microsoft deals with technology, it makes sense for them to donate things that have to do with their industry, to people in need. It also benefits Microsoft as an organization because they are not only building awareness, they are spreading their product to areas that are not familiar with the brand wars that surround the computer industry. They are, essentially, tapping into and claiming, untouched market share.
In conclusion, it is not only how companies and organizations are gift giving, it is often what and by whom the aid is being received. If companies want to be perceived as genuine and authentic, socially responsible corporations, they must not only stay on strategy with their product or service, they must also have a genuine interest in the people they are giving to. Companies should also make their intentions clear about what they plan to gain from their philanthropy. If they do not do this, consumers will not simply take their word for it and buy their product. Authenticity, honesty and a genuine concern for the cause, are the key elements in corporate philanthropy and if used correctly, are the elements which will yield the most positive results for the organization and the beneficiaries.
I finally got the chance to watch the National Geographic documentary God Grew Tired of Us. I strongly urge everyone to watch this beautiful, authentic and touching story about the lost boys of Sudan. The documentary revolves around the lives of four Dinka men who grew up in war-torn Sudan, but managed to escape life in a refugee camp and move to the United States. They had never experienced running water, electricity or even mattresses. I don’t want to spoil the story for those of you who have not yet watched it, but I did want to stress the incredible inspirational impact that this movie had on me. It was humbling to watch these men learn how to use a refrigerator, experience a grocery store, and deal with everyday struggles of adapting to a completely new culture, all the while focusing on their families back in Sudan. Some of these men worked three jobs at a time and sent every penny they earned back home, while running on less than three hours of sleep. They struggled to fit into the strange American way of life, but they didn’t complain once, keeping the image of their friends and families battling famine and disease, close at heart. This movie was a beautifully executed example of how one can publicize a struggle that seems so distant and alien, and make it real to those of us living comfortable and safe lives. The story of the lost boys exemplified true cultural exchange. They were experiencing their new lives in America, while telling the story of their countries struggle to those they came in contact with. Well executed documentaries, that really convey the plight of others, without fulfilling some form of self-interest are often hard to come by. It is sad to hear how many people, including my peers are not aware of the humanitarian catastrophe and genocide that is the struggle of Darfur. I urge you all to watch this documentary and tell your friends about it. Sometimes it’s easier and more valuable to learn from a documentary or from someone’s personal story, than it is to read the news. Take the time to think about that for a moment…
“The way I see it there are so many ways to help people…It seems like there is no answer, but the answer for it is there. If you had good leaders in Africa, they would help the people. But they don’t know how to treat people. They think of their own and they neglect others. It is a shame to have people that don’t take care of their own people”. –Daniel Pach, Lost Boy
For the last few weeks I’ve been trying to find some truly innovative and grassroots social media uses, that promote or benefit a charity in some way. I’ve been looking for something that is actually benefiting others on a non-organizational scale, which regular online users have come up with themselves. Of course there are numerous Facebook groups and causes that people join, which pledge to donate thousands of dollars to an arbitrary, faceless and often unidentifiable charity. However I can’t help but wonder if donations are actually ever made, or if the money ever lands in the correct hands. Often times many of these Facebook groups that are formed in the name of aid, come off as a ploy to simply get as many people as possible to join a group; almost as a form of bragging rights. I was beginning to think that there really weren’t a lot of well thought out fund-raising ideas that utilized social networks well, until a friend ‘tweeted’ an interesting link to me. I suppose I haven’t really been looking in the right places for great ideas, but this one is by far the most interesting and contemporary example of a social medium creating social change. Twestival, which was created solely by volunteers on Twitter, has brought together thousands of people from the online community, inviting them to support a clean water projects in Africa. Over a short period of time, using only twitter, hundreds of strangers organized events in over 200 cities to get people to come together for an evening of fun and fundraising. The idea was a success and has so far raised over $250,000 dollars. I can’t comment on the logistics of each of the events, but the fact that this was a world wide function organized in a matter of days is remarkable. The website backs up its efforts with information about the water crisis in Africa and what the money will be used for. Personally, I think it is amazing that a social medium where most of the people connecting do not even know each other in the ‘real world’, was utilized for something very real. I hope that we will see more of this in the future both on Twitter and Facebook. As always, I appreciate any feedback or comments, and would love to hear about any other innovative ideas and success stories!
I recently saw a very interesting lecture (online) by Dr. Joel Selanikio, pediatrician and co-founder of Datadyne, a non-profit that works on improving the quality and quantity of public health data. Although he focuses his efforts primarily on vaccination issues, this particular lecture concerned the growing opportunities regarding cell phones and computers in the developing world, particularly Africa. Probably the most memorable and consequential statistics that Selanikio brought to light pertained to the remarkable growth rate of cell phone adoption in Africa and around the world. In the year 2000, only 20% of the world’s population was in range of cell phone network. Compare that to 80% of the world in 2008. This increase is particularly noticeable in Africa. The reason that this is so remarkable is because the people who are buying these cell phones at alarming rates, are among the poorest people in the world. The once widely accepted belief that cell-phones were only for top tier individuals in society, no longer holds true. If people find something extremely useful, they will do whatever it takes to buy it. There are several reasons that Africans are adopting cell-phones at a higher rate than any other continent. Of course, there is the obvious fact that there is more room for growth, allowing for a higher adoption rate. This room for growth combined with the fact that cell phones are cheaper than landlines, are not government monopolized and neither good credit nor a permanent address is needed in order to purchase one, allows for not only city dwellers to purchase cell phones, but more importantly, rural communities all over Africa. As Selanikio points out in his lecture, this cell phone growth is in no way aided by UNAIDS efforts or a World Bank project, this is simply regular people buying cell phones through means of their own.
So why does all this matter? This phenomenon, or revolution, should really concern anyone who is interested in public health, or the dissemination of any kind of information. People in the western world, particularly marketers and public health practitioners, have often wondered, “What could we do if everyone in the world had a computer like ours?” What we should be wondering, however, is “What can we do with the computers that everyone already has?” Cell phones are essentially little computers that 80% of the world now has at their fingertips. Particularly noteworthy is the low price of communication that these computers allow for. For a mere 20 cents per text message, someone in rural western Kenya can text someone in Washington DC, receiving a reply in a matter of seconds. Furthermore, almost all of these cell-phones have the ability to do simple searches on the web, and although it will be a long time before everyone in developing countries will have access to rich internet (graphics, flash etc.), they already do have the ability to conduct simple searches and receive text based information. In my opinion, I believe this technology allows for endless possibilities, particularly in the health industry. Selanikio touched on a few interesting ideas. He recommended letting doctors and clinicians in rural Africa have access to reference materials for drugs via sms (short message service). Doctors could access this database and find drug interactions, doses and descriptions easily and quickly and then share this information with their patients. This is something that doctors in the west can easily access through the Internet a resource that many take for granted. Other medical usages include managing patients records on sim cards (essentially a memory card). This would allow for portable records in a world of limited paper work and filing.
In terms of HIV/AIDS prevention, I believe that this revolution lends itself to several possibilities as well. The growing cell phone phenomenon is as appealing to teenagers in Africa as it is in the United States. Text messages and text based Internet searches can easily be conducted by teens, and the dissemination of information from Aids prevention organizations could promote Aids awareness and prevention methods to an engaged audience, via a technology that they are already infatuated with. One possibility would be an organization that readily answers all questions about HIV/AIDS via text message. Questions could be submitted anonymously and answers could be received quickly.
I believe that the cell phone phenomenon, or as Selanikio calls it, the Invisible Computer Revolution, that Africa is currently experiencing is one that is underrated, but ripe with possibilities. It is an untapped resource that could not only aid the public health sector, but marketers around the world. Again, ask yourself, what we can do now that for the first time in history, humanity is experiencing the ability to communicate cheaply and efficiently with everyone else in the world.