Skip to main content

Cause Marketing For Hollywood

If you’re like me, you’re worried sick about what Hollywood actors and entertainment insiders think about the First Amendment, arts education in public schools, media literacy, and arts advocacy.

So, how better to bridge the gap between Hollywood and the rest of us than by funding things like celebrity-studded public service announcements and public forums where the hoi polloi and the arts community can discuss important issues of the day?

But my personal favorite is highlighted in the ad which brought “celebrities and stylish brands together through exclusive parties, luxe spa services, media suites, and more” in the service of celebrating “all things Hollywood” during the Academy Awards in March 2010.

This is vital nonprofit work my friends.

Forgive the sarcasm. But what else to make of this ridiculous self-indulgent ad? And by ridiculous I mean ‘worthy of ridicule.’

The ad, which ran in Elle magazine in July 2010, features ‘A-list actors… and media tastemakers’ like Stephen Collins and Erin Cummings above a list of ‘I’ll drink to that’ sponsors that include Jack Daniel’s and Monster.

To be fair, The Creative Coalition, which is a 501 (c)(3) public charity, is listed as another sponsor of the events, not the producer. Haven 360 was the producer. But since The Creative Coalition’s logo is seen no less than eight times in the ad, and since there’s little reason for the ad to run without The Creative Coalition’s participation, it’s a distinction almost without a difference.

The Creative Coalition, write co-presidents Tim Daly and Dana Delany in an open letter on the website “is made up of hundreds of actors, writers, directors, producers, journalists, artists, agents, casting directors, attorneys, publicists, dancers, artists, singers... Coalition members …believe that the active involvement in our political system of this highly visible industry is important not just to those who participate, but to the nation as a whole.”

You’ll get no argument from me that entertainers and creatives have a role to play in modern American Democracy. But so do the people who run those noisy street sweepers in mall parking lots at 6 am in the morning. You just don’t see them talking about their political and governmental policy views while getting a couples massage with one of the Kardashian sisters.

That “the Coalition members are caring, concerned professionals who believe that the active involvement in our political system of this highly visible industry is important not just to those who participate, but to the nation as a whole” is self-important nonsense on the scale of a Summer blockbuster.

Certainly “play(ing) an assertive role in presenting the creative community’s views on” issues like the First Amendment and arts education sounds high-minded. But who among us believe that the celebrities came to Haven360 last March for any reason besides the luxe spa services and the swag bag (and probably in that order since the IRS has recently taken a dim view of unreported swag bags)?

And if the price of admission was to bloviate on camera a little about arts education or the First Amendment, that’s a small enough price to pay for A-list tastemakers like Richard Kind.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Cause Marketing: The All Packaging Edition

One way to activate a cause marketing campaign when the sponsor sells a physical product is on the packaging. I started my career in cause marketing on the charity side and I can tell you that back in the day we were thrilled to get a logo on pack of a consumer packaged good (CPG) or even just a mention. Since then, there’s been a welcome evolution of what sponsors are willing and able to do with their packaging in order to activate their cause sponsorships. That said, even today some sponsors don’t seem to have gotten the memo that when it comes to explaining your cause campaign, more really is more, even on something as small as a can or bottle. The savviest sponsors realize that their only guaranteed means of reaching actual customers with a cause marketing message is by putting it on packaging. And the reach and frequency of the media on packaging for certain high-volume CPG items is almost certainly greater than radio, print or outdoor advertising, and, in many cases, TV. More to

Why Even Absurd Cause-Related Marketing Has its Place

Buy a Bikini, Help Cure Cancer New York City (small-d) fashion designer Shoshonna Lonstein Gruss may have one of the more absurd cause-related marketing campaigns I’ve come across lately. When you buy the bikini or girls one-piece swimsuit at Bergdorf-Goodman in New York shown at the left all sales “proceeds” benefit Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center . Look past the weak ‘ proceeds ’ language, which I always decry, and think for a moment about the incongruities of the sales of swimsuits benefiting the legendary Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Cancer has nothing to do swimming or swimsuits or summering in The Hamptons for that matter. And it’s not clear from her website why Shoshanna, the comely lass who once adorned the arm of comedian Jerry Seinfeld, has chosen the esteemed cancer center to bestow her gifts, although a web search shows that she’s supported its events for years. Lesser critics would say that the ridiculousness of it all is a sign that cause-related marketing is

A Clever Cause Marketing Campaign from Snickers and Feeding America

Back in August I bought this cause-marketed Snickers bar during my fourth trip of the day to Home Depot. (Is it even possible to do home repairs and take care of all your needs with just one trip to Home Depot / Lowes ?) Here’s how it works: Snickers is donating the cost of 2.5 million meals to Feeding America, the nation’s leading hunger-relief charity. On the inside of the wrapper is a code. Text that code to 45495… or enter it at snickers.com… and Snickers will donate the cost of one meal to Feeding America, up to one million additional meals. The Feeding America website says that each dollar you donate provides seven meals. So Snickers donation might be something like $500,000. But I like that Snickers quantified its donations in terms of meals made available, rather than dollars. That’s much more concrete. It doesn’t hurt that 3.5 million is a much bigger number than $500,000. I also like the way they structured the donation. By guaranteeing 2.5 million meals, the risk of a poor