Full Disclosure: A Rant is About to Ensure
As I've said a couple of times, the purpose of this blog is to share updates on Landon so our not-so-near friends and family can enjoy watching him grow up. But, as I've also said a few times, sometimes situations come up that infuriate me so much that I have to post about them.
In this case, I have to call out PR guru Peter Shankman for unapologetically distributing misinformation. Peter, as a public figure and someone who is seen as a PR expert, you have a responsibility to ensure that the information you are reporting is factual and (at the minimum) do a little research before sharing news stories.
Most of us are aware of the Susan G. Komen/Planned Parenthood controversy that occurred last week. Follow that fiasco, Peter Shankman posted the following Facebook update:
Follow the link and you'll come to a story reporting that Komen has "just" partnered with Discount Gun Sales to market a pink handgun. (Although, if you read to the bottom the article, you'll see where they mention that Komen maintains that they don't have a relationship with any gun manufacturer.)
The issue of this isn't the fact that there is a "breast cancer" gun out there - the last time I check, the Second Amendment is still valid, and gun owners likely know friends or family affected by breast cancer, just as non-gun owners.
The issue is that Peter failed to do his research. If he had, he would have learned that the "news" was from last year, and that, per Discount Gun Sales own admission, there was no official partnership between Komen and the gun manufacturer. In fact, you can read more about it here: http://www.discountgunsales.com/SGKF.pdf
Peter's comment received a lot of notice, with more than 130 of his followers commenting. Thankfully, among the commenters were a few level headed individuals who realized a few things:
A) a partnership like the alleged takes time. Even if Komen had officially partnered with Discount Gun Sales, the gun would not have been created virtually overnight, as the original story inferred. It's ludicrous to believe that the partnership would have been able to finalize the gun in such a short amount of time.
B) If there had been an official partnership, logic would dictate that Komen and Discount Gun Sales both would have realized the value of postponing an announcement, until the Planned Parenthood controversy faded. No organization is itching for bad press. Laying low for a bit would make a heck of a lot more sense than announcing a breast cancer gun mere days after a controversy of the magnitude we saw last week.
C) Gun owners are a legitimate population, many of whom give charitably and (as mentioned above) know people affected by breast cancer. Ignoring or demonizing that demographic is ridiculous. Why would it have been so terrible for Komen to appeal to a new group of people - people who are potential donors? The more people who receive your message, the more people who are aware of your work and may be willing to support you.
To make the situation worse, Peter has yet to address the issue that he is substantiating a rumor and spreading disinformation. Come on, Peter - take responsibility for your actions! Own up to your error and do a little "crisis" PR!
Finally, I find it curious that amid all this controversy, no one mentioned how little of its revenue Komen actually applies toward research. One figure shows that in 2009, 20.2% of Komen's revenue was directed to research. In other words, if you gave Komen $100 in 2009, only $20.20 would have been applied to fund research. Wouldn't you be curious where the remaining money went? Well, Komen uses an outside agency to help organize, promote and market the Walks - and that marketing firms keeps 30-35% of the dollars raised. So, if you pledged $100 to someone who is doing the 3 Day walk, only $70-75 actually makes it to Komen - and the rest is split to cover overhead, personnel and marketing expense and research.
(I will note that Komen has a new CEO and Board members, so the future direction of the organization (including how much is earmarked for research) may change.)
Before anyone accuses me of "hating" on Komen, let me mention that I am all for breast cancer awareness and research. My aunt battled breast cancer a few years back, and I support organizations that work toward a cure. My issue isn't with breast cancer awareness - it's with organizations that use their "good" name to fundraise, and yet spend so little of their donors' dollars on actual research. Let's hope Komen's new leadership recognizes this as an opportunity to change direction and utilize donations for what most donors intended - curing breast cancer.
No comments:
Post a Comment