But increasingly it feels like it’s becoming ‘buy something funny, slightly funny or only vaguely connected with the event…for money”, as Red Nose Day – like most major charities – becomes intrinsically bound up with major retail brands.
We’re not knocking Comic Relief. Far from it. It’s a fantastic charity doing amazing work and we’re sporting our monster noses as we write. The association with major brands and retailers is logical; it spreads the word about the event and, through mass product marketing, adds significantly to the charity’s coffers. And, at a time when charities are suffering because of the economic downturn, we understand that perfectly. Indeed, where there has been a long term association with a brand – for example Sainsbury’s and TK Maxx with Comic Relief or Tesco’s ten year support for the Race for Life – the relationship seems perfectly natural.
But more so than ever this year, it seems, there are Comic Relief products on our shelves that make you question the extent of genuine altruism and the extent to which there is a rush for any brand to link itself to Comic Relief. Has the charity reached brand overload this year and does the consumer see through that?
So far this year, I’ve eaten my Jimmy Con Carrne and Stephen Fry-up crisps for Comic Relief, munched on my Kellogg’s Comic Relief Rice Krispies Squares with edible noses, supported the Mini Babybel and Comic Relief Guinness World Record attempt for the most jokes told in a one-hour relay, washed my clothes with a special pack of Ariel Liquitab, eaten some
Carte D'or Chocolate Inspiration Comic Relief ice cream, spread Comic Relief Flora Buttery spread on my bread to have with my salad, that’s dressed with Hellmann's Balsamic Salad Dressing, with a proportion of the price going to Comic Relief. I’ve even sprayed myself with Impulse True Love Body Fragrance and seen 5p from the special pack donated to Comic Relief. You have to question whether any brand is really recognised for its association with the charity in such a crowded field. And that’s before I’ve bought any ‘official’ Comic Relief merchandise.
This in itself isn’t inherently wrong. Comic Relief is a great national event, a time for everyone – brands included – to come together in a combined endeavour. But are we reaching the point when the novelty wears off if anyone can be persuaded to buy a product in aid of Comic Relief when only a matter of a few pence is actually finding its way to the charity? And how can smaller charities possibly be able to compete with this?
You don’t need to be in such a crowded field to do good, be seen to do good and yet remain true to the values of the brand. Waitrose champions local charities by giving shoppers a token to give to one of three charities local to each store every month; similarly Marks & Spencer has been running its range of pink products for Breakthrough for a number of years.
The risk here for brands is quite simple. The more crowded the charity association, the more likely they are to be seen to be associating simply to avoid being seen as not associating. And therein lies the potential for brands to be accused of riding the Comic Relief bandwagon. Charities and brands should be a natural fit, but it may sit better with consumers for brands to build their alliances with charities with which there isn’t such an obvious commercial clamour. The brand still fulfils its CSR obligation, a needy cause still benefits and yet the brand creates some stand-out from the crowd and becomes a leader rather than a follower. Plus, and I say this still wearing my nose, there are other causes worthy of brands’ support.
No comments:
Post a Comment