The Emperor Has No Clothes

Guest Editorial: Gayle Sulik, M.A., Ph.D., author of Pink Ribbon Blues: How Breast Cancer Culture Undermines Women’s Health.

In the last few weeks Susan G. Komen for the Cure was exposed. We have watched and listened as journalists, health advocates, philanthropists, bloggers, affiliates, Komen supporters, and countless others have shined a light on the obvious: The Komen foundation – breast cancer charity turned nonprofit corporation – is a juggernaut in the fight against breast cancer.

In the past, many have overlooked the obvious. Blinded by pink. Fueled by hope. Engaged in an emotionally charged war against a disease that no one should have to bear alone. It all made sense somehow. Critiques of the world’s largest breast cancer charity were mostly hidden beneath a barrage of pinked propaganda. When anyone openly raised concerns they were met with accusation, hostility, and anger. Komen founder Nancy Brinker summarily dismissed as curmudgeons and naysayers those who would dare to confront the authority of pink.

Though marginalized to some extent people have been, for years, arguing for fundamental changes in Komen’s version of the breast cancer paradigm. KomenWatch includes many of the arguments and concerns in its archives dating back to the 1990s. The news articles, reports, and letters from breast cancer survivors and others reveal a persistent questioning of the powerhouse organization.

In 1995 Joelyn Flomenhaft wrote a letter to The New York Times editor saying that, although she had done so in the past, she would not be attending the Komen Race for the Cure because people were being told to write their years of survivorship on pink visers and badges. “Breast cancer survivors should have the right to choose to make their illness public,” she said, “not have their choice made for them by race organizers.” Her letter suggested that while some do feel empowered by sharing in this way, Komen’s expectations about how a person should display her survivorship may also exert undue pressure on the diagnosed. I’ve heard similar sentiments throughout my research of pink ribbon culture.

Investigations into Komen’s activities suggest that the growing aversion to the organization’s approach to breast cancer support and awareness may be more than simply a matter of personal taste. In 2003, with support from the Fund for Investigative Journalism, Mary Ann Swissler examined Komen’s corporate and political ties and their influence on the direction of the Foundation. Komen’s literature did not reveal the lobbying ties, stock interests, seats on boards of private cancer treatment corporations, or the political activism of its key leaders, including Nancy Brinker herself. Yet Komen’s “stock portfolios and cozy relationships with Republican leadership” not only set them apart, their ties to cancer-related industry affected the organization’s objectivity and credibility. Sharon Batt, author of Patient No More: The Politics of Breast Cancer, told Swissler how Komen rose above the rest of the breast cancer movement in terms of power and influence.

“For one thing, the Komen Foundation has had more money. For another they carry friendly, reassuring messages through the media and their own programs, a phenomenon I like to term the ‘Rosy Filter,’ meaning the public is spoon-fed through a pink-colored lens stories of women waging a heroic battle against the disease, or the newest ‘magic bullet.’ Yet little light is shed on insurance costs, the environmental causes of breast cancer, or conflicts of interest.”

In the years that followed Swissler’s exposé the Komen organization was taken to task repeatedly, though sporadically, about how its political affiliations, high media profile, bureaucratic structure, corporate partnerships, industry ties, and market-based logic had led to questionable decisions. Squeezing out competing fundraisers is one of them. When Komen decided to expand its 5-K race to a multi-day walk, it started in San Francisco where Avon already had a 2-day walk planned. When Komen came in, Avon’s funds plummeted. KomenWatch told me that since the inception of its website numerous individuals have reported in confidence that Komen organizers have “deliberate strategies of non-collaboration” that keep them from attracting support for their smaller and less extravagant community initiatives. Against this background, it may not be surprising that Komen’s branding initiatives also involve legal efforts to keep other charities and organizations from using “for the cure” in their names.

In 2004 Breast Cancer Action tried to raise the public’s awareness that no one even knew how much money was being raised and spent in the name of breast cancer as awareness gave way to industry. Now in 2012, Reuters reports that critics within the philanthropic and research communities have also raised questions about Komen’s scientific approach and funding allocations, and The Washington Post rightly points out that Komen is part of a larger breast cancer culture that emphasizes “optics over integrity, crass commercialism and the infantilization of the female experience into something fashionable, cheerful or sexy.”

Over the years there have been numerous critiques of the Komen foundation. In addition to the news articles and essays in the KomenWatch archives, several books written about breast cancer in the last decade also note Komen’s role in the creation of a narrowly defined and profitable pink ribbon industry. [See Ehrenreich, Kasper & Ferguson, Kedrowski and Sarow, King, Klawiter, Ley, and my own book, Sulik.]

Komen’s recent decision to change granting criteria in a way that would preclude the women’s health network, Planned Parenthood, from applying for grants to offset the cost of providing screenings to low-income women, is the latest in a series of moves to prioritize Komen’s brand. Though the decision was reversed, KomenWatch is keeping eyes and ears open. The rest is up to you. As a medical sociologist, I’m glad to be part of this message. Kudos to KomenWatch.

/  Gayle Sulik

Should Breast Cancer Ads Play Up the Pink?

Title: Should Breast Cancer Ads Play Up the Pink?

Author: Katherine Hobson

Publication: Wall Street Journal blog

Publication Date: July 7, 2011

The vast majority of breast cancer cases occur in women, so it’s only natural that the components of and context for public-health ads about the disease have a connection to that gender.

A study recently published by the Journal of Marketing Research, however, questions whether that’s always the best way to go. A series of six experiments demonstrates, the authors say, that emphasizing gender in those ads might actually lower a woman’s perceived risk for breast cancer, make her give less to gender-specific cancer charities and even make her less likely to remember the ads. (Here’s the executive summary and here’s the abstract.)

Link to Full Article

Hold Your Noses: Pink Has A Smell

Title: Hold Your Noses: Pink Has A Smell

Author: Gayle Sulik

Publication: Pink Ribbon Blues blog

Publication Date: June 17, 2011

Susan G. Komen for the Cure®’s new fragrance Promise Me has more than a few people up in arms about the lengths this nonprofit organization (or perhaps more appropriately termed, nonprofit corporation), will go to guarantee its position in the breast cancer marketplace. The organization technically is in the business of ending breast cancer not hawking pink ribbon product lines. If it worked as it should, achieving its mission would render the organization and its increasing number of branded products obsolete.

This irony is not lost on a growing number of individuals and organizations taking aim at what they believe to be seriously misdirected activities. Komen’s corporate partnership last October with consumer products investor and operator, TPR Holdings, only invigorated discontent. TPR’s targeted investments include “scalable mass and prestige opportunities in health, beauty and  wellness categories.” Together, Komen and TPR envisioned “a union of beauty and charity” that took the form of a scalable, mass-produced, prestige item specifically designed for Susan G. Komen for the Cure®, a fragrance called Promise Me. The perfume was released in April, given as a complimentary sample to prospective beauty bloggers and reviewers, and is slated to remain on the market for six months “with new editions launching each year.”

Link to Full Article

Enter the Komen Bandits — Racing With A Message for BC Mets

Title: Enter the Komen Bandits — Racing With A Message for BC Mets

Author: Gayle Sulik

Publication: Pink Ribbon Blues blog

Publication Date: June 4, 2011

This weekend marks the 22nd annual Susan G. Komen Global Race for the Cure® 5K at the National Mall in Washington, DC. Nearly 40,000 people participated and the event raised more than $5 million. Reports of the race festivities are awash with celebrity, festivity, performance, and unbridled enthusiasm.

Susan G. Komen for the Cure’s founder, Ambassador Nancy G. Brinker, “charged up the crowd, noting that the sea of pink making their way up the National Mall was a bold statement by this community that we will not rest until our promise to end breast cancer forever is fulfilled.” She went on to say that, “If my sister Suzy were here today, she would take joy in the inspiration you provide. She’d take pride that in a politically divided city, there is unity on this issue. She’d take comfort in the fact that hopes are high, and that a cure is near.”

SGK social media was all a twitter with live feeds from the race revealing a mood that was triumphant, proud, and promising while solidifying the message that Komen is responsible for progress.

Link to Full Article

The Scent of Exploitation

We learned recently of yet another corporate partnership at the nonprofit corporation, Susan G. Komen for the Cure ®. This one is with a consumer products and distribution company named TPR Holdings LLC.

Together, SGK and TPR will not find a cure for breast cancer, but they’ll do the next best thing; develop and launch a new product line called Promise Me, the first and only proprietary fragrance developed with Susan G. Komen for the Cure®.

The Promise Me website is beautifully designed to market the fragrance and related products. Against a sensual light plum background, the copy describing the new perfume is alluring:

New word alert: floriental. Perhaps a combination of floral and oriental? Not that it matters. The important thing is to tantalize women consumers with sophisticated femininity and a just a hint of sensuality and social conscience. Readers can take a leisurely scroll over interactive images of orchids and pink peonies to learn what the special perfume ingredients are meant to signify. Providing a sense of intimacy, we even hear a voice (perhaps that of perfumer Jean Claude Delville…) who reads the pop-up text for us.

The advertisement oozes inspiration and exquisite attention to detail all the way to the perfume bottle marked with SGK’s signature (and trademarked) running ribbon.

Designer Chad Lavigne was inspired by the iconic breast cancer ribbon which he weaved into the detail of the glass bottle. A beautiful collectible item, special attention to detail was paid to every facet of the design- from the tiers of signature pink to the reflective gold finishes.

Well-known French perfumer Jean Claude Delville speaks directly to the reader about the significance of the Promise Me fragrance.

Color us inspired! A fragrance designed to evoke the emotions of positive energy, hope and love! And a fragrance designed to generate sales for TPR Holdings and boost Komen’s public image and revenue stream. We learn on the “Susan G. Komen for the Cure ®” page that, “TPR Holdings will guarantee a minimum donation of $1,000,000 to Komen for breast cancer research, education, screening and treatment.” But it doesn’t stop there. Consumers who purchase the Promise Me fragrance will also get a free gift of Nancy Brinker’s new book, conveniently with the same name.

Promise Me tells the story of two sisters, Nancy G. Brinker and Susan G. Komen, their loving bond from childhood through adulthood, the cancer that took one sister’s life and threatened the other’s, and the promise between them that launched the global breast cancer movement, transforming and saving the lives of millions of women.

Komen’s continued forays into the world of corporate partnerships are looking more and more like the activities of a for-profit corporation interested in staying in business for the long haul. The attention paid to branding; the continued promotion of Komen and it’s founder, Nancy Brinker as the self-styled leader of the global breast cancer movement; the plethora of pink products ranging from dish towels to sporting goods to housecleaning items to food and beverage products to hardware and now, to perfume and cosmetics suggests that the SGK brand – the mother of all cause-related marketing brands – is now being sold as a pink ribbon lifestyle.

The breast cancer cause has moved beyond the oncology clinics, beyond the chemotherapy infusion rooms, beyond the radiation suites, beyond the surgical wards, beyond the shattered lives and grave markers of the fallen to be atomized into a fragrance, encapsulated in a pretty pink ribbon bottle — and all for the bargain price of $59.00 including the “free” copy of Nancy G. Brinker’s homage to her dead sister, Promise Me, the book.

But we shouldn’t be surprised at this latest iteration of Komen’s flashy marketing strategies. In a 2003 interview with Susan Orenstein of CNN Money, the head of sponsorships at Komen, Cindy Schneible, admitted openly:

“We’re sensitive to the fact that this is a marketing relationship, not a philanthropic relationship.”

A peek into some of Komen’s corporate sponsorship materials reveals the SGK marketing philosophy in greater detail. In describing the benefits to becoming a corporate sponsor of their San Francisco Race event Komen’s brochure states;

Based on your level of sponsorship, your company may:

• Receive high visibility before the event and on Race day
• Reach thousands of decision makers and consumers in the 9 counties of the SF Bay Area through exposure on our website, eBlasts, race applications, posters and other materials
• Test-market and showcase products
• Build employee morale and company pride
• Associate with one of the most renowned movements to fight breast cancer and align yourself with the largest and most progressive grassroots network of breast cancer survivors
• Increase company and brand integrity by partnering with a cause that impacts millions of people locally and globally
• Retain and increase customer and client loyalty – consumers have a more positive image of a company associated with a good cause

The message is clear. Piggybacking off of Komen’s branded pink ribbon cause is an effective form of advertising for any company that is willing to pay the price of admission: a large donation to Komen and the mandatory perpetuation of the SGK story-line.

Geoff Livingston, noted social enterprise strategist and author of Now Is Gone stated recently on his blog that money-grabbing strategies such as Komen’s actually run counter  to their mission:

Non-profits are not in business to make money. They are a business to be sure, but unlike a for-profit, which seeks to dominate markets and yield profits, a cause or social enterprise seeks to provide a solution. When a for-profit business is successful, it keeps its doors open for years and expands and keeps looking for more market share. When a non-profit is successful it should close its doors because its business – or mission – has been completed.

Where’s Komen’s plan to complete its mission and close its doors? How does creating a new product line to sell $59.00 bottles of signature perfume provide a solution to the problem of breast cancer? Livingston asks, and rightly so:

Are you competing just to raise the most money? Competing in the sense that a cause seeks to beat out its competition helps no one. It actually hurts the cause space by creating distractions and wasted resources.

Komen’s words and actions speak loudly: A pseudo-corporation intent on keeping itself in business by marketing pink lifestyle products under the global brand of breast cancer. Don’t miss the next SGK commercial on the Home Shopping Network; Ambassador Nancy G. Brinker To Appear Live on HSN To Debut Exclusive New Promise Me Gift Set Benefiting Susan G. Komen for the Cure®. The scent of inspiration? More like the stench of breast cancer marketing.

KomenWatch grants full permission to republish our editorials in their entirety, with proper citation and link.

Citation for this editorial: KomenWatch. (2011, May 18). The Scent of Exploitation. Retrieved from http://www.komenwatch.org/.

IS RIBBON FATIGUE RESULTING IN WRONG MESSAGE?; MAYBE THERE’S TOO MUCH PUBLICITY ABOUT BREAST CANCER, SAYS WOMEN’S EDITOR ROS D ODD.(Abstract Only)

ABSTRACT ONLY

Title: IS RIBBON FATIGUE RESULTING IN WRONG MESSAGE?;
MAYBE THERE’S TOO MUCH PUBLICITY ABOUT BREAST CANCER, SAYS WOMEN’S EDITOR ROS D ODD.

Author: Ros D. Odd

Publication: Birmingham Post

Publication Date: October 7, 1998

Little more than a few years ago, breast cancer was one of those diseases women talked about only among themselves, and even then in slightly hushed tones.

A lot of men turned squeamish when confronted with the illness; some, it has to be said, still do. Today, however, few people recoil from discussing this potentially fatal illness.

As women’s health issues in general have gained a higher profile, so breast cancer is being tackled head on, not only in the medical world but also at street level.

Each year now, October is designated Breast Cancer Awareness Month, generating a plethora of fund-raising and media events in a bid to raise public awareness of the disease.

Despite men’s growing understanding of breast cancer, most of the campaigning is, naturally, aimed at women. For although men can fall victim to the disease, the vast majority of sufferers are female.

One of the main objectives of Breast Cancer Awareness Month is to instill into women the importance of regularly examining themselves. For the earlier a cancerous lump is detected, the better chance they stand of being treated successfully.

The drive seems to be working. Women in their thousands now keep a pink ribbon pinned to the lapel of their coats and jackets, not only in October but throughout the year.

However, a recent survey showed that although 90 per cent of women know the importance of checking their breasts once a month, only nine per cent are doing a proper selxamination.

The implication is that, despite the steady rise in the amount of publicity given to breast cancer and its prevention, more needs to be done to alert people to the dangers of a disease which will affect one in 12 women at some point in their lives.

And yet perhaps – just perhaps – there is a little too much publicity; maybe pink ribbon-fatigue has set in and the life-saving messages being pumped out with such dedication are being ignored.

ABSTRACT ONLY