Marketing Breast Cancer Awareness Month

Today is the beginning of National Breast Cancer Awareness Month, an annual social campaign to promote education and information on the disease, as well as raise funds to help find causes, development treatment and, hopefully, find a cure. It was founded in 1993 by Evelyn Lauder (Senior Corporate Vice President of Estée Lauder). Since then, the number of companies supporting the drive has grown dramatically.

I certainly applaud the underlying intentions of Breast Cancer Awareness Month and I have absolutely no intention of criticizing any community effort to help alleviate the devastation of a serious disease. However, over the years, the message has been diluted by those few commercial and profit-driven factors that range from slightly questionable to downright repulsive.
The disease that's also a sure-fire marketing campaign.

I suppose it's nice when companies decorate their products in pink to show their support for Breast Cancer and then take some of those proceeds and donate it to charity. Of course, the new packaging and the ad campaigns to announce that new packaging aren't free. As a matter of fact, they'll spend more on rolling out a "pink movement" than they would just cutting a check to Breast Cancer research without all the hoopla. But then how would that help them move their product?

A certain yogurt company whose name I won't mention (it rhymes with "go play") asks its customers to mail in pink lids to help support the fight to find a cure for Breast Cancer. Seriously? They want you to mail garbage to them before they cough up a check? Obviously, you'll have to buy the yogurt first and, since you mean well, you'll probably end up buying more of that particular brand. Ka-Ching! It's no wonder October is like a second Christmas for some corporations (especially to those products that don't make particularly good gifts).

The organization Breast Cancer Action has coined the term pinkwashing to describe companies that use chemicals shown to have a link to breast cancer (ahem... Estée Lauder) but then turn around and heavily promote the cause instead of changing manufacturing methods. BCA currently has its sights set of that certain yogurt company with the pink lids for their use of milk from cows treated with rBGH*, a synthetic hormone.

* The FDA ruled rBGH treated milk safe for human consumption, but there's a raging debate from consumer groups over the effects of the increase of insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1), which has been linked to some forms of cancer, including breast. I invite you to judge for yourself; I'm too lazy to do it for you.

Symbolic items that do little to nothing.

How many afflictions and/or world issues have ribbons themselves help cure/solve? The answer is none. Same goes for "pinking up" everything around you or putting magnets on your car.

There's nothing wrong with showing your concern and support. But again, ribbons (and other "awareness" chotchkies) are only symbols, not tools. They are often manufactured and sold by small companies trying to cash in on a social movement. You never know what portion of the proceeds are actually going to the cause (if any at all).

A lot of well-meaning consumers buy these ribbons (or the wrist bands) in tiny gas stations or convenience stores. The counter displays housing these items often provide no literature or references for further education about the disease itself, only a price tag. Again, who is that helping, those with the disease or someone else's profits?

All the eggs in one affliction's basket

Breast cancer is a serious disease and education about early detection and treatment is certainly warranted. But one has to wonder why an entire month is spent on one form of cancer when heart disease continues to be the number one killer of women in this county (almost eight times more than breast cancer). And topping the cancer list: lung.

This may be overly cynical and potentially offensive if you don't agree but I still urge you to think about this: What other time can an unrelated company openly refer to breasts in relation to their product and get away with it? If they're so concerned with women's health, why not promote education and donate proceeds towards all the health risks? Because, like it or not, breasts are still linked to sexuality (even if subconsciously) and sex sells.

Would a company sink so low? One only needs to think of all the other cancers that don't get consumer product attention but are just as deadly. I guess lungs and colons aren't attractive enough to move inventory.

For further reading, I invite you to check out the Breast Cancer Action site and the book, Pink Ribbons, Inc.: Breast Cancer and the Politics of Philanthropy by Samantha King. Finally, go to the American Cancer Society for further information about treatment, support and links to donate.