Reply to Komen CEO Nancy Brinker’s life among the 0.1 percent

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Komen CEO Nancy Brinker’s life among the 0.1 percent"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=AnonymousI have nothing to do with Komen, but PP is confused.

Komen is criticized both for not sufficiently funding research and for defunding PP.  PP does not do research, but does provide terrific services to low income women.  Can't have it both ways on the research argument.  Komen also does advocacy work, meaning that it advocates for more goverment research dollars on breast cancer and for useful regulatory changes.  That is not research directly, but is critical.

Komen's salaries are not particularly high.  Check out your college/university President.  I am confident he/she is making as much, if not more.  Check out the CEOs of the other large charities.  Are you still contributing to them.  I also gather Briker did not take a salary for many years.

[b]Komen had every right to try to control the use of "for the cure" to the extent that it legally could.  This is basic branding.  If Komen did not, Komen would lose material opportunities to raise money for research and health care services[/b].  The choice Komen faces is to allow every disease group to copy what Komen created or to control the branding for Komen's benefit.  The former results in lost opportunities for Komen (ie, less sponsorship money), while the latter results in more money for Komen programs, whether they be research or health care services.  If every disease group was allowed to piggy back on Komen's branding, Komen would receive substantially less money from its sponsors.  Tiger Woods would not have received as much money from Rolex, if he were also promoting a rival watch company.  This is basic business sense.  And, to the extent that we are concerned about breast cancer, we should hope Komen makes good business decisions.  The more money it raises from whatever sources, the more money it can dedicate to research and health care services

As for slapping pink on HANDGUNS, I am perfectly okay with that.  I am a firm supporter of stringent gun control, and consider the NRA to be one of the worst organizations in the country.  But the fact is that handguns are not illegal, and will not be made illegal anytime soon.  Komen is simply trying to reach a segment of the US population.  The implication of the previous P is that Komen should work only with PP and not with any group that might cater to the more conservative segments of the US.  That is dead wrong.  All Americans must deal with breast cancer.  Komen should work with most any organization and with anybody that is interested in breast cancer.  Komen should have no views on other unrelated issues.  Komen supporters need not agree on other issues; they only must agree on Komen's breast cancer mission.  If one couldn't support Komen because one's views differ from other Komen supporters on unrelated issues, then this country is really messed up.  Komen should be a unifying force around breast cancer.  Other issues can be fought and argued in other forums.   All Americans, especially women, lose under the previous P's views.

[/quote]

I do check out the salaries at other charities. I do NOT give to those that pay the executives excessively and permit first-class air travel as a matter of policy.

Whether or not Komen had a "right" to legally harass other similarly-minded charities working for "a cure" to cancer is immaterial. I don't APPROVE of it and won't be giving them my dollars. Komen became far too obsessed with branding for branding's sake in any case that it lost sight of its mission.

Similarly, I know handguns are legal but I DON'T APPROVE OF THEM, ergo I won't support an organization that implicitly endorses their sale.

I made no implication at all that SGK should work "only with PP." My complaint was they moved to cut off funding for political reasons using the flimsiest of excuses. This offended my sensibilities and I will no longer give out of principle. Millions of others clearly feel the same way I do.

No one questions or challenges the right of SGK to do ANY of these things that you are defending. No one is trying to STOP them from doing these things. All we are saying is when they DO these things their actions will have INSTANT and MATERIAL consequences. That brand it worked so hard to cultivate and defend is now in tatters. The trust is gone, along with the respect. There are more worthy causes -- there have ALWAYS been more worthy causes. Only now we're committing to those other causes.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics