The Join (Red) Campaign amuses me a little. I heard about it over the summer and it sounded good in theory: buy certain products and a portion of the proceeds will go toward fighting AIDS in Africa. Then, however, I looked at these products. Emporio Armani sunglasses. Motorola RAZR phones. Why can't I help donate to AIDS relief while buying toothpaste or printer paper or something else I can actually afford?
Over fall break I saw Gap's Join (Red) display. Ordinary T-shirts for $28, leather bracelets, spray-painted safety pins with beads on them for $1. I think Gap is only participating in this campaign so that once they end AIDS in Africa, they can set up sweatshops there.
A few more companies/products have gotten in on the (Red) action, but I'm still not entirely sold. Red iPod nanos... cool. I, however, am still irritated that they remastered the nano soon after I got mine. It's not like I'm going to replace my functioning one with a new one. Whatever. And, as alluring as custom-designed $65 Converse sneakers are, I'm still pretty sure that they would be made by kids in a Southeast Asian sweatshop, since Converse is owned by Nike now.
Social conscience is the cool thing for all the hipsters who care about looking cool more than they do about the plight of the suffering. As long as people get helped, then none of that matters, of course, but I find it pretty amusing. Companies are now capitalizing on this in the hopes of convincing people to buy their products and help others at the same time. The benefit is, I suppose, that people who normally wouldn't send a check to charity will now be donating their dollars for a good cause.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I know how you feel. I get frustrated with how commericialized the entire breast cancer fight has become. Yes, it's a good cause, but come on!
"We don't receive wisdom; we must discover it for ourselves after a journey that no one can take for us or spare us." -Marcel Proust
i totally agree! its not compassionate if your wearing it on your wrist or on your shoes. its convenient.
i think in the end this just gives companies an excuse to over price (because people are willing to spend more because they think a large portion is going to cure someone of AIDS, when really its just more expensive so the companies can donate a little to AIDS research and then still make their huge profits)
and it might produce this false sense of impact. people will think their materialism is paying off because someone with AIDS might end up with the cure a day sooner. how perfect an example of materialism is that? to say "oh your suffering? poor you, let me buy a cell phone so money will go to making you a cure." as if to say that material is all thats affected by the epidemic. Theres so much more to the AIDS epidemic than that and finding the cure won't reverse the effect its already had on the world, and neither will buying over priced gap clothes and cell phones.
thats not to say though that a cure shouldn't be found. people should just be willing to give more, and do more.