What happened inside Komen:
But three sources with direct knowledge of the Komen decision-making process told me that the rule was adopted in order to create an excuse to cut-off Planned Parenthood. (Komen gives out grants to roughly 2,000 organizations, and the new “no-investigations” rule applies to only one so far.) The decision to create a rule that would cut funding to Planned Parenthood, according to these sources, was driven by the organization’s new senior vice-president for public policy, Karen Handel, a former gubernatorial candidate from Georgia who is staunchly anti-abortion and who has said that since she is “pro-life, I do not support the mission of Planned Parenthood.” (The Komen grants to Planned Parenthood did not pay for abortion or contraception services, only cancer detection, according to all parties involved.) I’ve tried to reach Handel for comment, and will update this post if I speak with her.
The decision, made in December, caused an uproar inside Komen. Three sources told me that the organization’s top public health official, Mollie Williams, resigned in protest immediately following the Komen board’s decision to cut off Planned Parenthood. Williams, who served as the managing director of community health programs, was responsible for directing the distribution of $93 million in annual grants. Williams declined to comment when I reached her yesterday on whether she had resigned her position in protest, and she declined to speak about any other aspects of the controversy.
But John Hammarley, who until recently served as Komen’s senior communications adviser and who was charged with managing the public relations aspects of Komen’s Planned Parenthood grant, said that Williams believed she could not honorably serve in her position once Komen had caved to pressure from the anti-abortion right. “Mollie is one of the most highly respected and ethical people inside the organization, and she felt she couldn’t continue under these conditions,” Hammarley said. “The Komen board of directors are very politically savvy folks, and I think over time they thought if they gave in to the very aggressive propaganda machine of the anti-abortion groups, that the issue would go away. It seemed very short-sighted to me.”
DougJ is right. These folks need to pay a hefty price.
Craig
I will not be buying anything with the pink label on it for the foreseeable future. Hell, I won’t watch a Pink Panther movie, or drink pink lemonade, or use delicious, delicious pink Himalayan salt either.
Steve
Jeffrey Goldberg gets an awful lot of grief for being on the wrong side of basically two issues total. I think he’s a good journalist and doesn’t really belong on anyone’s auto-hate list.
burnspbesq
They will. They are.
Soonergrunt
Secondary to your post, John, Tbogg has some insight to this situation, not associated with SGK or Planned Parenthood, but as a Public Relations guy:
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2012/01/31/the-pink-badge-of-cowardice/
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2012/02/01/radical-veep-and-mau-maued-by-the-god-botherers/
http://tbogg.firedoglake.com/2012/02/01/the-komen-syndrome/
I’m sure that most people here read Tbogg anyway, but this little series is an excellent examination on the sheer magnitude of damage that Komen has inflicted upon itself.
Not to put too fine a point on it, but it’s huge and irreparable.
Angela
Wow John Cole. Thanks for this verification of what we suspected really happened. I do hope they pay a big enough price that others organizations will start to understand there is a cost to messing with reproductive freedoms.
The Bobs
“The Komen board of directors are very politically savvy folks”
No one could possibly believe this statement now.
piratedan
fellas….. does anyone know if the NFL is in cahoots with Komen specifically or is their month of pinkiness just in support of breast cancer in general?
Cat Lady
All of the news this morning is about pushback to Komen and Rmoney’s quote about not caring about poor people. Wingers leaving their bubble find reality has a liberal bias.
LittlePig
@Steve: Now that’s more than a tad defensive.
And as Our American Cousin comes to a close, we hear the question from the balcony…”..well, other than *that*, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?”
JCT
@The Bobs: They are just like the Scott, Kasich, Walker and Daniels of the world, they decided they had the wind at their backs and went for it. Nothing more.
Gee, talk about Waterloo.
beltane
Yoplait is taking a lot of heat for this on their FB page. So far it doesn’t look like they’re scrubbing the comments.
There should be a special place in hell for Nancy Brinker, a person who exploited the death of her sister and the noble intentions of millions of Americans, in her quest to obtain political power and undeserved wealth for her co-conspirators.
DougMN
‘Very politically savvy people’ – that’s the funniest thing I’ve read all day. Its like they’ve been asleep for 30 years.
Legalize
Teahadism in a nutshell:
This is a terribly short-sighted idea; it will cause irreparable reputational and economic harm to an otherwise decent organization; and thousands of women will have their health adversely affected. But we will be ideologically pure and annoy liberals.
Yevgraf
I’m going to go OT, but it looks like there may be some union activity with regard to the Super Bowl in Indy.
I’m thinking that the reason why the unions are being handed their lunch is that nobody honors anybody else’s picket lines anymore, and nobody will follow through on a general strike.
Imagine the ramifications if all the union folks – electricians, telecom technicians, NFL players, delivery guys, etc. decided to strike the Super Bowl? How would those pasty, pudgy Hoosier business folks react to the brilliance of their Governor and Leg in passing the “Right to Work for Less” statute?
Martin
So is the battle for school boards over with, then? Are we onto the battle for charitable organizations?
Well, Komen can solve this quite easily. Fire the VP for Public Policy, make it clear why the VP was fired, and reinstate support for Planned Parenthood. That they haven’t done this shows that they really don’t know what to do, and that they aren’t as political savvy as they are suggested to be. They ARE cowed by the anti-abortion groups, and the only solution is to meet them with equal strength and demonstrate which support is the more valuable.
danimal
As a son whose mother survived breast cancer, I’m usually predisposed to support Komen. But now, my contributions will be going to the American Cancer Society.
curiousleo
For those that think all Christians are right wing extremists, please note that the Episcopal Bishop of North Carolina is against this decision by SGK and has said so publicly. He’s in PP’s corner here.
Calouste
That’s a shit lie. Unless you think the “giving in” part is the hiring of Handel. Everything that happened after that has been deliberately advanced by Handel. She stated that she would cut off federal funds for cancer screening to Planned Parenthood if she was elected governor, so of course if she were in a position to cut off funds to PP, like she is now at SKG, she would do it. Once Handel was hired, the outcome was predictable.
liberal
@Steve:
Yeah, the prospect of a little war with Iran wouldn’t be a big enough deal to make anyone decide that someone like JG shouldn’t be “auto-hated.”
slag
@Martin:
Sadly, this is a multi-front war. We’re going to have to fight multiple battles at once. And divert resources to the ones with the most heat at the moment.
Also, I wouldn’t say they were cowed by anti-choice groups. According to all we’ve been learning lately, they’re just finally coming out as an anti-choice group themselves.
Zandar
@Martin:
This. Anything short of this is unacceptable and will cost the Foundation millions. You don’t give in to them, you resist them.
MattF
As far as I can tell, ‘politically savvy’ still means ‘giving in to the wingers.’ And that’s not going to change until there’s blood on the floor. So, we shall see.
liberal
@Calouste:
Well, that’s an interesting aspect of the whole thing. Why was she hired? Did someone try to put the screws on the foundation? (I doubt it…) Did they think that by sucking up to the right it would somehow benefit them?
Of course, it doesn’t really matter…people should boycott the hell out of them.
feebog
danimal:
Better yet, donate directly to Planned Parenthood, as we do. Not that I have anything against the ACS, my wife is a volunteer with that organization, but PP really needs the support right now.
I was not surprised to see that Nancy Brinker, whose late husband was the head of Brinker, a company that owns and operates thousnads of restuarants, takes a heafty salary (400K) as Chair of Komen. She is undoubtedly a millionaire many times over, but just can’t keep her hand out of the till apparently.
Soonergrunt
@Martin: They can’t repair this. SGK will never recover fully from this, even if they do exactly what you suggest. If they reverse course, then everybody will see it as confirmation that it was a political decision that had nothing to do with women’s health, and will hate them for it. Additionally, nothing pisses off the right wing like taking a victory from them, and they’ll lose benefactors on that side of the house as well.
gwangung
That’s called multi-tasking. This is not a problem.
Stooleo
I enjoyed Ed’s take on it over at Gin and Tacos.
shortstop
@Zandar: They really have irreparably damaged the trust people had in them. They might be able to mitigate the harm by doing all of the above, but it isn’t going to “solve the problem” they’ve created for themselves.
The Moar You Know
The Chamberlains of the left have spoken. Sternly worded blog posts will be posted. An ineffective boycott will be mounted.
Komen will go on the wingnut welfare martyr circuit, and all the execs involved will graduate to roles on the Fox Entertainment Channel.
Responding in kind by ratfucking a right-wing institution shall be kept be firmly off the table by the high-road crowd.
The nation shall lurch a bit more to the right. Liberals will look in bewilderment at their tear-spattered drumheads and protest tents and wonder aloud how such a calamity could have been allowed to happen. Smug and secure in the knowledge that at least they aren’t vicious assholes like the other side, they walk on by the wreck of America, just as Noonan recommends, while the nation comes apart at the seams a bit more.
shortstop
@liberal:
She was hired because the foundation has a strong right-wing bias. We’re just now finding that out. Look at Brinker’s history; she’s no further left than Handel, but she’s been considerably quieter about it. They haven’t suddenly started sucking up to the right; they’ve decided (very, very wrongly, as it turns out) that the political climate is right for them to act openly on it (while still proffering pathetic excuses rather than owning their wingitude).
Satanicpanic
They’ve underestimated how much many of us (I’m no saint) have quietly resented the stupid pink pins and being guilted into supporting SGK when there are plenty of other worthy charities out there that don’t spend so much time on obnoxious branding. A lot of dudes (well, one anyway) have been waiting for an excuse to not fork over $$ at the company fundraiser and are going to jump on it.
YoohooCthulhu
Someone on the earlier thread pointed out that the only way to REALLY stop this is to ensure that wingnut welfare recipients like Handel can’t find a job after this. The left was pretty successful making Alberto Gonzalez unemployable, I don’t see why they can’t do it here…
Elizabelle
I don’t see how they come back from this.
We’ve seen behind the curtain, and the internet makes it easier to find groups providing healthcare to women and doing R&D. People will make their donations directly.
Cut out the middleman, swathed in corporate pink.
beltane
@shortstop: Aside from the latest travesty,t here is so much that is wrong about the activities of the Susan G. Komen Foundation that they deserve to go down in flames regardless of what happens to Karen Handel. Handel is a sign that the cancer at SGK has metastasized, but the organization appears to have been a malignant tumor from the beginning.
Amir Khalid
@Zandar:
One more thing: the malicious policy that targeted Planned Parenthood needs to be rescinded as well. Otherwise some other organization could risk losing the Komen foundation’s funding over an investigation on trumped-up allegations.
Satanicpanic
@The Moar You Know: What would you suggest the left do here? I’m not totally disagreeing with you, but isn’t it a little early (since this only came up 3 days ago) to start declaring defeat?
joes527
@DougMN:
There were folks who were avoiding Komen because they worked with PP. Those folks are sitting around their blogs talking about what a wonderful move this was, and how it finally allows them to support Komen.
There is tremendous outrage over this today, but seriously, something shiny is going to float by pretty soon. In two months will the number of outraged liberal $$’s not going to Komen outweigh the number of satisfied conservative $$’s that now are?
I don’t know the answer to that question, but it is possible that the liberal outrage will largely blow over by the next news cycle (they won’t ever approve of this move, but will they remember it?) and they will have added strong conservative support. If that is what occurs, then yes, this will have been a very politically savvy move.
gwangung
Hmph. Declaring defeat three days in seems particularly left-wingish….
Maus
@MattF:
The Board and Executive Officers *are* Wingers. How could they give in to themselves? This has been their MO since day one, the effectiveness of Pinkwashing has been scrubbing their image just as much as the petrochemicals.
Louise
What Elizabelle said. Not that SGK won’t continue to be a huge thing (it’s funded by corporations, after all), but they have lost all independent thinkers and their money. In my case, their decision made me pay attention to something I’d been unconsciously ignoring. I should thank them.
liberal
@Satanicpanic:
Good question. Maybe he/she thinks the Left should start lobbing firebombs?
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@The Moar You Know: Yeah, because that’s exactly what we’ve been seeing over the last few days. I’m curious what else you would have done since people are pulling donations to SGK and supporters?
Maus
@joes527:
Yes. Because these people are tightwads. The myth of conservatives overwhelmingly donating to charity is based on tithes, not independent donations.
Bludger
Yay, no more pink crap.
liberal
@Amir Khalid:
What malicious policy? Isn’t it a House investigation? AFAICT the House can pretty much investigate anything it damn well pleases. Not that I think we should be happy about the results; but rather, it’s not a “policy” at all but rather politics.
Maus
@The Moar You Know:
This was already in the fucking plans.
Should we not be outraged? All we can do is take our money and support elsewhere, and encourage PP or another group to create a REAL anti-cancer organization that’s not a corporate lobbying group.
shortstop
@joes527: Public opinion has been holding steady at about 75% against, 25% for. I’m not worried about all the illiterate homeschooling mothers with St. Philomena medals as their FB photos (most of whom are right now earnestly insisting that abortion and contraception give you breast cancer, and claiming that PP clients can just walk into radiology departments without a referral if they want mammos–oh, the protective shell that a husband’s insurance builds around an ignorant and insular woman) suddenly making up the scratch SGK is losing from the rest of America’s small donors. Most of them are obediently forwarding form letters (“I always wanted to support you but couldn’t–until now!) and that will likely be the end of their sudden interest in Komen.
I do think, however, that it’s likely that Koch-like folks will ride to the rescue with supergigantico donations if they can figure out how to make themselves some money in the process.
The struggle continues and we need to maintain our fighting stance.
Steve
@liberal: Goldberg doesn’t support war with Iran. In fact he’s one of the more cogent voices against it. But I don’t want to hijack the thread.
Maus
@liberal: It’s the house investigation into “sex trafficking”, put at the behest of Breitbart stooges, just as ACORN was defunded due to their chicanery.
JPL
@Calouste: Just to add to your excellent comment. Karen Handel didn’t graduate from college so it doesn’t seem that she was appointed to the board because of her wide range of knowledge. Karen’s life has been political in nature. It’s the only thing she brought to the table.
Violet
I’ll be donating to Planned Parenthood. I’m embarrassed I haven’t done it earlier.
I’ll also donate to the American Cancer Society or another organization that actually supports cancer research instead of inflicting their politics on poor women.
Doc Sportello
@piratedan — It looks like the NFL is working with the American Cancer Society, and not directly with Komen.
And Brinker sat on a local advisory board for Planned Parenthood as late as last year.
Also — her last husband invented the salad bar.
shortstop
@JPL: That is an excellent point.
rlrr
@curiousleo:
An extreme right wing Christian will tell you that an Episcopal Bishop is not a real Christian.
Pococurante
@Steve:
Agreed.
Most people don’t like re-thinking their past decisions though. Ironic isn’t it that Goldberg did rethink (much like our beloved BJ leader) and yet folks here keep doubling down on the hate.
Maus
@shortstop:
I think they’ve hit their highest point, I don’t see them getting more corporate donations now that they’ve gone on the anti-choice offensive.
ChrisB
@Martin:
This is absolutely correct. What this all shows is that when an organization like Komen is pressured by the right we must have the conviction to push back even harder.
Amir Khalid
@liberal:
From Goldberg’s blog post:
That malicious policy.
liberal
@Steve:
You’re flat-out wrong. Just because he doesn’t think we should attack Iran now doesn’t mean he’s against going to war with Iran.
joes527
@shortstop:
In 2 months Public opinion will be 75% don’t quite remember what the fuss was all about 25% made a change because of this.
If that.
scav
One fascinating thing about this is it’s so clearly on the high-visibility branding battlefield. The real pressure comes if companies start noticing, let alone withdrawing funds. Branding, PR, this is MBA visible. Putting a little fear of the public into that lot could be useful on multiple fronts.
Dave
@joes527: Since when did Republicans give two shits about women’s health? I find it hard to believe they’ll make up the amount of money Komen just cost themselves.
liberal
@Amir Khalid:
Oh, I thought you meant the policy producing the House investigation.
Amir Khalid
FYWP has refused me permission to edit my comment #57. The paragraph after the block quote should have been part of it.
Maus
@liberal:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-11-08/why-obama-might-save-israel-from-nuclear-iran-jeffrey-goldberg.html
He’s just askin’ questions. Y’know, like when Obama gets to launch missile strikes against Iran. Not War or nothin’.
liberal
@Pococurante:
Hardly. For example, while Goldberg isn’t saying “Bomb Iran now!,” I’d claim that considerable daylight exists between his take on US-Iranian relations and John Cole’s.
But thanks for playing.
Dave
@rlrr:
And that irks me because we have seniority on pretty much everyone except the Catholics. And the Lutherans, but we’re pretty much the same now.
J.D. Rhoades
Just FYI:
SF writer John Scalzi’s donating all his e-book profits from Subterranean Press between today and February 8, 2012 to Planned Parenthood. He says he’ll direct that the donation go specifically toward their breast cancer screening and educational activities, to help replace the funding lost from the Susan G. Komen Foundation.
http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/02/01/ebooks-for-breast-cancer-screening-and-education/
And I’m joining in:
http://jdrhoades.blogspot.com/2012/02/what-hell-ill-join-in.html
The Moar You Know
@Satanicpanic: Start ratfucking back. Stop bringing petitions to a gunfight. Stop squatting in their own self-righteousness and start throwing punches.
None of this will happen. The American left loves being able to say “I stuck to my principles” far more than they like saying “I won one for the good guys today”.
liberal
@Maus:
Thanks, Maus, for doing some of my homework for me (no snark). And for giving me yet another laugh re Goldberg’s take on foreign policy issues.
Should be getting back to work; cheers!
Soonergrunt
@Amir Khalid: Fixed. The blockquote function doesn’t complete across paragraph breaks, so I deleted the empty line.
Maus
And that’s not at all like what he posted in the past.
Seriously, it’s a fucking cut and paste job.
He “learns” like how Sully “learns”. He apes our speech and goes back to being a terrible person.
JPL
So according to Komen Foundation, they will not award grant money to any organization under investigation by a right wing whacko who hasn’t provided any evidence. Unless the guy loses the next election, planned parenthood will be under investigation for a long time since the whacko hasn’t had a meeting yet.
My dream is that this event has woke a sleeping tiger. It has been time to fight back for a long time but politicizing women’s health issues might be the last straw.
@joes527: You can call me a pollyanna, if you want.
EconWatcher
I actually didn’t “already know this.” I was guessing the decision reflected cowardice, not the outright venality of someone using a health charity’s resources to make an ideological point. I was wrong.
I try to be cynical, but I just can’t keep up.
I will say, I always got a bad vibe about Komen for other reasons, though–like their threats to sue other charities that use any phrase that sounds like “for the cure.”
shortstop
@joes527: Maybe. The early pushback is unusually strong and the pusher audience is particularly knowledgeable about — and mostly has a stake in — the topic of women’s cancer screening/care/research. It’s very personal for a lot of people.
As mentioned in a previous thread, this has several other unique elements attached: an organization that’s easy to boycott because of its branding obsession, a hugely recognizable and previously trusted name crapping on PP (coming on top of the less well known Congressional attacks and state-by-state defundings), etc.
We’ll see.
shortstop
@The Moar You Know: You still haven’t produced a single specific.
Rafer Janders
@joes527:
In two months will the number of outraged liberal $$’s not going to Komen outweigh the number of satisfied conservative $$’s that now are?
Yeah, because conservatives just LOVE to spend lots of dollars on supporting women’s health….In two months, conservatives aren’t going to give a toss about Komen or women’s breast cancer. They’ll give their money to a worthier, more reprehensible cause.
liberal
@The Moar You Know:
Look, I don’t disagree. However…most of these political battles involving solving difficult collective action problems. The right has these factors in its favor:
(1) Access to much, much more money (I’d say about an order of magnitude more)
(2) Ability to rely on already-organized groups via religious congregations (yes, there are liberal/centrist ones, but religions tend to be reactionary)—look at all the youth who went to the Walk for Life or whatever the hell it’s called (AFAICT they were largely sent by religious groups)
(3) The default attitude within the mainstream media and American culture more generally that the left is suspect and the right is to be accorded the benefit of the doubt (unfortunately, probably more widely spread than just American culture)
shortstop
Way to bolster the wide-eyed insistence that this wasn’t a political move, SGK.
GregB
The Susan G. Komen is not cowed by anti-abortion groups.
It has become an anti-abortion group.
It has become a political action committee with a highly political agenda and staffed and run by highly political people.
Maus
@EconWatcher: It’s even worse than what you think now! The organization is anti-womens’ health, lobbying against federal funds being used (with much more efficiency and less bureaucracy) for womens’ health because they support “private industry and charity”, and lobbying as their Health Care Industry donors wish them to in exchange for donations.
trollhattan
Nailed it [yesterday in comments; hurts self patting own back]. Now I’d like to know if Handel and Rep Cliff Stearns were in cahoots before he launched the PP investigation and if so, if that’s legal activity under Komen’s corporate structure? (Are they a 501(c)(3)?)
zmulls
@57
Exactly. If I had known the chair of Komen was a Bush supporter, I might have thought twice; but it always seemed to function as a non-partisan activity. It supported research to cure breast cancer, which is something we all can agree on.
But it’s clear that the “sorry, you’re being investigated, we can’t give to you” policy was a fig leaf set up to mask what they really wanted to do, which is defund PP. That was the goal, not the accidental effect.
They can’t fix it. Already people are starting to question the salaries made by the top folks, and the ratio of money spent on the cause vs. money for ‘overhead.’ Once people stop wearing the pink ribbons, and telling co-workers that they can’t support them this year because…….
….well, people will find new ways to support the same cause, more effectively. In the next two weeks we’ll hear about better breast cancer charities, I daresay.
And yes, I gave to PP this morning. *After* I heard they were only $50K away from replacing this year’s Komen funding. Bet they hit it.
Amir Khalid
@Soonergrunt:
Vielen Dank.
liberal
@Maus:
Another great quote.
Though I assume you meant And that’s not at all unlike what he posted in the past.
slag
@joes527:
It’s not that simple.
I’m with tbogg on this:
liberal
@shortstop:
I might be mistaken, but one potential vulnerability is that a lot of these foundations, and their sources of corporate money, like to steer away from obviously controversial issues.
Who knows, though. As posters above say, we could direct our funds to PP. And if the wingers try to replace that, they’ve got that much less money to spend on other shite.
joes527
@JPL:
I don’t dismiss that possibility. I’m just noticing that talk is cheap, and comments in a blog aren’t worth the money you paid to read them. The proof will be in the doing.
And if I had a nickel for every last straw I’ve ever seen, I could fund MY OWN SuperPAC.
shortstop
@slag: Superb summation by the basset man.
kay
@Legalize:
I don’t know. It looks like they lied to their (individual) donors and volunteers yesterday. If they did, they have some serious ethical issues at the top.
Soonergrunt
@Amir Khalid: Bitte Schoen.
FormerSwingVoter
Hey guys, look what I found!
The ‘Contact Us’ web form, phone number, and mailing address for Komen!
RELEASE THE HOUNDS, SMITHERS!
My own letter:
gwangung
Yes, and truly.
I’m not going to prejudge based just on political identification. That’s just the same tribalism right wingers go in for. I’m focussing on behavior patterns—and there’s enough there to brand Komen as a right wing tool.
Jennifer
The thing that ought not be allowed to die down is that SGK only uses 25% of their donations for “the cure”. It’s supposedly their mission to find a cure, but that takes a back seat in how they allocate their funds? Their leader pulls down $500 K per year – for running a non-profit. I wouldn’t begrudge someone $150K for running an organization this size, but a half-million per year?
Look, if the Komen folks have decided that wingnutty is the way to go, the long-term strategy is to constantly remind the public of how little of their donation will actually go to finding a cure for the disease that killed mom, coupled with information about better organizations to support.
Part two is to let corporations with SGK marketing tie-ins know that you won’t buy anything that helps to fund SGK, and be watching to see which companies continue to support the foundation in the future and taking that into consideration in all your purchasing decisions.
I don’t think it would be right to go nuclear at this point on anyone who currently has a SGK tie-in and threaten boycott, because 1)it’s not the company’s fault that SGK is being mismanaged, 2)they shouldn’t be punished for SGK branded products that are already produced or in the marketplace, and 3)most companies plan their giving on an annual basis; as such, it will be a year before most of them can really dissociate themselves from SGK.
But they certainly need to be encouraged to do it as soon as possible, by people letting them know that pink ribbon branding is no longer a warm-n-fuzzy, no-political-downside form of advertising.
Kyle
Good luck raising money from the Fungus on the Family crowd. They don’t give a shit about anyone’s health, and even less about women’s health, unless there’s profit involved.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
@The Moar You Know:
I am not about to fuck rats to prove a point. No organization is going to care that I fuck rats.
What do you want us to do to actual organizations and people?
bemused
@Soonergrunt:
The 3rd tbogg syndrome link was was particularly interesting to me. SGK had to know the doc Pink Ribbons Inc documentary was coming out and they had to know they were going to get a gigantic pushback from the get go but they did it anyway. Hubris/stupidity, yes, but also a single-minded, dogged determination by hard right conservatives to impose their will upon everyone else just as we are seeing happen with voter id, union busting, yadda, yadda. The GOP presidential and other republican candidates move faster and faster to the outer limits of wingnut madness and those in office work even more feverishly to bulldoze through outrageous legislation. These are desperate people and desperate people make incredibly risky decisions, willing to bet even the whole pot, their own survival, to win the jackpot.
handsmile
joes527
@Belafon (formerly anonevent):
The SPCA might have something to say.
Paul in KY
@curiousleo: Well I would expect Episcopals to still be sane. When they start ranting about Jeebus & Second Coming, etc. you will know the Wingularity is imminent.
Jesse
@The Moar You Know: Throwing punches, in this context, means what?
You know, if I could afford to bankroll my own astroturf “grassroots” and set up the lefty equivalent of Wingnut Welfare, I would. Many of us would, I bet.. But, for some odd reason, none of us can.
Jesse
@The Moar You Know: Throwing punches, in this context, means what?
You know, if I could afford to bankroll my own astroturf “grassroots” and set up the lefty equivalent of Wingnut Welfare, I would. Many of us would, I bet.. But, for some odd reason, none of us can.
slag
@zmulls:
I almost did a Komen walk. Signed up and everything. But then when I started to create my fundraising plan and looked into the percentage of my walk that was actually funding the cause (I think it was like 30% at the time), the words out of my mouth were something to the effect of, “I can’t sell that!”. Gave up my signup fee, of course, but I didn’t feel bad about it at the time. Now I wish those bastards never saw a dime of my money. I can hold a mean grudge.
FormerSwingVoter
Oh, by the way – we really need to start reminding everyone that the right to choose is a Constitutional one. I am going to start using the phrase “Constitutional Right To Choose” every single fucking time the topic of abortion comes up.
Marc
I think the gloomsayers here are missing the point. Tbogg had some really interesting insights into this point.
First of all, there is a strong overlap between “planned parenthood supporter” and “concerned about womens health”. They haven’t antagonized some fringe group with this action; they’ve antagonized their most natural supporters.
Second, they’ve covered themselves in political muck. Instead of this being just about a noble cause it’s now about abortion politics in a high-profile way. If your primary draw is “cancer research” you lose a lot if people have an excuse not to give to you for unrelated reasons.
It’s a disaster for them, and they’re already losing local affiliates (like in New England.)
Satanicpanic
@liberal:
I actually thought the OWS tents were pretty effective.
Rafer Janders
@Dave:
And that irks me because we have seniority on pretty much everyone except the Catholics. And the Lutherans, but we’re pretty much the same now.
Ahem. I think you’re forgotting the Eastern Orthodox, the Russian Orthodox, the Copts, the Armenian Apostolics, the Syrian Orthodox, the Assyrian Apostolics, the Maronites, etc. etc. All of these Eastern Christian churches have far more seniority than anyone else — many of them date pretty much back to the beginning.
Paul in KY
@The Moar You Know: Well what would you do Che? Bomb the SGK offices? Terminate the Board of Directors (with extreme prejudice)?
Please elucidate.
Soonergrunt
@Jennifer:
While I kind of agree with your general thrust, this paragraph is wrong-headed. The idea behind boycotting Yoplait and other companies that have ties to Komen is that if I send a sternly worded letter to SGK demanding that they change their leadership team and priorities, it will get shredded, but if the Vice President for Marketing at General Mills, which owns Yoplait and a bunch of other brands that have tie ins or potential for tie ins, they’ll at least read it in the SGK board room.
It’s not about punishing General Mills. It’s about leveraging GM to punish the bad actors at SGK.
Maude
@kay:
Wouldn’t it be nice to see Komen go down?
Maus
@liberal: Dry sarcasm.
scav
Can’t count on the BothSidesDoIt Nuanced Press here. This is probably going to be bottom-up and monetary. I think that it’s a visceral and familiar topic might help with the momentum. This could, however, be an OWS with a clear message. OWH? (Occupy Women’s Health? Sort of a Take Our Bodies Back vibe too).
Maus
@The Moar You Know: How about you stop with the bloviating and tell us to do something that would work, unlike a liberal Breitbart. We’ve got enough asshole liberal pundits.
slag
@Jennifer:
If they were an organization providing real value to society, I think their salaries should be comparable to any other organization–profit or non–providing real value to society. But then again, I’m one of those freaks who thinks teachers should get paid more than bankers.
Bullsmith
Taking out the institutions that work for people really is the conservative goal right now. Anything that the masses do for their collective good is, ironically, an enemy of the collective good. Jesus wept.
Kane
The Komen story is eerily reminiscent of the events to push a conservative agenda at PBS under the leadership of Kenneth Tomlinson.
Maus
@scav:
I thoroughly expect the anti-choice press to blame all this on OWS liberal commie activists who hate womens health and fail to mention any of SGK’s right-wing lobbying history and corporatist structure.
pseudonymous in nc
@shortstop:
I think tbogg was on the mark: the superset of “women’s health activists” encompasses lots of people who are informed enough to know PP is not Abortions’R’Us, and the group to which Komen has capitulated gives not a flying fig about women’s health and cares more about punishing filthy sluts with mandatory vaginal ultrasounds.
Which, I think, is a reflection on how far Komen had drifted away from women’s health activism towards the self-perpetuating brand synergies of co-marketed pink-ribbon tat.
Lex
As I said on DougJ’s thread, this, given the stakes (i.e., prematurely dead women), is the kind of PR nightmare from which a brand and an organization do not deserve to recover. I hope anyone and everyone who has ever given that organization money or time will simply give to some other charity that fights breast cancer, and that SGK will simply dry up and blow away.
John D
@Jennifer: Be careful with those numbers. By just selecting the numbers for “the cure”, you have ALREADY eliminated all the PP funding that is being discussed. PP is on the “detection and general health” end of the spectrum, and does damned good work. Early detection of breast cancer is *still* the best method of surviving.
Paul in KY
@Rafer Janders: They are infected, however, by icky Gnosticism, so saith Pope Palpatine.
slag
@shortstop: Agreed. I thought the divorce analogy really brought the point home.
Steve
Wait… TBogg works in public relations? Really?
joes527
@Marc:
What this seems to be missing id that PP isn’t primarily a fund-raising organization. It is a service provider.
Komen isn’t at all a service provider, it is a fund-raising organization.
The idea that everyone who buys yogurt, watches football, wears pink, or walks/runs are going to take all that and turn it into an unsolicited check to PP is nuts. In order for PP to capture ex-Komen funds in the long run, it is going to have to beef up its fund-raising seriously. Either that, or get funded by some other fund-raising organization that goes out and eats Komen’s lunch.
PP direct donations are way up today. Where will they be next year?
catclub
@curiousleo: Episcopal Bishop Gray of Mississippi, in the 1960’s, was vocal in favor of desegregation. Not many (white) Baptists did. About the same story here.
Episcopal Bishops in the United States are often _nothing_ like Catholic Bishops.
kay
@Maude:
I think it’s a disaster for them. I think it was a bad and cowardly decision and then they compounded the bad and cowardly decision by first not addressing it and then lying about it.
They just seem clueless. The spokesperson said yesterday that he knows that Congressional investigations don’t mean anything, but people in “Texarkana, Texas” don’t know that.
His idiot donors don’t know what’s going on? He says that to the NYTimes?
Apparently they don’t have much respect for their liberal or conservative donors.
pseudonymous in nc
Atrios:
So yeah, maybe PP has to do more fundraising of its own, or to link up with fundraising charities that aren’t pinkwashers.
Steve
@Jennifer: My understanding is that every major cancer organization is mostly about awareness rather than research. There are only so many viable research proposals out there at a given time, so as a research-oriented charity gets bigger, they have no choice but to look for other anti-cancer outlets for their money.
Of course SGK’s “for the cure” branding is somewhat misleading, making it sound like they’re more focused on research than other charities are, but I think most charities take advantage of the same mentality. In my opinion, most people who donate to anti-cancer groups just sort of assume they’re helping to cure cancer and they’d be surprised, as I was once upon a time, to find out how much of it goes for awareness and detection instead. Not to denigrate the value of awareness, of course.
Kyle
I’ll bet even Reed Hastings from Netflix is looking at Komen today and saying, “Geez, you really fucked up.”
MosesZD
@Steve:
Good journalist… Ah, ha ha hahaaa… Sorry, but anyone who can write a piece of shit book like “Liberal Fascism” and construct an argument that is wrong in virtually every way, from meaningful to trivial, cannot, under any circumstances be a ‘good journalist.’
Though, like a stopped-clock, he can occasionally be right. But only by accident.
Satanicpanic
@The Moar You Know: I’m not opposed to any of those things in principle, but in practice, I don’t know how we would make them work.
Kane
Surely, as senior vice-president for public policy, Karen Handel is well aware of this fact. Even the leadership of the anti-abortion groups must be aware of this. So what then is really at the core of the opposition to Planned Parenthood?
Maus
@Steve:
Your understanding is ungrounded.
trollhattan
@Kane:
Like the EPA, George Soros, solar power and the Chevy Volt, Planned Parenthood is simply evil and must be destroyed. Full stop.
The Moar You Know
@Maus: Even a liberal Brietbart would be a vast improvement over what we have now, which is nothing. No message machine. No coordinated pushback. No nothing. Ever wonder why the media is in the tank for the right? They’re scared to death of them. But not of us, and you know why? There’s no consequences at all for crossing the left, and they know it.
This Komen thing will be off the radar by Monday and they’ll do just fine, while so-called liberals are off chasing another shiny object d’ outrage. Meanwhile, the right keeps their eyes on the prize and continues working towards their goals.
The outright destruction of Planned Parenthood is one of those things. They’ve been working on it for twenty years. They’ll work on it for another twenty.
We don’t work on things for longer than a news cycle. Someone above wanted a “concrete suggestion”. Here’s one. Start working on things for longer than a week.
schrodinger's cat
@MosesZD: I think you have your Goldbergs confused, this is Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic not Jonah Goldberg of the National Review.
Louise
If only another congresscritter would start his/her own investigation into an organization SGK still *wants* to fund. According to their own rules, they’d have to stop funding it.
I would love to see that.
Mnemosyne
@Maus:
Ding ding ding ding ding. I think what Komen doesn’t seem to realize is that giant corporations HATE controversy. And giant food corporations like Nestle, Con Agra, Kraft, and Yoplait REALLY REALLY FUCKING HATE controversy, because they’re trying to sell to middle-class moms in grocery stores who want to feel good because they bought the yogurt with the pink ribbon on it.
If those moms are now going to start avoiding buying pink ribbon products at the grocery store because of Komen’s actions, the giant food corporations are going to drop Komen like a hot potato, because they don’t want people to have any bad associations with their product, ever, and they know that Komen needs them more than they need Komen. There’s no way that wingnut corporations are going to be able to fill in the gap, because the gap is consumers who avoid the products, not corporate funding.
Komen has basically fucked themselves for politics, and it couldn’t happen to a nicer group of people.
Jay C
Like I opined in DougJ’s other thread; if the Komen Foundation really are “very savvy political folks”, they can’t have been TOO surprised at the outcome of their PP decision. Well, maybe its intensity, but not the general reaction. My feeling is that far from being “cowed” by the fanatical anti-abortion lobby, they are more likely to be well in sympathy with it, and have no qualms about currying favor with the extremists by loudly and publicly dumping on the wingnuts’ boogeyman-du-jour (PP), and retreating behind a wall of teary “pro-life” sanctimony when called on.
I’m sure whatever funding shortfall their PP decision causes will be made up tout suite by some deep-pocketed wingers – their bigger problem is going to be maintaining their status as top-drawer charity if they can only appeal to the 27%.
Maus
No?
The Right and Neolib-aligned corporations prefer the Media the way it is. We’re never getting control over the media, except by becoming more right-wing.
wrb
@Martin:
Or that they now have other priorities.
Maus
@Jay C:
Good!
These fuckers talk a mean game, but they don’t donate. This was an intentional move to curry favor, and they’re not going to be happy with the results.
@wrb: Right, let them stick to this path. They’ve not retreated, they certainly haven’t said anything to alienate their new antichoice allies. In fact, they’ve made fun of PP claimed that this outcry is because PP “just wants money”.
Mnemosyne
Also, too, if anyone has any pink ribbon products in the house right now that they bought before the controversy erupted, I would strongly suggest returning them to the store where you bought them and explain why. Because grocery chains also really, really fucking hate controversy and will not be happy with their suppliers for sticking them with this stuff that customers are unhappy about.
shortstop
@The Moar You Know: Again, you offer zero specifics after numerous invitations to provide one or two. Feel free to complain endlessly about the left’s failure to coordinate, but “I expect you to come up with something but I can’t help you do it!” kind of marks you as one of the largest offenders in the behavior you’re criticizing.
Steve
@Maus: So please, tell us all which major cancer organizations spend most of their budget on research.
@MosesZD: You sure set me straight.
The Moar You Know
@MosesZD: Jeffrey Goldberg is not Jonah Goldberg.
JPL
@The Moar You Know: That might be true but every time I see a pink kitchen aide mixer or the lowly ribbon, I’ll remember and I don’t think I’ll be alone. The SGK branding will remind a lot of folks who don’t like women health issues politicized.
Southern Beale
Yes, they do need to pay a hefty price. Because Komen is just the tip of the iceberg. These zealots have been going after the American Cancer Society, March of Dimes and other organizations, too.
This isn’t about abortion or breast cancer. It’s about destroying Planned Parenthood. It’s about making them so toxic, no one will touch them. Time to turn the tables. Make the right wing religious zealots toxic. Make associating with the organized anti-choice movement so heinous that no one will ever do their bidding again.
pseudonymous in nc
@Steve: the discussion at Crooked Timber goes off on a useful tangent to discuss whether the aims and activities of the largest cancer charities — which have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend — actually matches up with the current medical consensus on screening.
Breast cancer’s an especially tricky one. The USPSTF recommended against routine screening between 40 and 49, suggesting that the “more is better” approach is confounded by the risk of false positives, unnecessary biopsies, stress of etc. The people who perform mammograms raged against that decision, but as with everything in American healthcare, you have to wonder whether they’re more worried by the lost profits. But there’s a genuine uncertainty about the best way to reduce breast cancer mortality rates.
What isn’t controversial is that it’s worth having a coherent, integrated healthcare system that takes prohibitive up-front cost out of the equation, and isn’t reliant upon the capriciousness of private charities that can become locked into advocacy models that no longer represent the best clinical evidence.
dogwood
@MosesZD: 0.@MosesZD:
Jeffrey Golberg and Jonah Golberg are two different people.
joes527
@The Moar You Know: “Iceberg, Goldberg, What’s the difference?
Southern Beale
Also, just FYI but that Atlantic story you linked to now has been updated to include a response from Mollie Williams.
Maus
I mean seriously, what the fuck are we going to do with a media that relies on all these corporate sponsors and the SGK directly to buy ads? They’re not going to give airtime to any discussion of a boycott.
geg6
@joes527:
Says someone who isn’t a woman and who obviously doesn’t have or know anyone who has/had breast cancer.
You don’t know what the hell you are talking about. I am the daughter of a breast cancer victim and have literally dozens of friends and relatives who are either closely related (meaning at high risk themselves) to a breast cancer victim/survivor or are one themselves. 100% of whom, based on my FB page, are absolutely outraged by this. I’ve walked and raised money for these assholes and so have these men and women. They won’t be forgetting this any time in the foreseeable future and if Komen is as stupid to think this as you are, they are in for a big surprise.
Elie
@shortstop:
Even if they do “ride to the rescue”, the Komen brand has been irreparably damaged for good. It will foever be a rightwing tool and sorry, they will suffer huge consequences for that… This was a bad bad PR disaster and a fundamentally disastrous organizational strategy…
Jennifer
@Soonergrunt: I’m not saying that people shouldn’t contact SGK’s corporate sponsors. I definitely think they should. What I’m saying is the message at this point should be “I won’t buy anything with a pink ribbon on it ever again, and in the future, I may not buy anything from any company that has pink-ribbon labelled products,” rather than “you’re supporting a bunch of fascists and unless you pull all pink-ribbon stuff from the market immediately, I’ll never buy any of your products again!”
You know, a message that lets them know you’re watching but not one that says “I’m going to start punishing you RIGHT NOW because an organization you’ve given to and been associated with in the past and at the current time just did something wretched.”
As for the stuff about not all of the money going to “the cure”, what I was getting at is that any organization where less than 25% goes to the mission (in this case, it would be not only research funding but awareness and detection) is a shitty organization to support. They could have almost DOUBLED early detection efforts through Planned Parenthood by tossing in their leader’s salary to the amount. That’s not a group that’s as serious about their mission as they are about just raking in a lot of cash.
trollhattan
@joes527:
Same punchline popped into my head, too.
MosesZD
@joes527:
The problem is that you have to understand the numbers. And failure to do so leads one off the path to false assumptions and silly gloating…
Conservatives give much more to thier churches and far less to secular charities like Komen. Whereas Liberals are quite the opposite, giving more to secular institutions and far less to Churches.
And these Churches are certainly not going to make it up. Contrary to the popular mis-conception, Churches do very little for the community with that money. Mark Chaves, in his book Congregations in America, points out that even religious congregations that promote social service activity spend less than 3 percent of an average congregation’s budget on these programs. Rather, they tend to keep most of it in house and build bigger, newer churches, pay over-head and salaries, or just piss it away on frivolities like concerts for Jesus…
So, where is the money going to come from? They Conservatives are sending thier to the church and aren’t likely to change. Liberals can just move over to the American Cancer Society and Planned Parenthood (like my wife I just did).
And Komen can go to hell.
scav
How many bodies as political footballs and punching bags can they afford to juggle in an election year? Women, Near, Hispanics, Immigrants, Gheys, Muslims, The “Undeserving” Poor . . . . ? ETA: The Unionized . . .
Elie
@pseudonymous in nc:
Really fine comment…right on.
pseudonymous in nc
@Southern Beale: the working assumption is that if it worked with ACORN, it’ll work with PP. I think that’s a mistaken assumption — put crudely, because Komen is where the white women at.
curiousleo
@rlrr:
While true, there are many (here and elsewhere) that conflate all Christians with the right wingers and lambast “Christans” for the various idiocies and hate acts done by the right wing.
I’ve been fighting to take the word Christian back from the “Christian” Coalition since the 80’s. I will continue to remind everyone that they do not speak for an entire religion.
While I instinctively didn’t like the Komen approach of pinkification and never gave them money, prior to this week I had no idea how little a % of their money went to actual cancer research and medical care. I hope reporting on the issue keeps pointing these facts out as it will further damage the Komen brand.
burnspbesq
@MosesZD:
Let us know when you’re ready to have your own workplace performance judged by the same standards you want to apply here.
WereBear
It’s the famous Right Wing Double Down! Step right up.
Mnemosyne
@Jennifer:
I actually think a full boycott would be counter-productive: what we need to do is say that we will not buy pink-ribbon branded products.
So if you like Yoplait, keep buying it, but make sure you buy the packaging without the pink ribbon. Getting cases and cases specifically of pink ribbon products returned to them by grocery stores will get the anti-Komen point across much better than a general boycott.
Elizabelle
Too bad the Dallas Morning News has a paywall. Would like to see the rest of this column from today:
Jacquielynn Floyd: Komen for the Cure’s new fashion statement: the pink burqa
http://www.dallasnews.com
Website has an picture of boats in a marina that has dried up. (Story on drought recovery.)
Ironic.
GregB
@Maus:
MSNBC has run two pieces on this matter so far and even had the head of Planned Parenthood on long enough to get attacked by a doltish talking head named S.E. Cupp.
This story is not going to go away.
kay
@Mnemosyne:
I’d like it a lot if giant corporations would go back to paying taxes instead of having us buy their products to support health care charities.
They can make yogurt, I’ll buy the yogurt, they can pay taxes, and then people who are elected can make decisions and allocate those public funds. That worked pretty well.
I’m just a little nervous about outsourcing public policy priorities to giant corporations, based on their charitable whims. They may not have or best interests at heart, 110% of the time :)
wrb
@Steve:
Here is a list with letter grades by Charity Watch for overall effectiveness. They don’t breakdown expenditures, at least on this top level page, but the names of the different charities are suggestive. The names link to the charity’s site where most likely more detail can be found.
The one A+ was given to The Breast Cancer Research Foundation.
batgirl
We need to find a Democratic house member to open an investigation in SGK, just because he/she can.
Raven
@GregB: She’s a snide fucking bitch.
slag
@pseudonymous in nc: Best ecard ever on that Crooked Timber post.
Paul in KY
@dogwood: I wonder if Jeff Goldberg ever receives a rant from a pissed-off liberal (verbally or written) who then has to do an Emily Litella when he explains he’s not THAT Goldberg?
I’m sure it has happened more than once, especially in written form. I still sometimes get them confused. I hear the word ‘Goldberg’, think of Lucianne & her evil spawn & say ‘Goldberg’ (like Jerry saying ‘Neumann’) & half the time it turns out to be Jeff.
pseudonymous in nc
@MosesZD:
This is why the whole “conservatives are more charitable” line is a canard, given that donations to Focus on the Vagina or building a new wing on the local megachurch for Pastor Megabux are considered no less “charitable” in the tax code than giving money to the local food bank, women’s shelter… or a cancer charity.
pseudonymous in nc
@GregB:
I believe her first name is “Sipp”.
aimai
@Louise:
Komen is “funded by corporations” because they get pinkwashing and theoretical goodwill. Komen will not survive this anymore than any other advertising agency survives once their principle service is (the selling of a good, fuzzy, feeling) is muddled by their principle spokesmodel being found in bed with the remains of a cannibalized child. The cycle will go something like this:
A few corporations will pull out of the pink washing system because they have a choice between some good publicity right now, or continuing bad publicity.
A few others will simply quietly not renew contracts–which actually pay the Komen foundation–for the “use” of the pink symbol.
A whole lot of funding money will dry up when people refuse to do the stupid walks, or organize them, under Komen’s umbrella. There is a vicious circle here when local organizations stop donating shit because people stop asking for it, and people stop asking for it because they are angry that the corporations are profiting off it.
Some activists will switch their direct donations to other groups-hopefully PP but other cancer agencies.
In a few years Komen will either have had to issue a (fake) apology or they will simply disappear like any other amway style scam.
aimai
handsmile
@joes527: (#126)
trollhattan
Blowback’s now occurring at the California State Legislature.
http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2012/02/california-lawmakers-sever-ties-with-susan-g-komen-over-funding-decision.html
Maus
@Steve: Theoretically, http://www.demandcurestoday.org/
I’ve put a good faith effort into finding a better breakdown and reliability, but most of the ratings sites use arbitrary ratings, don’t break down the numbers, or require user creation/login (likely to market charities to you.)
What you say isn’t necessarily untrue, but I don’t see why we can’t have something better and less bloated.
JPL
@Elizabelle: I did not watch this video but here’s another statement from the Dallas Paper..hahaha..
GregB
Amy Brinker is on MSNBC now crying a river of tears about how they’ve been so misrepresented…boo…hoo..hoo…..
Andrea Mitchell, who I generally consider a font of beltway centrism is actually grilling Brinker quite hard.
Southern Beale
@Jennifer:
Oh bullshit. Sponsors can pull out whenever they want, that stuff is written into the contract. Just ask the Dixie Chicks or Tiger Woods.
Second of all, that is precisely why we need to hit their sponsors hard. No one says it’s their fault, but they are trying to burnish their brands’ social responsibility points and the message is that Komen is no longer the organization to do that.
Komen didn’t just withdraw funding from PP. They decided to make breast cancer a pawn in the culture wars. That was just SO WRONG and there are fucking repercussions for that kind of thinking.
Hit ’em hard. Hit ’em where it hurts. Because they WILL NOT STOP. They won’t, we know this. And I’m sick of being told to just suck it up. NO I WILL NOT.
You cannot prove how pro life you are by taking away poor women’s access to cancer screenings. That is a fucking no-brainer.
Paul in KY
@batgirl: I don’t think they can. That’s part of the fun of being in the Majority.
Mnemosyne
@joes527:
In two months, people may not remember the specific controversy, but they’ll still stand at the dairy case and think, “Wait, there was something bad about stuff with pink ribbons on it — what was it? I’d better buy the package without the pink ribbon just in case.”
Once you create a controversy, people may not remember the details, but they’ll steer away from something that was at the center of that controversy, especially if it’s food. Within six months, there will probably be an urban legend circulating that you should avoid pink ribbon products because they cause cancer.
Rafer Janders
@Maus:
I’m as big a critic of Twitter, Facebook etc. as anyone, but one good thing about them is that we don’t need the media anymore to communicate en masse. A direct Facebook post from your friends and family is far more effective at shaping behavior than hearing about something on some TV show.
geg6
@MosesZD:
You are confusing Jonah with Jeffrey. They are not the same person.
Maus
@Jennifer:
Totally agreed.
Don’t associate this with PP, associate Pinkwashing with being anti-woman.
Paul in KY
@pseudonymous in nc: I hear her nickname is ‘2 Girls and One’.
Southern Beale
Brinker is lying. They have a relationship with Bank of America, which is an “official sponsor” of Komen and offers all sorts of Pink Ribbon products. Bank of America is under investigation for fraud.
So, sever your ties with BofA, hon. Waiting … waiting …
Sir Nose'D
As I understand it, PP’s mission is to support:
So if it is not up to the individual, is it up to the government or up to the free market? Because with the first amendment and all, it couldn’t possibly be up to Quetzalcoatl or whoever it is that the kids these days are following.
Sir Nose'D
As I understand it, PP’s mission is to support:
So if it is not up to the individual, is it up to the government or up to the free market? Because with the first amendment and all, it couldn’t possibly be up to Quetzalcoatl or whoever it is that the kids these days are following.
Paul in KY
@aimai: I sure hope you are right. But, I trust your judgement in general.
slag
@kay:
Yes yes yes yes yes yes! Holy shit this bothers me. I’m so tired of organizations like Komen, like The Gates Foundation, etc, getting to pick and choose which of our social problems get solved and how. That’s what democracy is supposed to be doing. That’s what our government is supposed to be doing. That’s why we’re supposed to be paying taxes.
Instead these private organizations not only get the power, they get the credit. Pisses me off.
Mnemosyne
@kay:
Oh, big corporations will always have charitable arms — they love the good publicity and the tax breaks. That doesn’t mean that we can’t use public pressure to re-direct those charitable impulses.
Paul in KY
@Southern Beale: Anyone who still banks at ‘Bank of America’ is a certified moron. Unless you have lots of stock or they have opted you out of some of their ‘soak the rubes’ rules.
joes527
@MosesZD: If this result of this is a huge drop in support for Komen from liberals, I’ll agree with you. They won’t make it up from conservatives.
If the result is just so much Sturm und Drang, followed by a return to status quo when the next shiny object floats by, Then they won’t really be hurt, and they will pick up something on the conservative side to offset a slight loss on the liberal side.
I am NOT arguing that this is going to work out foe Komen. All I am saying is that the intertubes having its collective panties in a bunch != A Change is Gonna Come.
Like I said earlier, the proof will be in the doing.
Rafer Janders
@burnspbesq:
Let us know when you’re ready to have your own workplace performance judged by the same standards you want to apply here.
Um, you mean the standard of not being an utter failure who is bad at logical reasoning, research, and grasping basic concepts? Sure, I’m happy to have that apply.
The fact that you think this is a high bar to clear, though, rather tells me something….
Elizabelle
Pongo had a good post on “Komenfraude” thread:
scav
@slag: To be fair, a pure, nationally-based democracy only solution would still have holes to be filled. The Gates Foundation is doing lots in the area of tropical world diseases that aren’t catching the profit-seeking big bucks and that aren’t really in a position to be addressed by local democracy-based efforts.
Martin
@Soonergrunt:
They can, if they move fast and if they avoid a ‘mistakes were made’ kind of bullshit response, and instead say ‘We are in the business of funding breast cancer research, not engaging in women’s reproductive issues. We regret that we allowed our choice of VP of Public Policy to change the course of our mission. This individual is no longer with SGK, the policies of SGK have been reverted with full funding restored for PP, and we reaffirm our commitment to breast cancer research with a public commitment that the organizations we fund will only be evaluated based on their service and commitment to curing and treating breast cancer.’
But it needs to be a full throated response. It can’t be at all weaselly. And it needs to be soon. The public will forgive mistakes that are admitted boldly. They won’t forgive mistakes that people hide from, and they certainly don’t forgive mistakes that aren’t corrected. The mistake wasn’t defunding PP. The mistake was allowing the mission to be changed. They need to remove the people that changed the mission and reassert the mission, and be up-front about it.
I doubt they’ll do this, but if they do, they’ll recover. I’m not aware of any of their partner corporations dumping them, but as soon as a high profile one does, it’ll be too late. The corporation will get all of the credit for doing the right thing, and any change then by SGK will be viewed as only happening because they were forced to. And then they’re just fucked.
GregB
The Susan G. Komen Foundation has ignited a four alarm fire.
Brinker is a liar and she’s in the process of pouring get fuel on the fire.
Because now in order to tamp down the flames she’s saying things that are going to inflame the wingnuts.
Burn baby burn.
wrb
Komen will quiet this kerfuffle by redirecting the funds to a new better planned parenthood organization, one that offers small, discrete vagina locks.
They will be pink.
Raven
@slag: Or these outfits that “help” wounded vets. Fucking bandits. The government that sent their asses should bear full responsibility for their care.
bemused
@Elizabelle:
Jacquielynn Floyd is a good writer. I like this:
Well, it’s Komen’s money. It’s extremely able at raising it, and the charity can distribute the money as it sees fit.
What it doesn’t get to do, however, is dissemble and protest that it’s “not about politics.”
That’s like saying abandoning your post in the heat of battle wasn’t about cowardice-you just had some other place to be.
As much as it would like to sidestep a public announcement, the Komen Foundation has chosen sides. It picked the pink burqa.
Mnemosyne
@Southern Beale:
That’s why we specifically need a pink ribbon boycott, not a corporate boycott. As I said above, if Kraft is getting cases and cases of pink-ribbon branded rotting cheese shipped back to them by grocery stores, that’s going to make the point better than if it’s all Kraft products, including the non-pink branded ones.
Pink Ribbon Boycott. Starting today.
Satanicpanic
@shortstop: Anonymous (though I’m not sure they’re strictly left) has pulled off a few good pranks here and there but it wasn’t until OWS that any left organization was more than occasionally in the news. OWS is pretty much what the left has been doing for years, but it took the right wrecking everything in sight for people to want to join in. The same might be the case for SGK- the right has finally gone too far and people will start to fight back.
trollhattan
@slag:
Agree in principle, because we shouldn’t let the whims of the influential replace sound policy. I wouldn’t, however, conflate Komen and Gates Foundation if only because Gates is doing real work while Komen…not so much.
Litlebritdifrnt
OT – but for all you gardeners there is a new USDA plant hardiness map out.
http://planthardiness.ars.usda.gov/PHZMWeb/
FlipYrWhig
The story doesn’t support the idea that the Komen Foundation was right-wing/pro-life all along, just biding its time to come out like this. That doesn’t square with all the mentions of tensions and fallout within the organization itself. Like liberal raised earlier, I’m also still curious about the decision to hire Karen Handel in the first place. I wonder if SGK wanted to have a public policy director with ties to tea partiers and social conservatives after the 2010 election cycle. Who was her predecessor in that position?
slag
@scav: Funny thing is…I was ok with the Gates Fndn when I knew them as the big mosquito net provider. I appreciated that. I’m not ok with them fucking up our own country. Getting their grubby hands into our educational system and whatnot. I don’t appreciate that. I didn’t elect them.
Southern Beale
@Paul in KY:
That’s true. My husband still banks there though. He’s not a moron but he hasn’t got around to changing his account. Ah well.
Here’s the thing, as part of their charter, banks have to give back to the local community, they all have social responsibility or community action wings. And they all stay away from “controversial” things and religious things that could possibly alienate some of their clients. So that leaves diseases, the banks love these organizations because they can make their donations without any risk of a potential scandal. And Komen just shit the bed, big time.
You know, if Komen wants to be the “pro-life” breast cancer organization, great go for it but that doesn’t mean they can do it while pretending they’re something else.
GregB
MSNBC follows up Nancy Brinker with a chat with US Senators Patty Murray and Barbara Boxer.
Ring another alarm bell Komen, the house is fully involved.
Maus
@Rafer Janders: Oh, I totally agree. I’m saying that we can never rely on the traditional media to promote anything but the most corporatist, wishy washy Moveon tripe and greenwashing.
scav
@Litlebritdifrnt: OT Unpossible, it’s a government funded global warming plot!
dogwood
@Rafer Janders:
I can’t speak for burns, but I interpreted his criticism to mean that someone who doesn’t know the difference between Jeffrey Goldberg, and Jonah Godberg might not be the best spokesperson for journalistic standards.
Elizabelle
@Martin:
I dunno. Would work for some corporations and institutions, but Komen’s going to face a “fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice…” donor base.
I don’t see them getting a second chance from most of their individual donors.
Pool: who will be the first reporter to ask multi-millionaire Nancy Brinker about taking a $400,000 salary for her good work? And can you imagine the expenses she’s funneling through her cause?
Soonergrunt
@Jennifer: I agree with this 110%
kdaug
Ain’t seen a lot of Hoverrounds in the “Race to the Cure” runs/walks we’ve gone on.
Congrats, SGK. You pissed on your base, and it’s been wall-to-wall on the networks.
You had a good run. Time to die. Like tears… in the rain.
gwangung
@Martin:
Too late:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/02/1061064/-Komen-Foundation-official-deletes-evidence-of-anti-choice-bias-from-Twitter?via=sidebar
Paul in KY
@Southern Beale: I’m sure that if he is married to you, he’s not a moron :-)
pragmatism
no one would have cared about how effective of a charity SGK is prior to this dustup. i highly recommend litbrit’s piece on this to peel back the curtain on how they operate.
http://litbrit.blogspot.com/2012/02/on-susan-g-komen-for-cure-pink-ribbons.html
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@dogwood: Pretty much what my answer would have been. Two different Goldbergs, so perhaps research isn’t a forte for Moses ZD. Ahem.
Elizabelle
@bemused:
You can see the whole column? Excellent.
I’m getting a “subscribe to see more” box.
Hate that about the Dallas Morning News. Turned to them for any inside scoop on the American Airlines bankruptcy filing when it happened, and just out of luck. Way to get your reporting out.
scav
@slag: Ahhhh, I don’t follow the Ed stuff. But the general point of the hole in emphasis unserved by profit-seeking and govt-based research still holds.
IM
@MosesZD:
Wrong Goldberg. This Goldberg is obsessed about israel/Iran.
Southern Beale
@FlipYrWhig:
Reproductive Health blog has an in-depth piece at how anti-choicers infiltrated their board. It wasn’t just Karen Handel, it was Jane Abraham of the anti-choice Susan B. Anthony List.
This was a planned maneuver.
Someguy
Meanwhile, the Catholics just went into open revolt over the Affordable Care Act. Somebody should look into whether there’s links between the Koch Brothers, SGK and the Papists.
Steve
@wrb: I’m prepared to accept what you’re saying, but I don’t see anywhere that tells me, for example, what percentage of the Breast Cancer Research Foundations’s expenditures go to research as opposed to cancer awareness and other activities. I realize that some charities are better than others based upon how much money goes towards the overall mission as opposed to salaries and the like. I think that’s what third-party grades are typically based on, but it’s a different benchmark than what I’m talking about.
Also, I have no idea how to define a “major” charity, but it looks like the BCRF takes in about $40 million annually, as compared to a behemoth like the American Cancer Society that gets more like $200 million. The point I thought I had read was that as you take in more and more money, it becomes that much harder to find worthy research projects to spend it on, which is why most of the money at the major charities ends up going to awareness, screening, etc.
No one thinks the American Cancer Society is a scam, as far as I know. I just think most people would be surprised to learn that only 16% of their donations go towards curing cancer.
Martin
@gwangung: No, SGK needs to hang this entire thing around Handel’s neck. They could have covered the tweet with that move. But I’m afraid that if Brinker is out there trying to spin their PR, then they’ve blown their chance. They’re trying to have it both ways now, and they can’t, and that won’t be easily forgiven.
Rafer Janders
@dogwood:
Oh, I know. I just enjoy poking burns because he’s often such a nastly little bully to other commentors here, but one who (as all bullies) doesn’t enjoy taking it nearly as much as he enjoys dishing it out.
Also, too, burns is pretty much one of the last here who should be chiding anyone for sloppy misreading of basic facts.
geg6
@dogwood:
Yes, you are correct in that it is how I interpreted burns’ comment.
Southern Beale
@Paul in KY:
Aww that was sweet!!!!
:-)
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@Rafer Janders: Fair point.
Southern Beale
@Martin:
Yeah they’re trying to pretend this isn’t about the most divisive social issue in America and that’s just such an obvious lie. Talk about being inept at messaging.
Jay C
@Martin:
Your scenario is certainly a desirable one, but with people like Nancy Brinker and Karen Handel running things at the SGKF, what’s the likelihood of it ever happening?
I’m guessing that if the Komen Foundation ever publicly backtracked like you suggest, the blowback from the “pro-life” wingnuts would probably utterly destroy them. The anti-abortion nuts have made Planned Parenthood their pet bête noire, and any institution that would go back to supporting them after loudly and publicly cutting them off will most likely reap a whirlwind from the Right, and – more importantly, NOT get a lot of kudos from the Left for weaseling out.
kay
@slag:
It’s funny, because that was the understanding in poor countries, with charitable efforts. The people there would accept the money and in return they would lose control. It was okay, because they didn’t have functioning state systems. Not great, but okay. Give up a measure of control, get the bucks. Hopefully you’ll have your state up and running and in the meantime we’ll give you these mosquito nets.
I’m not clear on when Americans decided this was a good trade-off, or why they decided unelected but really rich people should, just naturally and without question, be setting public policy.
I don’t think the money comes without strings.
slag
@scav: Agreed. And I’m fully in the tank for do-gooding organizations everywhere. But there’s a hard line that needs to be drawn wrt protecting our public sphere. And large, powerful NGAs (often backed by non-taxpaying corporations) are busily trying to obliterate that line. If we don’t hold it, our time in history could easily be looked back on as another Gilded Age. And that aggression will not stand, man.
bemused
@Elizabelle:
I just googled Komen pink burqa and the first link to the article had the full piece. I do that a lot whenever a site has rudely prevented me from reading something there and most of the time, I am successful.
shortstop
Martin, you’re way behind. Brinker was out there yesterday evening offering alternative (contradictory) rationales for ditching PP and insulting former donors who criticized SGK, going so far as to impugn those donors’ commitment to women’s health. SGK will not recover from this and that’s clear from their piling bad move onto bad move.
JCT
@aimai: And just imagine the fun when people start protesting the walks — tough to feel like you are doing good when other women are reminding you that you sold out PP.
schrodinger's cat
@kay:
Sounds like the modern version of the White man’s burden.
Tonal Crow
I hadn’t donated to Planned Parenthood before this wingnut jihad.
Now I have.
srv
I’m not following the wingnut response, but I would expect the smart wingnuts and Kochs to rally behind Komen and make some huge donations. Are they already rewarding the good behavior?
Ben Cisco
LA County SGK head to resign.
slag
@kay:
I’m not clear on that either. I don’t understand why people would vote to put the boot on their own neck. Yet another reason I don’t understand anti-choice women. Or Republicans, in general. They complain that Democrats want a nanny state. But really the nannying is going to be done by someone. If it’s not me, it’s going to be Nike. I’d rather it be me.
deep
@srv:
ahahahahahahahaha! Koch making donations to improve the lives of women?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!
pseudonymous in nc
Grar, getting spam-trapped.
Handel’s predecessor was Jennifer Luray, who came from Abbott Labs in 2009. She was previously Barbara Mikulski’s chief of staff, and was presumably recruited for her lobbying ins during the healthcare reform negotiations.
Handel started consulting for Komen in January 2011, before being officially hired, so it definitely smells like SGK wanted a public policy SVP who was friendly with the incoming teabag brigade.
bemused
@JCT:
I alerted two people planning to do a Komen walk this summer and who had also requested a donation about this on Tues before the shit hit the msm. I don’t know how they are feeling now but I’d hate to see people protesting those who may feel committed to follow through or even still support Komen do the walks.I’d hate to see women supporting breast cancers causes against other women supporting breast cancers causes. I told one that this thing was going to be huge and could get ugly. I just didn’t fully realize how ugly it could get.
Elie
@srv:
That will just make it worse, in my opinion — highlighting the political aspects of this self inflicted debacle. From the sound of what others are saying, its getting pretty late for an exit strategy that will allow them to recover their reputation. I would also add that this could have a real splatter effect on all breast cancer charitable organizations.. something I am sure that all of them will really appreciate… Highlights the old saying that is totally true: “There is no right way to do a wrong thing”
Maus
@srv: http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/01/31/susan-g-komen-listened-have-you-responded/ if you can stomach the comments section.
kay
@schrodinger’s cat:
Maybe I’m cynical, but I don’t think so. “Here’s your new high school! It’s free! We’ll be directing what goes on in there”.
That’s okay. You keep it. We’ll manage. Just drop the taxes off and go vote like the rest of us, okay? Or, they could run for office! How about that zany public-private talent coordination idea? Radical, I know.
coredump
@FormerSwingVoter: Thank you formerSwingVoter. Here’s my letter to them:
I also donated to Planned Parenthood today.
gex
@Bullsmith: Jesus seems to be enabling this, not weeping.
FlipYrWhig
@Southern Beale: Interesting… but I couldn’t tell from the piece how recently the Susan B. Anthony person was brought on board. I wonder if there was a struggle about what to do to help the organization keep thriving (such as it is) regardless of what party was in charge of making policy, leading to an attempt to build bridges with pro-life Republican women.
Raven
Just a heads up on Handel, I’m not dissing the GED, I have one myself but
“Handel, who earned a GED and worked in the nation’s capital for Hallmark Cards and later in the Bush-Quayle White House before moving to Georgia and being elected to the Fulton County Commission, is regarded as less prepared to stand toe-to-toe with Barnes in a debate.”
Maus
@Martin:
They’re riding this all the way to crazytown. Attacking PP as greedy, never retreating.
kay
@Ben Cisco:
That’s great. They should coordinate. Do one an hour. Like a planned demolition, slow mo.
pseudonymous in nc
Looking at their hiring decisions, SGK is in an interesting position. Presumably, if the Dems push back in Congress in 2012, then Handel gets jettisoned anyway because her lobbying value is zip, zilch, nada. Since Congress is going to do fuck-all this year, it’s not too big of a loss to dump her now — except that doing so makes her a martyr to the wingnut cause in an election year.
No One of Consequence
Personally, I would like to thank the Komen Foundation for committing this latest prime example of macro-organizational Darwinism. Inadvertently, with nothing but their own dubious sense of righteousness to blame, they are going to hasten their inevitable irrelevance.
Good riddance, and please don’t forget to close the latch on the top of the Dustbin — The light frightens the Bunnies.
It is likely that PP sees a net gain from their initial loss. Oh, and loads of free PR on the way. Gobs of pixels and ink building public buzz. Not bad.
– NOoC
FlipYrWhig
@pseudonymous in nc: Ah, that’s what I suspected… Thanks!
bemused
@Maus:
I did laugh at the commenter who donated to Komen that said, it’s not like I needed to save it for any presidential candidates anyway. Never thought I’d find any RS comments funny.
scav
@kay: It really does come down to implementation. There are a lot of Carnegie Libraries about but neither he nor his Zombie-LLC are choosing the books.
JCT
@bemused: As I commented on another thread, I have a sister-in-law who is not the sharpest crayon in the box and has been heavily involved in organizing teams for SGK walks for *years* in her wealthy suburb. When I told my brother that we wouldn’t be contributing this year — he immediately pointed out that she had already informed SGK that she would not be involved this year because of this. This woman is about as “low-information” as you can imagine, I was SHOCKED anther response, I was expecting some annoying argument from her. This move struck deep. I think it is a no-brainer that people will protest at walks, to be honest.
One thing that is interesting — multiple emails from my college senior today. I always give her hell about her generation not paying attention while the wingnuts dismantle her rights. Whoa, are the women at her university tweaked over this — I think that they all grew up with the “Pink Ribbon” thing and feel betrayed.
I think this may stir up many complacent folks.
Maus
@pseudonymous in nc:
Corporatists/Conservadems will always be valuable to them.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/12/14/hadassah-lieberman-under-attack-over-industry-ties/
artem1s
@Satanicpanic:
the magic words, right there… company fundraiser….that’s why this type of fundraising organization
hireselects big wig CEOs to the board and hands them a hefty 6 figure salaries (normal 501 c 3s don’t pay board members BTW). United Way has been using this model for years and then getting the CEO to thumb screw his/her employees into a weird fundraising Olympics. Only its more like Glengarry Glenross than a sporting event. Either way, giving money to community chests or re-granting organizations is like pouring money into a hole in a CEOs swimming pool. You are never, ever going to give them an incentive to fix the leak.Mnemosyne
@kay:
But now I feel like you’re conflating two different things. There’s a difference between a charitable foundation like the Gates Foundation and a corporate sponsorship. Corporate sponsorships are much, much more vulnerable to public opinion because a public backlash will hurt the parent company, which is why they usually focus on sponsoring very safe, very uncontroversial projects. The Gates Foundation is unmoored from Microsoft Corporation, so they can do whatever they want without damaging the Microsoft brand very much.
Not disagreeing with your points about why we let billionaire philanthropists decide what’s best for us, but I think corporate sponsorship is different than individual philanthropy.
gex
@curiousleo: You can have the word, but you can’t take it from them. There are Christians in this country who are waging war on our secular society. It is not incorrect to call the Christians.
I’m sorry that Christians not of that ilk are unhappy about sharing the label. But that isn’t on me.
rdldot
@GregB: They’ve been talking about it for hours. I’m actually impressed. The network (CBS) news has had pieces about it for the last two days.
Ben Cisco
@kay: Next up: American Association of University Women.
Martin
@shortstop:
Yep, looks like it. Busy, I am.
Based on what I’m reading now, they are indeed fucked. Oh well. Let’s see how this exercise in “Conservatism can never fail, it can only be failed” plays out.
bemused
@JCT:
It’s great that your sis-in-law reacted so quickly. SGK made a serious miscalculation that they could do something so political and insult people’s intelligence that it wasn’t political. Even many low information folks see that. Breast cancer is personal and people get pretty filed up when they feel duped.
Amanda in the South Bay
@Mnemosyne:
I just have to comment on what you said about corporations hating controversy. Back when I was a cashier at Whole Foods, it was during the HCR debate, and John Mackey wrote that WSJ op-ed that had a lot of people on the left (and a lot of WF shoppers) pissed off. The next day, all team members got briefed on what to say to pissed off customers (damage control). IIRC Mackey didn’t get shitcanned for that, because a year or so later, he wrote another inane op-ed, and we were briefed on what to say to irate customers.
Something isn’t right there.
shortstop
Amanda: apparently our local version of the Whole Foods briefing was to tell all the cashiers to look vacant and slightly slack-jawed while responding, “Oh, wow, I didn’t know anything about that. One of our guys said that? Wow. Weird, huh?”
kay
@Mnemosyne:
You’re right, that’s different.
I’m not crazy about the whole complicated. multi-faceted Komen model. I generally think people are at work to work, and they should be left to their own devices re: charity. I don’t know why it’s okay to hit them up at work. We’d never do it here, but then we only have 2 employees :)
Mnemosyne
@Amanda in the South Bay:
Since Mackey is the founder of Whole Foods, there’s pretty much zero chance he would get fired for saying stupid shit, so it sounds like the company had to just do damage control as best they could. But I guarantee you that Corporate PR was very, very pissed off at having to do it and there was a whole lot of discussion about how Mackey had damaged the brand.
Big corporations have entire brand management departments that scrutinize everything they do to make sure they match up with the corporation’s image. I guarantee you that the brand management departments of all of Komen’s sponsors are carefully monitoring the internet and the mail today to see if this blows over or if they’re going to have to cut Komen loose to protect themselves.
kay
@Ben Cisco:
Oooh, good. It would be sort of fun. Stretch it out. Politician, group, author, celebrity, switch it up hourly.
Make it look huge and wide ranging :)
blondie
Hattip to Shakesville. The ever-pleasant Handel retweeted a nasty bit of commentary and is learning how quickly twitter can turn on ya. She tried to untweet, but it didn’t work. Oh darn. :( http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2012/02/quote-of-day_02.html#disqus_thread.
RedKitten
The fact that they have not immediately fired Karen Handel speaks volumes. As I said on another thread, their clearly stated mission is “education and research about causes, treatment, and the search for a cure.” It’s NOT “education and research about causes, treatment, and the search for a cure, and preventing abortions” (or saving the whales, or reducing greenhouse gas emissions).
The abortion thing is a moot point. The fact of the matter is that under Karen Handel’s leadership, the Susan G. Komen Foundation has cut funding to cancer-prevention programming. This is a clear and direct violation of their very mission, and for someone this high-ranking, should be a firing offense, full stop.
Elizabelle
@Ben Cisco:
From Ben’s link re AAUW:
Elizabelle
@Ben Cisco:
From LA County SGK head Deb Anthony’s email:
Past year. Take that, Karen Handel.
No longer fits their model. Not sized for wingnut.
kay
@Elizabelle:
I think that’s the part they’re clueless on. That’s what resonates, because I keep seeing variations on that language. That’s what makes it gut-level horrible. That they still don’t see this is just amazing.
dmbeaster
Reading through the thread, its worth re-emphasizing what Stooleo @27 linked to at GinandTacos, and which Tbogg references concerning the expose soon to be released about Komen.
Komen is not a charity, but a corporate branding enterprise masquerading as a charity. Any “charity” that is only forwarding 30% to the cause is not a charity. Komen’s business is selling its fake charity brand to big business for $$$, who use the label as part of their own effort to promote sales. Yoplait (General Mills) pays big bucks to Komen for the pink label in order to promote a warm fuzzy feeling about their product, and hopefully also promote sales. Komen makes big bucks from selling that warm fuzzy faux-charity feeling.
That is why the salaries at Komen are so high compared to a typical charity – it is in fact a marketing business. That is also why Komen spends around a million a year (reportedly) on legal to police its “trademark.” No one else can use their pink ribbon allegedly to promote a cause.
So keep this in mind when talking about what to do about Komen and those corps who buy its trademark to promote their own sales. Treat Komen like any other pariah business, and do the same to those that are trying to make money from Komen’s phony brand.
JCT
@kay:
Because they have been blinded by their overriding concern for the fertilized egg above everything else. The re-definition of PP as being “all about abortions” has been successful for them up until now…
This feel just like the Kasich – Walker – Scott – Daniels approach to me.
TooManyJens
I have a question about the whole “pink ribbon” thing. I noticed that the Breast Cancer Research Foundation (recommended earlier in the thread) uses it on their website as well. Is there a chance that a pink ribbon boycott would hit other organizations besides Komen? Or is Komen the only one that has the deals with the pink ribbon co-branded products?
slag
@TooManyJens: I was just wondering that too since I have a product with their ribbon on it. Are you on twitter: http://twitter.com/bcrfworldpink ?
kay
@JCT:
But in this country, where everyone knows there’s vast inequality in access to health care, to exclude poor women?
No one is going to feel good about that. Not poor women, not middle class women, not rich women.
Just clueless. It feels like the same old story to me. People who are insulated and told constantly that they’re very good at what they do, and so they simply don’t see the problem, or how this looks.
Ruckus
@geg6:
Agreed on this.
I posted elsewhere that almost 50% of the women in my immediate family have had BC and 2/3 of those have died from it. Yeah I won’t be forgetting any time soon.
In the business I was in there are many charitable events, runs, walks, bike rides and most of them tie into an organization that collects money. They don’t do research for the causes they support, they don’t provide services, they collect money. And they charge everyone who supports them a price for collecting that money. Some charge very little, some of course charge way too much. The events are fun and can be informative, but many exist to support the the money collectors.
Like politicians, we should all do due better diligence about those people and organizations we give money, time and votes to.
Rafer Janders
@Amanda in the South Bay:
You know, that was a few years ago, and I still don’t shop at Whole Foods. And I make sure to mention the reason why whenever my friends and family mention the place. They’ve lost thousands of dollars off me alone.
brantl
@Steve: Are you kidding? Jeff Goldberg is just as big a hemorrhoid as his older brother.
Cheap Jim
@batgirl: That’d be difficult, what with them not running the House.
Soonergrunt
@Cheap Jim: So find a Senator. I hear that Dianne Feinstein might want to ask the SGK people a few questions under oath.
Ruckus
@Elie:
Maybe they should continue but wear the ribbons upside down. The concept of SGK is great, what’s bad is the execution. It was never a great organization, but recently it has just gotten worse.
TooManyJens
@slag: That’s what I was afraid of:
https://twitter.com/#!/BCRFWorldPink/status/165151718458404864
https://twitter.com/#!/BCRFWorldPink/status/157199597322764288
So, a flat-out “pink ribbon product” boycott would hit other organizations besides Komen.
Kola Noscopy
test
Mnemosyne
@TooManyJens:
As others have mentioned, Komen has been policing the use of the pink ribbon and trying claim it as their trademark, so while there are smaller organizations that also use it, I think everything in your typical megamart grocery store or Target is probably going to be going to Komen.
At a minimum, you should read the label of a pink ribbon product and see who the money is going to before you buy it.
JGabriel
@liberal:
I’m auto-hated? (hurt puppy look)
What did I do?
.
Ivan Ivanovich Renko
@joes527: I KNEW someone would twig to that one.
Jamey: Bike Commuter of the Gods
What a bunch of boobs!
piratedan
@J.D. Rhoades: good to see you here Dusty ;-)
satby
@trollhattan: and the Gates Foundation is mostly Bill Gates’ (and Warren Buffet’s) money that they give away, they aren’t out fundraising and spending a ton to do it.
JCT
@kay: The cluelessness of these folks never fails to amaze, right? It never occurs to them that they could be wrong or that folks won’t see things the same way they do.
I agree — classic echo chamber mentality. They hit the third rail this time.
As you said — this is a decision that will almost exclusively hammer poor women, they can spin all day long (and they have) – but this is an evil, politically motivated decision. We have to make them OWN it. Around their necks, like an anchor.
a hip hop artist from Idaho (fka Bella Q)
@brantl: Who exactly is Jeff Goldberg’s older brother?
JD Rhoades
@piratedan: The pleasure is all mine, old friend. :-)