Page 197 - The Handbook of Persuasion and Social Marketing

Ethical Issues of Social Marketing and Persuasion 189

WWF was expanded to a global partnership focusing not only on water
but also on the sustainable management of energy, packaging, and the
sourcing of agricultural ingredients. As another example, Starbucks works
with Save the Children to improve children’s health and education in cof-
fee-growing communities in Indonesia (“Goals and progress,” 2013).
Bloom, Hussein, and Szykman (1995) proposed a two-question test to
determine whether companies should be involved in corporate social mar-
keting: First, is society better off because of the corporate social marketing
program? And second, has corporate involvement allowed this program to
perform better than it would if it were managed by only a nonprofit or-
ganization or a government agency? The answer to both questions should
be a resounding “yes” to justify company involvement in social marketing.
One reason partnerships between companies and nonprofits or public
agencies are popular is because these organizations can provide companies
with much-needed expertise regarding their selected causes.
Companies cherry-pick the attractive causes. Many firms choose to
focus corporate social marketing programs on popular, attractive, socially
acceptable causes—a practice described as cherry-picking (Andreasen &
Drumwright, 2001). For example, breast cancer has been among the most
popular corporate causes, and it is attractive and marketable for a variety
of reasons. Many affluent people are affected by it or concerned about it,
so it has high visibility on the public agenda and is likely to attract media
attention. Its incidence is high, and it is not associated with any social sins
or disreputable groups. Many people without a family history of breast
cancer contract it, so it is difficult to predict who will be affected. With
early detection and treatment, the survival rate for breast cancer is high,
and it lends itself to positive social marketing messages of conquering the
disease and thriving.
It is also possible to cherry-pick within a given cause such as breast
cancer. For example, companies often prefer to be involved with the more
glamorous aspects of the cause—such as funding potentially breakthrough
research—rather than the less glamorous but very necessary aspects, such
as providing transportation to and from mammography clinics for poor
women.
Unfortunately, the importance of a cause is not necessarily correlated
with its popularity and attractiveness. Early on, this was the case for AIDS,
which had the potential to create an epidemic but was associated with
some groups that were viewed unfavorably by many at the time. Likewise,
causes such as domestic violence and date rape are important, but they
make some people feel uncomfortable. In short, the concern is that com-
pany involvement in social marketing will create and exacerbate a “market