Komen President Steps Down to Focus on Making More Money [Disgrace For The Cure]

Nancy Brinker, founder, President, and CEO of Susan G. Komen for the Cure (which I'm now required to characterize as "embattled") announced yesterday that after years at the helm of the breast cancer charity, she'd be stepping down from her role to focus more on "revenue creation." Two other board members resigned on the same day, and it's not clear who will replace Brinker as she works to convince more people to give her money for the cure.

The charity's had a disastrous year — at the very end of January, Komen announced that it would be cutting off its grants to Planned Parenthood, angering women's groups, politicians, and fueling a long-whispered theory that the organization cared more about its own image than it did about actual women's health. And in the days after the announcement, it was discovered that, thanks to some highly-placed Komen officials with ideologically extreme agendas, the grant cutoff wasn't procedural, but political. The charity couldn't get its story straight — it first claimed that Planned Parenthood grants had been discontinued because the family planning organization was under Congressional investigation, but when several people pointed out that Planned Parenthood gave money to plenty of organizations and institutions that were under investigation, Nancy Brinker took it upon herself to defend Komen's actions in a series of media appearances that only made her look like Lady Who Lunched who didn't need to fully explain herself to the millions of American women who didn't want to see women's health further politicized.

Planned Parenthood's funds were eventually restored by the charity, but not before several curiously political Komen stances and questionable practices were brought to light — why had the charity supported embryonic stem cell research in 2006, and disavowed it in 2011? Why did Nancy Brinker, wealthy thanks to a profitable divorce, still earn almost half a million dollars a year and live a lavish, charity-funded lifestyle? How beholden to right-wing political pressure was the organization? And why the hell were they partnering with the dictator of Uzbekistan's socialite pop singer daughter, whose fashion line uses child slave labor? And why did the perfume the charity sold contain carcinogens? And why did the organization refuse to condemn cancer-causing chemicals used by companies that gave them lots of money? And why did they spend so much time suing other, smaller charities?

Komen officials hoped its Hell Fortnight would end when former Georgia gubernatorial candidate and once and always anti-abortion zealot Karen Handel resigned her executive post at the charity, but public trust was already shaken and in the ensuing months, Komen's fundraising suffered and never recovered. The charity's signature fundraising event, Race for the Cure, lagged in nearly every market. Galas were canceled. Officials in chapters across the country resigned in disappointment. Many critics called for Nancy Brinker to resign if she valued the future of the charity, but there she was, hanging on.

Until yesterday.

What pushed Brinker over the edge and prompted her to hand the mess off to another, yet-to-be-named candidate wasn't specified by Brinker's sunny press release about the shake up ("I want to focus on Susan G. Komen's global mission and raising resources to bring our promise to women all around the world."), but I'd venture a guess it had something to do with vocal criticism from the scientific community of Komen's deceptive practices. In a piece published in the British Medical Journal last week, the directors of the Center for Medicine and the Media at Dartmouth Medical School wrote that Komen was flat-out lying to women about the benefits of mammograms (well, the paper used the words "misleading" and "false," which is a less confrontational way to say "lying"). According to Komen literature, 98% of women who detect breast cancer early survive versus the 23% who survive without early detection. One of the authors of the study told Bloomberg,

We think Komen can do a lot better by giving women the information they need to weigh the benefits and the harms. They aren't doing a good job. The ads are misleading and give false promises.

Ouch.

In addition to Brinker's resignation, two other members of the Board stepped down yesterday.

This debacle will one day make a great lesson in How Not to Handle a PR Snafu; even with Brinker's resignation, it may be too late for Komen to restore the cloying pink sheen to its reputation, though, as the damage has been done.

[LAT]

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.

Why Is Whitney Port Asking For Money On The Internet? [Video]

Whitney Port is coming to the Internet cap-in-hand for money to pay for her September runway show at New York fashion week.

Port is making her request on Indiegogo — a crowd-funding site that, unlike its competitor Kickstarter (which has stringent rules for qualifying charitable and creative projects), allows anyone with an Internet connection to post any plea for any sum. No idea is turned away. "Showing [your line] can actually be one of the most exciting moments of a designer's life," explains Port in the accompanying video. "I'm doing something that's never been done before: the first-ever fan-supported fashion show at fashion week in New York. That means I'm asking you, the friends and fans who've made everything I do possible, to join the crowd-funding campaign."

Click the image above to see a screengrab of Port's Indiegogo fundraising page.

Port is seeking $50,000 "to put towards the hair and makeup, the space, the models, and so much more."

What separates Port from your average friend-with-an-idea-for-a-movie-and-a-Kickstarter — aside from a lucrative background in reality TV — is that Port is essentially seeking a $50,000 investment for her small business. Only she's calling it a donation, as if her fashion line were a charity. Putting on a fashion show is a standard business expense for a designer fashion brand. Why isn't Port doing what other young designers do to grow their companies — get a bank loan, a financial backer, borrow money from family and friends, apply for industry awards and grants for emerging talent, or dig into her own pockets? Why isn't she seeking funding from individuals and institutions that understand the risks inherent in this type of investment and who are savvy enough to negotiate for an ownership stake? In exchange for your donations, Port is offering only recognition that ranges from "special thanks on my Facebook page" ($1) to a front-row seat at the show ($450).

Putting on a fashion show can be very costly, especially at Port's chosen venue of Lincoln Center. Last year, IMG — the entity that owns Mercedes-Benz New York Fashion Week — raised the rates on all of its show venues by an average of 8%. To rent the Box, the smallest space available for just the few hours it takes to mount and strike a show now costs $16,500. Last season, Port's line Whitney Eve showed at the Studio, a mid-sized venue that goes for $30,000. And then, of course, there are PR expenses, invitations, a stylist, a casting director, key makeup and hair artists and their teams, security, and all of the other budget line items that need to get paid. Nobody said working in fashion was easy. But Whitney Eve is a business. Port expects to make money from this show. Why should the public pay her for the pleasure?

Whitney Port seems an unlikely candidate for charity. The Hills, the reality show that launched her to fame, paid her a reported $20,000 per episode. Then she did her own spin-off, The City, for two seasons. She got a book deal. She endorses a zit treatment and John Frieda hair products. She's a judge on Britain & Ireland's Next Top Model. A single sponsored Tweet from Port will set you back $2500 (but if you give her $5 on Indiegogo, she'll Tweet at you in thanks). Her CAA Speakers profile page doesn't list a rate for securing her services as a public speaker, but does suggest topics a Whitney Port speech might address, including "Style: Injecting a Bit of Brightness into Every Outfit," "Living Life To Its Fullest: Accept the Invitation, Take Chances, and Enjoy Yourself!" and "The New Consumers: Using Technology to Connect and Communicate with a Changing Demographic."

Port also comes from a wealthy family. Port's father, Jeffrey Port, is the head of a Los Angeles apparel company called Swarm. He backed his daughter's fashion line at its inception in 2008, when it was called "Eve & A." Port and her four siblings all attended Crossroads, a tony Santa Monica prep school. (Tuition there is currently $31,900 per year for grades 6-12.) Whitney Port's net worth is estimated at $3.5 million.

Port's fundraising campaign has 40 days left. She has raked in a grand total of $415 so far.

Whitney Eve [Indiegogo]

View the original article here

This post was made using the Auto Blogging Software from WebMagnates.org This line will not appear when posts are made after activating the software to full version.