Tag Archive: Planned Parenthood


“Mr. Biden’s word is insufficient to dispel the cloud. Any inventory should be strictly limited to information about Ms. Reade and conducted by an unbiased, apolitical panel, put together by the D.N.C. and chosen to foster as much trust in its findings as possible.” — New York Times editorial,  May 1, 2020

“I thought it was an ‘Onion’ headline, not a New York Times headline. They should be embarrassed for themselves for even suggesting that idea.” — Former White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders

The Democratic National Committee should be tasked with oversight of an “unbiased, apolitical” into sexual dalliances to restore “trust” in its presumptive nominee for President, Joe Biden?

Almost DailyBrett must stop right here and ask: How can anyone combine DNC — let alone the RNC — and the words, “unbiased” and “apolitical” in the same sentence? The national committees of the two respective parties are the most political beings on this planet.

That’s why they exist.

Take for example the self-described “abortion access” reporter for CBS News, Kate Smith. She’s on the front lines with Planned Parenthood, the Center for Reproductive Rights and other abortion providers/advocates. CBS has to know that Smith is a fully committed advocate posing as reporter.  And yet the “Big Three” network tolerates this masquerade?

Why doesn’t Planned Parenthood simply hire Smith as its lead spokeswoman … and cut out the middle man?

Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks played the roles of Katherine Graham and Ben Bradlee in the heralded movie, “The Post.” The plot line revolved around the decision of the Post management to publish “The Pentagon Papers,” a former Secretary of State Robert McNamara authorized study by Rand Corporation about the conditions on the ground in the Vietnam War.

It wasn’t pretty.

There were political threats. There was the prospect of a failed IPO for the Post on Wall Street. There were those who simply thought Katherine Graham couldn’t do the job. The Washington Post asserted its independence, and published the Rand Report.

CBS anchor Walter Cronkite, the most trusted man in America, went to Southeast Asia, and came back with the truth. The Vietnam War was indeed, a “stalemate.”

Mass Media, An Oxymoron?

I always say mass media is now an oxymoron, because there is no mass media, really. Everyone’s getting their information and their content from different places, often those that affirm their preexisting beliefs.”  — Veteran television host/anchor Katie Couric

Some apologists may be tempted blame the media’s obvious loss of cherished independence and corresponding decline in public trust and approval as simply a reflection of the national divide in the Age of Trump. Too easy.

Consider the media’s record when it comes to the linkage between political philosophy and zippers. Your author has always contended that once the zipper comes down … it will always come down.

In chronological order there was the media belief in Anita Hill against Clarence Thomas (1991); the “It was consensual” mantra (1998);  The Me Too pile-on against Brett Kavanaugh (2019) and now … the call for the Democratic National Committee to serve as the Praetorian Guard of the Biden-raided hen-house.

There is a obvious pattern here, and more importantly there is the loss of professed independence of the media. Sides have been taken, and the loser is the general public, which has a right to know.

If the media ever regains its vaunted independence, it could go back to providing the nation and the world with news and information without stenographic interpretations. Will it cost a few shekels? Whattyathink CNN?

There were decades when CBS was fiercely independent when Edward R. Murrow and Walter Cronkite held sway. Alas, next came disgraced anchor Dan Rather, who could not and would not suppress his partisan sympathies.

The rest is history. CBS and the vast majority of its brethren have changed their missions, seeing their new job to simply affirm preexisting viewpoints. And the result?

As General George C. Patton once said: “If everyone is thinking alike, then someone isn’t thinking.”

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/495989-sanders-mocks-ny-times-urging-dnc-to-investigate-biden-allegations-i-thought

https://www.foxnews.com/media/katie-couric-says-americans-watch-news-for-affirmation-not-information-seek-to-confirm-preexisting-beliefs

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/donald-trump-media-journalists-dont-bother-to-hide-partisanship/?

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2018/02/15/oppositional-journalism/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2017/12/27/dan-rather-father-of-affirmational-journalism/

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/planned-parenthoods-ambassador-to-cbs-news/?

 

“The surest way to undermine the credibility of the White House press corps is to behave like the political opposition. Don’t give speeches from the White House briefing room.” — ABC White House correspondent Jonathan Karl on his CNN colleague Jim Acosta, “Front Row At The Trump Show”

“Political opposition”?

As in political opposition to President Trump and with it, the Republican Party?

How about … The Democratic National Committee, ACLU, NARAL, NOW, ADA, Planned Parenthood, Move On, … and on, and on … as tangible examples of political opposition?

If all of the above apply as political adversaries with prescribed agendas, what about opposition media?

Let’s ask: What’s the difference between opposition media and the NRA? Both are narrow special interests with defined agendas. The latter registers to lobby.

Almost DailyBrett has been outspoken in yearning for the return of professional, dispassionate and objective reporting of relevant news and information for the benefit of the American public … particularly in this time of crisis.

As measured by Gallup, The Edelman Trust Barometer and others, public esteem and corresponding trust in the media (e.g., White House press corps) without any doubt whatsoever has been plummeting.

If the credibility of the White House press corps has been undermined as Monsieur Karl suggests — and the Boys and Girls on the Bus are now the political opposition with a clear philosophical and policy agenda — shouldn’t they be required to register to lobby under the auspices of the federal Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA)?

If the openly expressed goals of the vast majority of White House Press Corps and so many more in media citadels of New York, Washington DC, Atlanta … is the removal of President Trump from office and the thwarting of the Republican Senate Majority policy program, don’t these quests equate to lobbying executive and legislative branches of government?

Wouldn’t it not be sound public policy to require reporters, editors, correspondents, anchors — using their awesome communication powers to influence the electorate and change policy — to state for the public record what they have become … unregistered-to-date lobbyists with notepads and microphones?

“Hold On Mr. President!”

Almost DailyBrett can already hear the complaints about a “chilling effect” on our cherished First Amendment Right of Free Speech. Do other special interests sacrifice their constitutional rights (e.g., NPR) upon registering as lobbyists at the federal or state levels?

Why should today’s partisan media be held to a different standard? Don’t they believe in public accountability?

As a young press secretary, your author remembers venturing into the White House briefing room with Reagan deputy press secretary Larry Speakes at the podium. Helen Thomas (UPI), Leslie Stahl (CBS), Chris Wallace (NBC) and Sam Donaldson (ABC) were sitting in the first row.

In the history of the planet, never assembled was a better and more formidable group of skeptical Devil’s Advocates … but they were not opposition media.

They were tough (read Donaldson’s “Hold On Mr. President!”) but they were fair and did not resort to partisan grandstanding or pose hateful questions implying POTUS has “blood on his hands.”

Some may want to ask Almost DailyBrett whether the few conservative media outlets, such as Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, should be compelled to registered as lobbyists. Your author says ‘yes’ to the former and ‘no’ to the latter. The neoliberal Wall Street Journal editorial board offers its take on national policy and direction on its editorial pages … anyone can read them … but they do not lobby.

During the course of his lengthy career in communications stretching from cub reporter to tenure-track professor of public relations, Almost DailyBrett witnessed the sad transformation of media organizations from the responsible providers of news and information to crass disseminators of partisan vitriol to further divide the American public.

(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Your author doesn’t want to provide CNN’s Jim Acosta (referenced by Jonathan Karl in the quote above) any more attention.

Having said that, his demagogic behavior and obvious loathing of the president should serve as Exhibit A … as to how partisan media has mutated and why they should come clean … leaving absolutely no doubt about their partisan public policy agendas for the executive and legislative branches of government.

The Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) was approved for a reason. Opposition media should register just like any other special interest.

https://lobbyingdisclosure.house.gov/amended_lda_guide.html

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/04/planned-parenthoods-ambassador-to-cbs-news/?

https://www.foxnews.com/media/president-trump-media-hostility-coronavirus-briefings

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2018/02/15/oppositional-journalism/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2020/03/29/america-loses-trust-in-media-at-the-worst-time/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2020/01/12/has-all-media-become-partisan-media/

A lot of truth is often spoken in jest.

According to the old joke, Richard Nixon dressed in his presidential windbreaker gathered the Washington Press Corps at his presidential retreat on the beach in San Clemente, California.

After chastising the ladies and gentlemen of the Fourth Estate for not covering him fairly and accurately during his political career including his presidency, he gave them one more chance.

Nixon miraculously walked out onto the Pacific Ocean and back without getting his wing tips wet.

“Now, you can finally cover me fairly and accurately!”

The New York Times front page headline the following morning: “Nixon Can’t Swim.”

The liberal elite media could not and would not cover Nixon fairly back in the 1970s. The negative coverage trend toward Republican office holders has only intensified with time. There is zero benefit of the doubt when it comes to Republicans, only to Democrats.

Almost DailyBrett knows this undeniable fact based upon eight years of hard-earned experience as a campaign media director and press secretary for California Republican Governor George Deukmejian.

“Rebuilding Trust Requires Embracing Bias”

“A more partisan media is the last thing America needs. Those who doubt that should consider that it would be squarely in Mr. Trump’s interest. The president’s attempt to gin up his supporters by depicting the media as biased is one of his most powerful lines. Why vindicate it for him?” — Lexington, USA columnist for The Economist

“We don’t want to change all of our structures and rules so much that we can’t put them back together. We don’t want to be oppositional to Donald Trump.” — Dean Baquet, executive editor of The New York Times

Almost DailyBrett is begging for mercy.

The New York Times along with CNN (Clinton News Network) and MSNBC lead the oppositional journalism pack against Donald Trump. They detest the man (understatement), wanting unlimited license to label him as a “racist” regardless of context. After four-plus years, we know for a fact the liberal media will take everything and anything he does or says and add a negative spin to employ a PR word.

Hiring foreign affairs hawk John Bolton with his goofy mustache (Liberal media: ‘Trump added a dangerous war monger to his team’) and later firing him (Liberal media: ‘Trump can’t retain anyone on his staff’) is vivid proof that any Trump action triggers an automatic negative take. The media always wants it both ways.

Liberal columnist Nathan Robinson (see quote above) suggested out loud that elite media should openly express a bias and affinity to left-wing causes in order to rebuild public trust. Why shouldn’t the liberal media come out of the closet? Let the world know, what it already knows: Liberal media outlets are just another special interest group, similar to Planned Parenthood, ACLU and NPR.

Bias leads to trust?

There are hundreds of always excitable journalism professors, who will be more than happy to intensify their “guidance” of impressionable students toward socialist justice, encouraging them to express their bias digitally, in print and across the airwaves. These academics will declare … wrongly … that objectivity never existed and never will in America’s newsrooms.

Robinson is essentially arguing the media should simply come clean and openly side with Bernie Sanders/Elizabeth Warren Democratic Socialism, lauding those who drink the Kool Aid and chastising any and all who dare to dissent. Lexington counters that a gallant admission of oppositional journalism by the major mastheads and networks will aid and abet Trump’s talking points about the media losing its way, abandoning any pretext of being fair and accurate.

Didn’t St. Louis Post-Dispatch executive editor Joseph Pulitzer once say the three most important words in journalism are: “accuracy, accuracy and accuracy”? He made this famous assertion even though he was a staunch Democrat, actually serving in Congress, and crusading against business and corruption.

If a reporter. correspondent, anchor or media outlet sacrifices personal and/or institutional integrity on the low-altar of abandoning fairness and objectivity, any and all of these lost souls should not even sniff the prestigious journalism award that bears Joseph Pulitzer’s name.

https://www.economist.com/united-states/2019/09/12/a-full-court-press

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/sep/10/media-bias-is-ok-if-its-honest

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2018/02/15/oppositional-journalism/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2019/03/26/oppositional-journalisms-victory/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2019/02/19/profs-should-not-force-political-opinions-on-students/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2019/07/24/is-the-word-racist-becoming-cliche/

 

 

 

 

 

“ … Stuff happens, there’s always a crisis and the impulse is always to do something and it’s not necessarily the right thing to do.” – Jeb Bush speaking at the Conservative Leadership Project

“I don’t even think I have to react to that one. The American people should hear that.” – President Barack Obama

Close your eyes for a nanosecond …

Imagine a PAC-funded 30-second attack ad. There is the aerial view of a community college in Central Oregon. Nine dead. There are emergency vehicles. A SWOT team risking their lives. Perhaps, spent bullet casings. Maybe there is even blood on the walls … a horrific scene.umpqua

Next there is a chart listing contributions to former Florida Governor John Ellis Bush or “Jeb” from gun interests, including the always warm-and-fuzzy National Rifle Association.

And finally: Video of Jeb essentially dismissing the latest mass shooting, “Stuff happens.”

Presidential? Don’t think so.

Quoted out of context? The Mother of All Weak Alibis.

A gaffe? Certainly.

Campaign defining? Could be.

Rhetorical Discipline?

Remember former Texas Governor Rick Perry’s “Oops” moment, failing to remember a major federal cabinet-level agency he wanted to abolish? He never recovered in both the 2012 and 2016 presidential cycles.

Or how about Mary Gatter, a Planned Parenthood medical director, saying “I want a Lamborghini” in the context of selling fetal organs for profit? The non-profit’s image and reputation has been irrevocably tarnished. It’s time for a rebrand.

And now we have Jeb Bush and his version of caca happens in  response to eight students and one teacher losing their lives in the Southern Willamette Valley. When asked about the gaffe, Bush defensively and rhetorically  asked whether it would be better, if he had said, “Things happen.”

Former Fla. Gov. Jeb Bush speaks at the Hispanic Leadership Network conference, Thursday, April 18, 2013 in Coral Gables, Fla. Bush says he applauds the comprehensive reform bill formally unveiled Thursday in Washington and told conference attendees the bill tries to balance the immigrant experience and respect for the rule of law. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)

. (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee)

Sorry Governor, “things” is a distinction without a difference. How about cutting your losses and quickly admitting that you misspoke and clarify your remarks?

The image that comes across is someone who is more interested in appeasing and pacifying the firearm lobby than to demonstrate concern about gun violence. Couldn’t you have discussed enforcing the myriad of gun laws on the books and implementing the death penalty for brazen mass murder? Or how about expressing concern about the influence of violent video games and movies that portray mass killing as recreation?

Instead, the response from a two-term governor from a major swing state is “stuff happens.” As a former press secretary, I winced when I heard the news.

Pathetic, downright pathetic.

“Stuff” and “You Know”

As a college professor of public relations writing and presentations among other subjects, the author of Almost DailyBrett has strongly cautioned students about using the words, “Stuff” and “You Know.”

What is “stuff”? Is it bigger than a bread box? What constitutes “stuff”? Or is “stuff” just a crutch word to throw into a presentation when one is nervous. Once “stuff” becomes ingrained, it is a hard habit to break, similar to nicotine’s deadly hold on smokers.

Equally egregious are the words, “You know.”

U-No disease in college classrooms is as prevalent as cock-roaches. Once you hear one, the next one is not far behind. Many times, yours truly has kept a count of how many “you knows” pops up in any presentation. Sorry, I don’t know the exact circumstances about what you are talking about, so why are you implying that I do know?

These are two-more addictive words, and they are difficult to shake.

So why is the former Governor with a bachelor’s degree from the University of Texas using such a sophomoric word/phrase in such a horrific context?

Eternal Digital Audio and Video

All 44 presidents, particularly those in the modern era, live under the constant glare of our digital media on steroids.presidentialpodium

Do you think that Messrs. Obama, Clinton and Nixon would like to take back “Jayvee team,” “…Did not have sex with that woman” and “I am not a crook” respectively? Almost DailyBrett is not equating the three, other than to say they are all mistakes.

“Stuff happens” brings into question whether Jeb has the temperament, sensitivity and discipline to serve as the unquestioned leader of the free world.

And if Jeb does indeed overcome this rhetorical debacle and attain the presidency, will the electorate simply dismiss anything and everything  that goes wrong – horrifically wrong – by simply shrugging, “stuff happens”?

Don’t think so.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2015/10/02/when-asked-about-school-shootings-jeb-bush-says-stuff-happens/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_headlines

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/02/jeb-bush-is-criticized-for-saying-stuff-happens-in-reaction-to-oregon-shooting/?_r=0

http://www.cnn.com/2015/10/02/us/oregon-umpqua-community-college-shooting/

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2015/08/02/never-say-in-private-what-you-wouldnt-say-in-public/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeb_Bush

 

 

 

 

“There are 47 percent who are with him (Obama), who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you name it. These are people who pay no income tax.” – 2012 Republican nominee Mitt Romney caught on a planted Mother Jones videoromney47

“I want a Lamborghini.” – Mary Gatter, Planned Parenthood Pasadena and San Gabriel Valley medical director, caught on a planted Center for Medical Progress video.

Hall of Fame football coach and legendary commentator on CBS, ABC, NBC and Fox for three decades, John Madden, was asked on KCBS-Radio what was one of key reasons for his unprecedented run on four major networks:

“Never say in private, what you wouldn’t say in public.”

Also remember that allegations make headlines; rebuttals are buried in the story.

Saying that you were quoted out of context is weak, defensive and sounds lame.

How about not making inexpedient or arrogant comments in the first place?

How about assuming that you are always on-the-record regardless of where, when, what, why, how and to whom you are speaking?

The cameras are everywhere. The microphones are ubiquitous. And soon the drones will be swooping in. And thanks to Gordon Moore’s Law (e.g., the number of transistors on a piece of silicon real estate doubles every 18-24 months), ever more complexity can be packed into smaller and more powerful than ever before devices using a fraction of the power as in the past.

Think of it as the serendipity of the consumer electronics business.

The Cameras are Everywhere

The Mother Jones hidden video of Romney’s 47 percent remark, made to a supposedly private meeting with wealthy donors, immediately fed to the growing perception of the former Massachusetts governor as a heartless plutocrat. Whether that image was real or not, really didn’t matter at that point … the damage was done.

The Center for Medical Progress hidden video of Planned Parenthood’s Gatter discussing the dollars-and-cents pricing of tiny body parts of aborted fetuses over salad and wine in a tony Pasadena (CA) restaurant, ended with her visions of an Italian sports car. She inadvertently put Planned Parenthood’s $542 million in federal subventions into the crosshairs of a Republican-controlled Congress.Lamborghini

Think of it this way: a Mother Jones planted video came from the left side of the political spectrum and a Center for Medical Progress planted video came from the right side of the political spectrum. As Mary Matalin once said: “Politics is a contact sport.”

At the same time, publicly traded technology companies, such as GoPro (NASDAQ: GPRO) and others, are pioneering ever-smaller, more reliable cameras with excellent sound pickup, which are available for reasonable prices. Top it off, uploading these videos and having them go viral is easier than ever.

Digital is Eternal.

The candidates for the presidency and everyone else serving as the FrontMann/Frau(lein) or mouthpiece for any political sensitive organization or profitable business is now on record: No conversation is harmless. You should trust no one. Should you be a tad paranoid? Hello!

Take a mundane chore, such as Hillary Clinton heading off to Bergdorf Goodman on New York’s Fifth Avenue for a $600 haircut at the John Barrett Salon. Reportedly, her entourage closed down one side of the store on a Friday and marshalled a private elevator so the inevitable nominee could have her hair done.

July 26, 2015 - Ames, Iowa, U.S. -  HILLARY CLINTON speaks during an organizing event at the Iowa State University Alumni Center .(Credit Image: © Brian Cahn via ZUMA Wire)

July 26, 2015 – Ames, Iowa, U.S. – HILLARY CLINTON speaks during an organizing event at the Iowa State University Alumni Center .(Credit Image: © Brian Cahn via ZUMA Wire)

Does this $600 haircut square with championing the needs of the struggling middle class? Or does it add to the notion of privilege?

Once again in our Twitterverse, second-screen world, everything and anything is in play. Nothing is off-the-record. Literally anything is discoverable. Have we lost to a large degree our privacy? Yes, we have.

Thirty years ago, we were all told to be wary of anything that you wrote down or typed because scary Xerox machines existed. Your ill-advised words could be copied and delivered to a non-friendly reporter, looking for “good dirt,” in a plain-white envelope.

Life was so innocent back then.

Today is so different. Who would have thought that munching on an overpriced salad, sipping nice wine, while dreaming of a nice car with the top down, could be so dangerous to the political and economic health of your organization and/or campaign?madden

Once again contemplate the wise words of John Madden: “Never say in private, what you wouldn’t say in public.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-barbarity-of-a-nation/2015/07/31/344f5140-36eb-11e5-9739-170df8af8eb9_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions&wpmm=1

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-price-of-fetal-parts/2015/07/23/13cb5668-316d-11e5-8353-1215475949f4_story.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2015/07/21/antiabortion-group-releases-second-planned-parenthood-video/

http://pagesix.com/2015/07/28/hillary-clintons-600-haircut-puts-bergdorf-on-lockdown/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/decision2012/leaked-videos-show-romney-dismissing-obama-supporters-as-entitled-victims/2012/09/17/5d49ca96-0113-11e2-b260-32f4a8db9b7e_story.html?hpid=z2

http://www.biography.com/people/john-madden-9542594

http://gopro.com/

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/08/planned-parenthood-receives-record-amount-taxpayer-support/

 

 

 

 

 

 

“Buckets for the Cure”

It never fails to stir up emotions, particularly in October (e.g., National Breast Cancer Awareness Month).

It is represented by a simple image, illustrating a pretty-in-pink bucket of grilled chicken.

It describes a marketing campaign that raised 50 cents per bucket and ultimately delivered $4.2 million to date to fight breast cancer.

And yet blood pressure always seems to rise and passions start flowing. Is this a case of no good-deed going unpunished, or something much deeper?

One person’s CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) is another person’s “Pinkwashing.”

kfc

In one corner is for profit Yum Brand’s KFC Division (once known as “Kentucky Fried Chicken”) on the other is non-profit Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Or maybe they are not in separate corners, but instead joined at the hip?

For present-and-future PR practitioners, I have seen this debate played out several times in the last two-plus years, and there is nothing even remotely approaching consensus on this ethical issue.

Reportedly, Susan G. Komen is the largest non-profit source for breast cancer research and advocacy. Susan G. Komen touts 240 corporate donors, and KFC is just one of these donors. And yet the knives are out for KFC primarily, and also for Susan G. Komen for signing off on KFC’s marketing campaign in order to raise millions to fight breast cancer.

To some encouraging patrons to consume grilled chicken breasts to save female breasts is too much of a mental metaphor to process. Fatty chicken contributes to breast cancer, so doesn’t the KFC/Komen alliance constitute shameless hypocrisy? That question has been asked repeatedly.

As a consuming public, we have been demanding that “Big Food” take action to notify us of the calorie count in its fast-food offerings and to offer healthier choices. As Martha Stewart would say, “It’s a good thing.”

As Almost DailyBrett reported, publicly traded companies (e.g., $13.5 billion NYSE: YUM) have a fiduciary obligation to promote profitability for their shareholders, many of whom are future retirees or parents with kids approaching college, investing in mutual funds and individual stocks.

At the same time, we are asking these corporations to give back to the communities they serve and take action to protect the environment through Corporate Social Responsibility. Yum Brands would naturally contend that its grilled chicken is a healthier consumer choice, and that it has raised more than $4 million to fight breast cancer. Isn’t this a case of both fiduciary responsibility and CSR? Would it be better for KFC to just offer original recipe or extra crispy to go along with the fat-laden side dishes and not give a dime to Susan G. Komen or any other non-profit?

When it comes to vilification, Susan G. Komen has been the subject of rhetorical broadsides even though it has invested nearly $2 billion for breast cancer research, education and advocacy. The largest single donation? $4.2 million from…KFC. At times, Komen has demonstrated a PR tin ear (gun-toting Smith & Wesson donation; Planned Parenthood debacle), but overall the foundation has been one of the leaders of the charge against breast cancer.

Shouldn’t we be celebrating corporate entities practicing CSR and helping non-profits? Or do some of us detest corporations so deeply and by extension, capitalism, that they would prefer for corporations to not offer and promote healthier choices, and give nothing back to our communities?

From this humble perspective, we instinctively know that life is not perfect and certainly not fair. Having said that, shouldn’t we be encouraging all to do good things, regardless of how large or how small (e.g., “Random acts of kindness”)? Isn’t the key to move the dial from an ethical and societal standpoint upwards and to the right? Shouldn’t we all have good intentions?

Or was mumsy right, when she reminded me: “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

http://blogs.courier-journal.com/derbycitycents/2012/10/07/yum-brands-david-novak-on-buckets-for-the-cure-criticism/

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Wellness/kfc-fights-breast-cancer-fried-chicken/story?id=10458830

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/30/AR2010043001971.html

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/pr?s=YUM+Profile

https://almostdailybrett.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/fiduciary-responsibility-vs-corporate-social-responsibility/

http://ww5.komen.org/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Susan_G._Komen_for_the_Cure

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_road_to_hell_is_paved_with_good_intentions

%d bloggers like this: