Oh, and (Red) and EDUN both are NOT charities. I don’t know how many times Bono and Ali have to say that. These are business models, they create a win/win situation for all parties involved. If you don’t agree with it, donate money on your own. People are always looking for negativity, but if you are only being negative and nobody is doing anything about certain issues, there will never be any progress in these areas.

but i do have to say that if all Apple has to do for literally millions of dollars in free advertising is give $5 from a $300 Ipod to charity, then apple cannot be said to be involved in anything even approximating charity. (RED) is doing a great thing. I just wish they’d really hold these corporations feet to the fire. The amount of publicity that (RED) products get is insane, both paid and otherwise. And like a person above did comment, they are usually older models that have had the price raised. Which effectively means that Apple is giving nothing. It is probably gaining more than it is losing.

(RED) is great, because all these companies should be chipping in something. But they aren’t, we are essentially, and it all seems very old-school way of doing things, and seems to still put capital and money first, Africa second, and that’s a shame.

To respond:

KC – You’re not paying $50 for a shirt. You’re paying for a high-quality, organic shirt that promotes fair trade, a donation to bee research, and you’re also raising awareness by wearing it. Furthermore, it does cost more to produce a shirt using vegetable dyes vs. harsh chemicals, organic materials vs. mass-produced synthetics, etc. so the shirts aren’t marked up as high as you may assume. I worked in fashion advertising for 8 years; I’ve toured the factories and seen the difference.

Steve – If you don’t like (RED) or Edun, that’s your right, but don’t make claims that aren’t true. The products are more environmentally friendly and socially conscious than their counterparts and the fact they are for-profit companies only helps replenish our failing economy and stimulates the economies of nations in much worse shape than we are in. At the end of the day, developed countries are consumers; if that’s the only way that charities can get us to respond to a crises, so be it. To me, buying a shirt crafted in AIDS-affected village by people who are trying to work to earn their living is far more noble than paying for a $200-a-plate dinner and listening to a bunch of suits speak at a stale benefit.

Silvrlvr – That $58 in groceries may not go as far if 1/3 of our food supply is compromised. I would love to be as optimistic as you that nature will “work it out,” but I share in the belief that if humans can help reverse the problem in any way, they should make every effort to do so. At the very least it will speed up the process. As for things “looking up,” an article as recent as last week claims the opposite in Hawaii:

http://www.khon2.com/home/ticker/42369912.html

To conclude, if buying a shirt isn’t the way you want to help a global problem, that’s your right, but don’t criticize those of us who support it.

And, the latest is actually that things are looking up for the bees, since the world realized two years ago that they were in peril. Nature is going to sort this out.

As soon as it went from being a “cut out the middle man” straight from the developing world (e.g. Traidcraft where my family would buy food when I was growing up) to a “corporations pay to look socially aware by slapping (RED) on their discontinued merchandise at an appaling markup over MSRP” game, I completely lost interest.

I’d far rather use my spare money to buy traffik free chocolate (See http://www.stopthetraffik.org/) than waste it on overpriced crap that is no more environmentally friendly or socially conscious than non-(RED), non-EDUN products from the same or similar manufacturers.

Instead of the (RED) AmEx card, there should be a (RED) “Nothing” where you don’t piss away your cash/credit in the name of phony-philanthropy and instead give 100% of the money you were thinking of spending directly to the causes that need it (rather than an unimaginative corporation that doesn’t. Hint: Motorola, Microsoft, Apple, …).

As for the quotes on Organic cotton they’re there, because organic means zilch to me. I’ve had Organic food and it’s nothing special…and sometimes worse (see bananas). I’m all for doing things for the environment, but the organic movement often seems more like religion than science. When your typical gardener’s food isn’t organic enough to be “organic,” it’s gone beyond ridiculous. But hey if you’ve got some extra disposable cash and you want to spend 3-4x on fruit go for it.