Are you seeing RED? Amex Helps You Spend For Yourself And Give Money To Charity At The Same Time.
by Leonora Oppenheim, London, UK on 03. 7.06
What have Bono, Elle Macpherson, Scarlett Johansen and Giorgio Armani got to do with American Express? Well the obvious answer is that they all have a lot of money to spend on their credit cards. The not so obvious answer is the launch of (Project) RED which brings big name celebs together with big name brands and big name credit cards all in the very big name of Charity! (Project) RED is the brainchild of Bono and Bobby Shriver and was launched last week in collaboration with their DATA organization which lobbies governments on debt, trade and AIDS in Africa and The Global Fund which fights AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria around the world. Ethical consumerism is what we are all about at TreeHugger so we are interested to know how (Project) RED will go about fighting devastating diseases in developing countries through people’s everyday shopping habits in the consumerist crazy first world.
The idea is quite simple: incorporate charity donations into people’s everyday spending habits by creating products which give a small percentage of their value to The Global Fund. So for example if you go into GAP and buy the RED t-shirt (which is made in Africa) a percentage of the cost will go straight to The Global Fund, although how much is not specified, strangely. You can also buy some Bono style shades from Emporio Armani and some mudcloth sneakers from Converse. In the case of the Red Amex card they are making ethical spending so easy you don’t even have to think about it. You just use the credit card as you normally would and they donate 1% of your spendings every quarter to The Global Fund. If you spend over £5000 in a year they will up the percentage to 1.25%.
RED is currently looking for more big name brands to get involved in the project. Companies will more than likely will be hooked by the kudos the brands currently involved are getting from industry and consumers alike. They are setting an ethical example and creating cool new products while doing it. Gap has said it will develop a full RED range beyond the original t-shirt and Converse have pledged a new RED shoe each season. They say that they will work in collaboration with ‘designers, artists, musicians and filmmakers to inspire originality by creating limited edition Converse RED shoes on a unique canvas that preserves culture and celebrates creativity.’ The Chief Marketing Officer of Converse, Dave Maddocks, couldn’t be more enthusiastic about the idea. “Red is masterful in its simplicity: the greatest brands in the world enlisted to help with the biggest global emergency of our times. We are proud to be able to lend one of pop culture's most original and globally recognizable icons to assist in this critical endeavor”.
No it cannot be denied that Bono, who is clearly in line for a sainthood with all his extracurricular rock star campaigning, has cottoned onto something big here. It comes down to that old adage of ‘if you can’t beat ‘em join ‘em’. While we at TreeHugger believe we can educate and inform people into making better lifestyle choices for the environment, we accept that affecting change is a slow process. Bono and chums clearly don’t believe they have time to wait for this. Also when it’s a question of needing money for anti retroviral drugs like, right now, then you’ve just got to go straight in at the top and take it! The clever part is that whilst they are getting money for their cause they are making everyone involved look good. The consumers feel good, the big brands feel good, and hopefully if the money is spent right and it is spent on the right things then (Project) RED will actually affect change where it really matters, in Africa.
There will be cynics who don’t believe this kind of celebrity campaigning can ever work; those who might question the involvement of companies like GAP and Nike (who own Converse) who in the past have been attacked for their own ethical policies; and most of all the argument against this continual encouragement to spend spend spend will definitely be heard. However, the question that must be asked is, if the Global Fund has already committed US$4.5 billion to more than 350 programs in 130 countries since 2002 and this is still not enough to do the work that needs to be done, what other ways are there of getting a steady flow of sustainable money to fight the spread of AIDS and other diseases? Surely no one wants to sit through another Live 8? Via: tippster Zerlina ::Join RED
This is a great idea. When are they bringing it the US? I guess I'll just have to use a discover card and donate my 1% back at the end of the year.
This is a great idea. When are they bringing it the US? I guess I'll just have to use a discover card and donate my 1% back at the end of the year.
This is one of the more rediculous ideas I've heard in a long time. You can't save the world with consumerism, all you can do is make it more socially acceptable for people to buy stuff they don't need. How is this environmentally positive?
"Problems cannot be solved at the same level of awareness that created them." - Albert Einstein
This kind of card is really common in the US, although they usually don't specify how much is being donated back to the organization in question.
Personally, I'd rather donate directly.
I assert there can be a real social cost to people making such a symbolicly good act (of using a red Amex) since it may fool themselves into thinking that they live their lives in a socially conscious manner.
I consider it similiar to the US tobacco executives who donate .000001% of their profits to "good causes" thus allowing them to sleep at night even though 100% of their profits are made in a process which is the #1 cause of cause death, and untold strokes, and amputations.
That being said, if you are already using your Amex to live reasonably then might as well get a red one.
I see this cards and those that are similar as a tool and not a solution. It really depends on how you use it.
If you live consciously, frugally and make good choices, the card will be a small bonus on top of all that. But if you are stuck in a vicious circle of over-consumption and waste resources frivolously, it won't change much at all.
In Madison, we've been able to make a charitable contribution while shopping for necessities like groceries since 1971: http://communityshares.com/$spindb.query.chip.commview
Funds go to local non-profits working to make our community better and more sustainable.
There are a number of other cards that support similar causes, and are through much more progressive companies than AMEX:
The Working Assets credit card gives 10¢ for each purchase you make to a whole list of progressive nonprofits, which members vote for.
ShoreBank Pacific, an bank with a "commitment to environmentally sustainable community development", offers a card that donates to the nonprofit Salmon Nation.
I'm sure there are others like this, and are great replacements for the many of us not fully integrated into a barter economy.
I've got a few problems with the way this brand is being promoted.
Firstly, Both Bono and Geldoff began promoting this brand a long time before products were launched. At present, the card isn't even available outside the UK, and products are still not available for purchase. In fact, both of them will be in town for their own tours before we can even expect to see Red products in the stores. This reeks of self-promotion.
Secondly, the products pander to the high end of the market, meaning most of the profit from the (label) goods is already going back to the companies who produce them in the first place. Cheaper brands could be enlisted in order to ensure the maximum coverage of populace, given the middle and lower classes are still the largest market, and could therefore make a larger contribution than the Armani crowd.
In the case of Amex, the interest rate is 12.9%. To be fair, I ensured I checked the UK site. The red card had one of the the highest interest rates for consumer-targeted cards (Amex Blue: 6.9%, Platinum: 8.9%, Red: 12.9%, Nectar: 12.9%). The closest comparison - Nectar - offered cash rewards instead of a charitable contribution. Obviously, Amex is a business and the company certainly offers no charity here, merely replacing rewards otherwise available on other offerings with measly contributions to the Global Fund. There are much higher costing cards, but they seem aimed at corporates and offer high rewards - (British Airways: 15.9%, British Airways Premium: 22.4%, British Airways Premium Plus: 26%)
It would totally depend upon the value you place on their - as yet unknown 'exclusive deals' and promitions, etc. As an example, the maximum amount I could conceivablly run through a credit card - around AU$3,000 a month, would attract a donation of AU$37.50. If I owed money on it, this contribution barely compares to the amount I'd be paying in interest. (Note: I'm also talking about Aussie dollars - the contribution would be converted if I was talking pounds).
Not very ethical in my view, but I suppose it will go some way toward helping and anything is still better than nothing. I'd just prefer to see more transparency in the amount donated before I trust Red to donate on my behalf, instead of me making a well-considered personal contribution.
The Sunday Observer also had a huge spread on "Eco-friendly consumerism" too, with a large photograph of Elle MacPherson endorsing the new amex card which your article features.
Isn't it slightly hypocritical when last July she was paid $2.3million for starring in the Black Glama campaign - a US fur company that deals EXCLUSIVELY IN MINK?
As tree-hugger claims that 'The Future is Green' I feel inclined to point this out...
This is such a scam! I was quite disappointed to see that treehugger seems to eat this one. Bono is doing nobody a favour but the big corps that gets a bit of eco-friendliness and rockstar-hipster glam added to their brands. I seriously wish he would get back to concentrating on his band and leave these matters to people with a little more vision. Come on people - this donation is second to non and doesnt at all add up to the harm these companies are creating with their production methods. Bono is a useful clown in the eyes of these guys, for the rest of us he is close to being dangerous when he helps to sell wacko ideas like these!
We have had charity credit cards in the UK for ages. Usually they are marketed by the charity themselevs. E.g. The Vegetarian Society used to have one with the Co-op bank.
These cards never seem to be very competitive. I think it is better to get the credit card most suited to your needs i.e. lowest interest rate/ best cashback rate and make your charitable donations separately. Also by doing this, the charity can claim tax back via the GiftAid scheme (in the UK).
I think this should be applauded, clearly not as a final solution--as everyone previously has mentioned, there are a lot of problems with this scheme--but as a small step in the right direction.
This scheme is working with our imperfect world. Sure, it would be much better if people donated directly, or if they used the Working Assets card, or if they stopped buying altogether, but they haven't, and they don't. If people are going to be consumerist, isn't it better that something positive comes from it?
World change won't happen if it's isolated to the fringes of society, where (we?) idealists live. Movement in the right direction on a mainstream level, however small, should be supported and seen as building momentum to a more perfect future.
It's too much to ask for most people to radically change their behaviors and their philosophies, but change can and will happen if people start taking small steps in the right direction.
I think this is just one of those steps because, however flawed, it will appeal to many people who currently live their lives without making any other contribution to the causes RED supports. It may not be perfect, but it's a pretty impressive mainstream step which, hopefully, will sow the seeds for greater change.
Hi