The above ad for Amtrak's sorta high-speed Acela line has been looping on local TV. One line in particular seemed a bit odd--besides wireless internet and electrical outlets, Amtrak enables passengers to get back such travel basics as "taking off your shoes only if you feel like it."
That's right--Amtrak, a corporation created, funded and owned by the federal government, is touting its exemption from TSA anti-terrorism procedures as the recovery of a fundamental right. Based on the railway bombings by terrorists in other countries, one could argue that trains are as much if not more at risk of a serious attack as commercial airlines. Nonetheless, while airline passengers have to remove their shoes when they go through security, Amtrak is literally selling the lack of such security features on our government-owned railroad as a feature, not a flaw.
Which raises an interesting question about the TSA airport screenings--if they are indeed required to prevent terrorism, why does the government's own transportation company portray them as an unnecessary burden?
Counterfeit Chic on the The Innovative Design Protection & Piracy Prevention Act--IDPPPA--the new fashion copyright bill just introduced in the U.S. Senate. Obtaining intellectual property protection has been a crucial issue for emerging designers in the U.S.--where the lack of copyright for clothing means that fashion has less IP protection than in Europe & Asia.
Brilliant, and as always with GSH, so rich. His general point is one the today's do-gooders would do well to note--a social movement with no sense of fun is at base inhuman and as such fundamentally skewed in ways that make it far less than what it could be."He especially likes shows and movies and cartoons from his childhood, such as 'Top Cat' and 'Rocky and Bullwinkle' and 'Underdog.' 'Your life has to consist of more the 'Black people should unite,' he said. 'You hope they do, but not twenty-four hours a day. If you aren't having no fun, die, because you're running a worthless program, far as I'm concerned.'"
After an interesting few months--more about which later--and intermittent posts on my Twitter feed, here we are again, back to the ol' long-form writing.
Coming soon, my thoughts on the Social Innovation Fund, Donald Duck and emergency rooms. Plus a heckuva lot more.
It's good to be back.
Tonight at 10 p.m. PBS is premiering The New Recruits, an insightful documentary that provides an inside look at the experience of Acumen Fund fellows as they try to change the world through social business. Rainn Wilson from The Office is the narrator, and you can find local listings (and DVD info) at the PBS website.
Since I was a consultant on the production I'm not in a position to provide a disinterested review, but I will say that one of things that makes the film so refreshing is that it isn't afraid to take a warts-and-all approach. But you don't have to take my word on that--for reviews from the Wall Street Journal and other media outlets, check out the filmmakers' website.
To complete today's charity ad trifecta, here's a thoughtful reflection from within the advertising industry on how the business views its charitable clients. The piece is rather eye-opening: according to the author, ad agencies see charity work as "downmarket" and design charity promos more to look good for awards than to be effective. Hence the post's provocative title, "Every time we make a self serving charity ad, a gay baby kitten dies of breast cancer"--
You could argue that, even if the main effect of these ads is to win awards rather than raise money or awareness, no one is really harmed. I’d argue against that. The same agencies that make creatively awarded ads know equally well how to make effective ads. Most of the time, though, they’re not the same thing. So every time an agency pours resources into making a beautiful, moving, and hopefully awarded charity ad, they’re choosing (consciously or not) not to make an effective one instead. They’re choosing not to make an ad that raises money for the charity and saves lives, cures diseases, finds homes for kittens or whatever it is the charity exists to achieve.
My last post featured a BBC satire of charitable fundraisers typified by a calculus of moral nihilism. Here's an upcoming event that's far more thoughtful: the Disabled and Sexy fashion show for the UK's Jennifer Trust for Spinal Muscular Dystrophy.
Unlike the ersatz porn stars of the Ladies Guild of Kneesley, this Notting Hill event isn't just about doing anything for cash. The fashion show reflects how the charity does more than treat a disease, an effort that itself can make people feel as if they've been reduced to a set of symptoms. Rather, the initiative celebrates the participants' full humanity, an aim that is as meaningful as providing medical care.
In this BBC Comedy video, The Ladies Guild of Kneesley skewers recent efforts by charities to sex up their fundraising. While the tactic can work for some organizations--particularly those with sexuality-related missions--far too often it's an uneasy fit, with lame jokes and blatant objectification rationalized by a good cause.
PUTTING THE FUN IN FUNDRAISING EXTRA: This vintage trend piece from the Washington Post describes (ostensibly) wacky sexy fundraising as a trait of social entrepreneurship. Who knew? And somewhat related, this recent article from Australia notes that donating sex toys & bongs may not be the best way to support your local charitable thrift store.
One of the hazards of being a lawyer is that you often find yourself having to tell folks to prepare for worst case scenarios that may seem unlikely, even goofy--but would be devastating if they occurred.
Case in point: this $100 million lawsuit filed in Palm Beach County Court, in which controversial pro golfer John Daly has sued the PGA Tour (a nonprofit, by the bye), its hotel venture and a local children's hospital failing to provide adequate security at a golf tournament benefiting the hospital. As the Palm Beach Post reports,
Daly filed two years ago after a woman taking pictures jumped in front of him in mid-swing. Daly claimed in the paperwork he aborted the movement because he feared killing the woman but felt his rib cage pop out. The paperwork reads that Daly and other players unsuccessfully tried three times before the incident to have security kick the unidentified woman off the course.
Daly blamed the injury’s recurrence for his withdrawal from several tournaments this year. He even twittered about retirement.
In short, another reminder of why there's a thriving business in special event liability insurance--and not just in the litigious U.S.
