As I sit and eat this hersheys bar, it comes to pass that I notice there is a message hidden on the fold of the wrapper that says: "Every Hershey's product you've enjoyed has helped support children in need through Milton Hershey school. Thank You for making a difference!"
It is frequent that man will denote a higher cause to gain appreciation for a practice that may otherwise be malfactory to or nonbenificial to such. In this case, the Hershey company is saying that they "helped" children despite the fact that the relative percent of transfer may be extremely low.
In addition, BP recently aired a radio commercial where a fisherman described everything good BP did to "make things right" despite that there is still a massive amount of pollution and many other fishermen or members of neighbouring industries may have been ignored.
How do you feel about this?
It is not just these companies that are struggling with trying to do right by there wrong. At the same time though that little percent is helping these children out and that clean up that BP did could be just keeping that fisherman from or his family starving. Just because it may not seem like anything good is coming out of this small thing is could eventually build up to something much much bigger.
ReplyDeleteOnly Spencer is epic enough to write a blog entry inspired by a blub on a Hershey's wrapper.
ReplyDeleteAnd that British Petroleum commercial is bloody annoying...
And THAT, Mike, is why I'll be bicycle racing against, and BEATING, the British Petroleum bicycling team in the BP MS150 (a massive Houston bike ride/race benefitting people suffering from multiple sclerosis that is sponsored by BP). I will have to do 100 miles in about 4 hours including rest stops. I think it's safe to say that if my team beats the BP team, we'll be ahead of 99.9% of the 13,000 other people who do the ride. :)
ReplyDeleteMy opinion: no one can judge. Honestly, there's no way to know for sure where the money's going, & people are surprising sometimes. John Edwards, a prominent member of the Democratic party, was discovered to have spent $2000 of taxpayer money on like, a haircut. On the other hand George W. Bush, who has been demonized over & over in the media, apparently donated millions of dollars to improve conditions for African children without even making it public. No one found out about it until after his presidency. I can't even read the mind of the person next to me; I try not to judge harshly the intentions of someone I've never met.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCompanies are always finding ways to improve their image and there tend to be trends. The current fad that I've noticed is breast cancer awareness. Before that it was muscular dystrophy. From the face comes an image and these companies change face quite often in order to appear before the public with an image to their liking. Sponsors and charities are just accessories to this face. A group's intentions are falsely presented through these supplemental attributes just as makeup and jewelry can hide an appalling complexion. The seductress lures with false features; such is the nature of a company's image.
ReplyDeleteI apologize, I stated an incorrect piece of info in my previous comment...John Edwards only paid $400 for that haircut, & it was in fact his own money. But it's still pretty ridiculous.
ReplyDelete