Talk:Cause marketing/Archives/2012

Cleanup

Stopping by after a considerable break, I see some great work has been done over the years. It seems some valuable things others contributed along the way may have been taken out too.

It might be helpful to note that many years ago, the cause marketing page was removed completely - in part because of egregious self-promotion.

Reading through this article after a long break (fresh perspective), I am noticing what seems to be too much marketing in this article on a marketing topic. The history section appears to be problematic. Two references to the same website is not going to work. The first two paragraphs is too much, IMO, considering the overall length. Either the "first claim" to cause marketing should be reduced or the section should be greatly expanded. There are some examples I remember seeing in the past (such as ones with online auctions) that I think should perhaps have stayed or been replaced rather than deleted.

I would appreciate some input from others. Please note, this is definitely one topic where it is best to avoid self-promotion.

And I love some of the things listed in discussion here over the years. "Great eye" to some of you. Having had the opportunity to create this page, I'm happy to see some others who have taken it seriously - and helped to keep an "eye" on this article.

Uberveritas (talk) 16:03, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Recent

I noticed a fairly recent edit that appeared to be blatantly self-serving or in the least not a necessary edit. For anyone working on this page, I would encourage us all to ensure that we are doing our best to meet Wiki standards. Uberveritas (talk) 10:23, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Regarding recreation

I saw that the page was unlocked again ( I think ) so I added a stub. I can do a full article shortly, but I need to do some more reading on the formatting of Wikipedia articles before I do so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.195.236.89 (talk • contribs) 05:55, December 13, 2006

If the neutrality of this article is being disputed, it would be best for an explanation to be added to the discussion page so that the situation can be reviewed and remedied (if needed). Uberveritas 06:00, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I am removing the neutrality dispute tag as most of the original (and temporary) stub has been re-worked. I was able to increase the content, and there should be more on its way shortly. At this point, given that the text has changed, I think the neutrality can be re-disputed if there is still a concern. If such becomes the case, I would appreciate it if a note could added here in the discussion section so that any errors in tone can be remedied. Thanks, Uberveritas 07:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

A couple of tags removed given the substantial change in content today. Will continue to update, quality check the tone, and add additional citations/references. Several sections still need considerable work; others just need additional information. Uberveritas 09:06, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Further research material?

• Joe Marconi, Cause Marketing, ISBN 0793152585 [1]
• Stephen M. Adler, Cause for Concern: Results-Oriented Cause Marketing, ISBN 0324311303, [2]
• Jocelyne Daw, Cause Marketing for Nonprofits, ISBN 0471717509, [3]

The numbered links lead to amazon, the ISBN links lead to the library book-search. (so you can find a library near you to borrow it from)

The article looks great! Good job improving it! ---J.S ^(T/C) 22:28, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

• • Thanks for adding this information here J.S.  :-) Uberveritas 06:07, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

More source material -- New blog post today by Cara Wilking, J.D. of the Public Health Advocacy Institute, "Organizations that Care About Health Should Play No Part in the Soft Drink Industry’s Effort to Rehabilitate Its Public Image", found here: http://www.phaionline.org/2011/06/20/organizations-that-care-about-health-should-play-no-part-in-the-soft-drink-industrys-effort-to-rehabilitate-its-public-image/ --EricE (talk) 00:12, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Status, Direction From Here

The sections on benefits (and uses) of cause marketing as well as types of cause marketing still has considerable work to be done. Uberveritas 06:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

American Express

This section states that the company saw a 17% increase in its card holders but other websites (eg, Foundation Center) state that it was something like 45%. Does anyone know the actual percentage? (81.129.240.186 09:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC))

-- Thank you for noting a possible discrepancy. If anyone else has additional data to contribute to ensure the accuracy, please make a note here (Uberveritas 05:58, 15 May 2007 (UTC))

Examples Section

- While the Wally Amos citation is wonderful in its own right, I wonder if it might not be a very pertinent example for a general and broad article on cause marketing. I would love to see comments on this. (Uberveritas 06:01, 15 May 2007 (UTC))

Redirecting CRM to Customer Relationship Management - Request For Comments

The current CRM article is a list of possible expansions for that acronym, one of which is this article. It is my belief(based on searches), that most users who are looking for CRM are looking for Customer relationship management, and this is a confusing experience for them.

I'm proposing that the CRM article be redirected to Customer relationship management, and the current CRM page be moved to CRM (Disambiguation). The Customer relationship management article will then contain this text under its title:

"(Redirected from CRM) For other uses, see CRM (disambiguation)".

I'd like to have you comment on the issue before I request any changes. I have opened a discussion on the CRM Talk page where you can add your opinion. Thanks!

Kingsley Joseph (talk) 21:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

claims for Nancy Brinker

An anonymous editor (who, by the way, has a long record of trumpery and fluffery on behalf of Nancy Brinker) added the following sentence: "Susan G. Komen for the Cure founder Nancy Brinker is credited for taking cause marketing to the next level by associating major corporate sponsors with the Race for the Cure event benefiting breast cancer research."

Three references were provided. These two, [4] and [5] do not mention Cause Marketing at all. This one does identify the Komen foundation as an important example: [6], but it does not attribute anything to Brinker, nor does it say such things as "the next level" as if this were a remarkable shift. (Indeed, a read of the article shows that, in fact, it's the same kind of thing that Marriott and American Express were doing: associating corporations with worthy social causes.)

Cause Marketing, importantly, is not something charities do, it's something business do, and charities can plug in. The Komen example is already described below, in its partnership with Yoplait.

So I have removed the sentence, pending some reference which would establish both (1) that it is Nancy Brinker in particular who has done this, rather than the Komen foundation in general, and (2) that it is a "next level" to do what, in fact, Marriott and the other examples have been doing for years, and (3) that this is properly understood as something the charity does, rather than the business, since the whole point of cause marketing is as a commercial strategy for business, not a fundraising strategy for charities. Tb (talk) 18:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Good article

"Sick of Pink", Boston Globe, October 4, 2009. I thought the information about the difference between the U.S. and Europe would be a particularly a good addition to the article. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 19:46, 2 October 2009 (UTC)