pro Bono? Seeing red?

Product (RED). I've looked at this cynically since it started, but couldn't quite put my finger on what made me dislike it so much. beyond the "What's the point?" factor. You see the whole idea behind Bono's big idea is that the company donate a proportion of the proceeds from the sale of the 'red' branded fashion products to charity.

Why only a proportion? Why not all the income from those "specially designed products"?

you see if I'm choosing this Gap T-shirt as a fashion statement, instead of buying this gap t-shirt) just because it helps a charity, then SHOULDN't IT DO MORE? There are other companies that already give a good share to charities without having ME advertise it for them. or why not just buy something less expensive and donate the difference, tax efficiently, and do more for the same?

The same goes for the AMEX card. Is it any more ethical than the other charity cards.

i can almost see the point in the iPod (RED). it's the same price as the other iPod nanos, so it really is $10 that the charity wouldn't get otherwise, if you're buying an ipod anyway (which i admit I want to do).

But still, apart from some nifty marketing, really what does the whole malarky (red) do?

The answer lies in what Gisele told the Sunday Times a few weeks ago. "We can all start shopping more and feel good about it. No more guilt!".

So there you go. You thought it was about alleviating AIDS, TB and malaria in the poorest parts of the 3rd world. Turns out it's about alleviating guilt in the richest, consumption frenzied parts of the world.