blogging social change

It’s becoming a bit of a corporate social change week, but here’s one more: Fast Company has released the winners of its 2005 Social Capitalist Awards. With uncharacteristic hopefulness, the article’s author writes: “Social capitalists show that pushing humanity’s path upward is simply a matter of will and resources. It is also a function of our collective willingness to believe in possibility, to meet each day’s news with the belief that the world can be a better place.” (on newsstands in the January issue of Fast Company)

Ask and ye shall receive. I give you the opposing (more or less) and practical view to Steven Forster’s National Post blather from a successful capitalist (see post, two down). Microsoft multi-millionaire Jeff Reifman writes “Investing for Change:
A Microsoft millionaire wonders if his money can express his values” in this week’s Seattle Weekly: enjoy.

In today’s world, your loudest vote is not at the ballot box; it’s at the cash register.

On February 10, MTV EXIT will air “Inhuman Traffic,” a documentary addressing sex trafficking and human rights. United Nations goodwill ambassador Angelina Jolie hosts the show, which will also be availalbe via streaming download on the MTV website.

The trailer is available online for streaming download. (via AdLand)

Steven Forster has an infuriating article in last week’s National Post, denouncing those tree-hugging environmentalists and their crazy tactics, like, say, buying an ad to tell people that overconsumption of paper is bad.

From the article: “As a survey in the latest Economist (which is well worth reading) points out, notions of corporate social responsibility, sustainable development, the triple bottom line, etc., etc., are based on a fundamental failure to grasp the significance of Adam Smith’s “Invisible Hand.” The most amazing aspect of this way of thinking is that it has been embraced by so many muddled/vain/scared/hypocritical corporate “leaders.”"

Wasn’t Smith saying that the market would regulate and correct itself? Well, since consumers have told corporations that they expect them to act responsibly, use triple-bottom-line accounting, and are more likely to buy their products if they conduct CSR or corporate giving … then wasn’t Smith right? Maybe Forster should remember that the market is the consumers, not the shareholders.

The Canadian Centre for Philanthropy (CCP) and the Coalition of National Voluntary Organizations (NVO) annouced earlier this week that the two organizations have merged. The new organization will be called press release (PDF), Imagine Canada explained that the process has involved over two years of hard work and focus testing. Congrats — a positive change with a smart board of directors. This is good news in a sector not known for thinking of things like strategic mergers, even when they make good sense.

The Washington Post is reporting (note: free registration required) that food giant Kraft will stop advertising many of its snack foods to kids ages 6 - 11.

According to the article, Kraft won’t be reducing their advertising budget, nor will they stop using cartoon characters or in-store promotions that target kids — but they will begin phasing out TV, radio and print ads targeted to those age groups. It reeks of classic corporate self-regulation just as the US Government releases new healthy eating guidelines, also expected to come out today. Guess what: Oreos still aren’t a food group.

Since big brains are good for social change, I thought I’d share the new and exciting Google Scholar with you: it’s all the journal articles you can eat, offered up in one simple (and very familiar) interface.

Here’s a sample search for “social marketing.”

Counterpunch.org is publishing a spitting rant against the non-profit sector by Michael Donnelly, entitled: “How Nonprofit Careerism Derailed the ‘Revolution’: Greens and Greenbacks”.

Donnelly’s friend Lisa sums it up in the article: “The Revolution was derailed by three things: the end of the draft; Roe v. Wade and the rise of the nonprofit sector. Once the children of privilege were no longer subject to any personal pain, it was over. It was a brilliant strategy by predatory capitalism.” Discuss.

In response to the terrible tragedy in south and southeast asia, Canadian international development charity Engineers Without Borders have begun educating the public on the difference between development and disaster relief, and the vital role that development can play in preventing large scale tragedies like the aftermath of the tsunami.

Why help poorer nations in development? Becuase infrastructure helps protect vulnerable societies from these kinds of unpredictable events. Read more on the EWB website.

You can’t deny the impact that propaganda has had on social change — some good, and lots of it bad. At the Centre for the Study of Political Graphics, they’re archiving the best and providing some nice annotations to put it all in context. I particularly enjoyed “We Shall Not Be Moved: International Graphics on Gentrification and Homelessness. (via Metafilter)