The Foulées brand offering a 15% promotion on all women’s sports underwear for Pink October, Pizza Cozy launching an “exclusive” pink pizza, the Lemon Curve site selecting special lingerie for this month, Au Nom de la Rose which promises to donate one euro for each purchase of a bouquet, Gillette which highlights its razors when talking about Movember… More and more brands are positioning themselves in the fight against cancer with calls for donations or promotional offers. Initiatives that raise questions: is it a responsible commitment or a dubious recovery?
Caroline Marti, professor of information and communication sciences at Celsa Sorbonne-University and researcher at Gripic, wants to be pragmatic: “Brands are opportunistic and seize every opportunity in the calendar as clutches for commercial offers”. As such, Movember would not be so different from a Valentine’s Day or Christmas.
“We consider it normal that they engage in society”
The comparison may obviously seem surprising, yet the brand’s approach has been part of a trend that has been evident for years. That of a commitment that is increasingly claimed and increasingly important in the eyes of the consumer. “Brands are part of our lives. We consider it normal for them to get involved in society and to take a stand, to become actors”, explains Florence Touzé, professor at the Audencia Group faculty and specialist in the evolution of marketing and consumption towards more responsibility.
This is all the more true for the fight against cancer, “a societal fight that unites, because many of us have people affected by cancer among our loved ones”, continues Johanna Volpert, associate professor in marketing at Kedge BS , recalling that cancer is responsible for one in six deaths in France. “It is therefore logical that the brands – which are expected to engage on social issues – should be the spokespersons for this fight”, he continues.
Can we talk about socialwashing ?
Commitment, or corporate social responsibility (CSR) as it goes by its nickname, also makes it possible to erase some criticisms, notes Caroline Marti: “It’s a way of lighting up the negative images of the search for profit at all costs and misguided capitalism”. Especially since if the commitment can sometimes seem touchy, a non-positioning would be equally so. “Many brands have been singled out for not reacting to large-scale societal issues, such as the Black Lives Matter movement. There is a requirement for them to take action on social issues, which explains the increase in the number of companies involved, ”explains Johanna Volpert.
Let’s not be naive, all this is not done – only – out of goodwill, but also out of commercial interest. Therefore, can we consider the maneuver as hypocritical and speak of socialwashing, as in the case of greenwashing ? “It seems a bit harsh, tempers Florence Touzé. There is, in most cases at least, a real involvement of company personnel” For Johanna Volpert, “some brands are more legitimate than others. The fight against cancer, for example, was invested by Avon, a brand of cosmetics using ingredients deemed dangerous by the Massachusetts Breast Cancer Coalition, in a campaign in 2001.
“Anything more done is a good thing”
In the end, is cancer marketing a good thing or a bad thing? It all depends on the method and the message conveyed, according to the Kedge BS professor: “In the case of October Rose, the patients are often presented as ”warriors” who lead a ”fight”. The surrounding storytelling can make society believe that it is enough to walk with a pink ribbon to ”fight” alongside patients, thus obscuring the feelings of frustration, anger, sadness that would tarnish this glamorous imagination of patient warrior. This is completely damaging to the defended cause. »
Pierre-Louis Desprez, associate director of Kaos Consulting, nevertheless wants to see the glass half full: “Brands that take on this issue make it possible to give more human, colorful and gentle visibility to the fight against cancer, where public health spots can sometimes be off-putting. As a general rule, the role of the State on these issues is declining, because it is costly and complex, and it is good that brands are taking over”. Florence Touzé shares the same opinion: “There are still so many women and men who do not get tested, so many lack of means, so many unreached target audiences. Anything more is a good thing in this fight.”