Does anyone else dislike the Macmillan Brave the Shave campaign?

Like everyone, I am grateful for the fundraising initiatives that raise money to help us all.

Unfortunately I feel this response smacks of "fobbing" us off with an off the shelf PR statement - and does not in any way take on board any of the many heartfelt stories and feelings that have been expressed in this thread.

It lacks any level of understanding or empathy with what we are saying.

I feel rather patronised and deeply disappointed in the response. 

A poor response that clearly shows little understanding of how cancer patients feel.  I still remember being diagnosed and then realising just how many cancer advertisements were bombarding me when I was trying to have a break from thinking about cancer.  Go shopping and ads and collection boxes, watch some TV, more adverts, listen to the radio, Adverts.   Plus of course Facebook with it's constant MacMillan adverts because facebook knows you've been on the MacMillan site.  I even get mail shots from MacMillan asking me to donate.  It's constantly in my face at home, work etc.  No respite.

I didn't undergo Chemo so never lost my hair but I wouldn't dream of patronising someone who has by saying "I'll shave my hair to be like you".  Within a week my hair is regrowing and I still have my eyebrows, eyelashes, body hair etc.  Sadly for them they have to continue to be the "bald person" for quite a while longer while the person who has "joined in" gets praise while the cancer patient gets pity.

Fundraisers just because you know someone who had cancer doesn't mean you know how they feel.  We hide so many of our true feelings from family & friends to spare them or to try to remain some dignity and not always be talking about cancer.

I'm also incredulous if another poster is correct that you spend £25,000,000 on fundraising activities.

My husband has to mute the TV or walk away when Macmillan Ads and Cancer Reasearch ads come on. I understand why they have to be there but there must be better tactics than the ads that pull at heartstrings because they're so upsetting if you ARE the cancer sufferer and their family - and yes, I'm being bombarded on fb all the time now with Macmillan ads, because I post on this website.  So sick of "Brave the Shave" popping up everywhere. I'll be glad when they move on to the next campaign.

Also, I hope they truly have researched the effectiveness of the £25m and are absolutely certain they get that back and more in donations.

If they could prove that pulling say, £10m of marketing/fundraising  would reduce donation income by more than £10m, then I might feel a bit happier.

Hiya

Just popping in to say that I was told that last year the target to raise was £220m and the previous year it was £200m.  I know they smashed it in 2014, and I'm sure they did in 2015.  The target for 2016 is almost certainly more.  

There has to be some marketing, this is things like posters, TV campaigns, t-shirts and sales materials, that you can buy from the website and at fundraisers.  In addition, the wages of some of the people at head office will come out of the £10m.  

Frankly I think, although I believe that this particular campaign has been ill advised in some respects, particularly with the name, the fact is, people are doing this anyway, and all charities spend some of the monies raised to make more money. That's just how it works.  Macmillan publish their accounts for anyone to check, so if these figures are incorrect, I apologise, just what I was told by the CEO. 

We are ultra sensitive, but the money does go to great causes.  You can apply for funding, grants, visit the Mobile Information Service, read the booklets, I could go on and on.  Sometimes you just have to look away and choose not to be offended.

• Tags

I realise that an organisation like Macmillan cannot rely solely on volunteer labour, and that costs have to be incurred on promotion and awareness, but £25m? that's more than 10% of the target for 2015. I am pretty sure this sort of thing is endemic amongst charities, and I also believe that more thought could be given to the approach. Does Macmillan really need all those full-colour glossy brochures and leaflets? how about "charity begins at home" with an austerity drive to cut costs. I was quite pleased with what I managed to raise last year - £100 isn't much in the global scheme of things, but I felt I was at least making a contribution. I'm a good deal less happy now I'm aware of just how much is being piddled away on print and publicity. As a former art director I'm very well aware of how much these things cost, and I'm also aware of just how badly the input of all the shiny suits in the marketing department can drain a budget.

Totally agree!  

Not even aware of this but from what you say I am with you all the way!  I know this is a great charity but it does make some very bad choices across the board.  It seems to waste an awful lot of money on things that are not necessary and like this downright humiliating 

Sharon

I don't mind the idea of investing money to make money even in the charitable sector but this thread tells us that a lot of people are offended by this particular ad campaign.

If you'd put together a campaign and even 1 person complained, you'd pull it, or be under pressure to quit.

I don't like any of the cancer ads. So I have learned to look away but I can't make my kids look away every time.

I'd bet my eyesight the TV channels don't give their air time for nothing and there's plenty of ad / design agencies making a nice living out of charitable work too, we tried to pitch for some but it's locked down by the big guns, that's when you realise how profitable it is.

We know half of the advertising budget is wasted but we don't know which half, I can't remember who said that ...

It's the level of complaints from the people that matter in this thread that I find irresistible and I don't understand the desire to 'fob us off' and actually, £4m in funds isn't enough to make me think that it's worth offending so many, not when you consider how much is spent to achieve it. If they can offer a transparent explanation perhaps we could agree to close our eyes and ears to it.

like I said, there's a lot of good they do, which we are happy to accept but we're the end user, we're the CLIENT here, and the client is always right.

the accounts are posted, so the info is freely available, if you understand corporate accounts.

www.macmillan.org.uk/.../how-we-raise-and-spend-our-money.html

I have disliked this campaign from day one as I believe that it trivialises what it actually means to be treated for cancer.

Losing my hair was the least of my worries..they never mention:-

• Losing your eyebrows, eyelashes and every other hair on your body
• Fingernails and toenails coming off
• Your entire digestive system turning inside out
• Not having the strength to do the simplest of tasks without support
• Loss of libido
• A constant feeling of impending doom
• Grief for the life you have had to leave behind

Or is Joe Public too damned precious to know the truth?

x

Bon

I may not have made my point correctly.  Whilst obviously there are staff costs, the publicity materials, fundraising packs etc all have to be produced but lead to funds being raised.  

Without being visible, there is no marketing and less fundraising.  If you, say, spent £1,000 buy t-shirts and having them printed, but you sold them for £5,000 total, then you would actually raise £4,000, but the books would still have to say £1,000 spent.  

At the moment, there is a campaign being promoted which tries to spotlight the Online Community.  The one you are using.  A group of professionals were hired to produce this, the models were all volunteers although expenses were incurred, such as travel which some may have given as their "donation" and some chosen not to.  Then the professionals created the campaign and hopefully people who need us will join the community that they may not have been aware of, and found the help and support that you have.

Now this doesn't raise funds, but it does provide a service, and without it we wouldn't be here, many of us, becautse we wouldn't have known of its existence.  But people have to eat, put fuel in their vehicles, wear clothes, etc, and you cannot expect agencies to work for free.  

I actually don't have any issue with the amount spent, having witnessed some of it, because I know how committed people who are paid by Macmillan are.  They do a great job, often doing free overtime, because they want to help.  

Now I don't really think any further discussion on this will be helpful, everyone has made their point.