August 23rd, 2005

Filed under:
Sports
14 Comments »

Living a Little Too Strong?

Is that yellow number still working for you, bracelet boy?

The boss of the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) says the organisation is looking into the latest doping claims against cycling legend Lance Armstrong. French paper L’Equipe claimed signs of EPO were found in samples of the seven-time Tour de France winner’s urine from the 1999 race.

I joke, as there’s actually no proof yet. I’ve got no fondness for the whole rubber bracelet trend, regardless of colour. It’s been an incredible marketing success, but it rubs me the wrong way. I make charitable donations without wearing them on my sleeve, why can’t you?

UPDATE: Rebekah airs her thoughts (with an illustrative photo) on the bracelets trend.

Comments: 14 Responses so far

Chris
August 23rd, 2005
11:01 pm

+1 on making fun of the stupid bracelet thing. I want to get a shirt like this:

http://www.tshirthell.com/store/product.php?productid=487

[Reply]

Johnny K
August 24th, 2005
3:11 am

I disagree, it’s called advertising. You ask any charity would they like global free advertising, and I doubt they would decline the offer.

I have some t-shirts that I purchased to promote charities (I put open-source projects I have donated to in that bracket), not to make me look cool. You’d be surprised by the number of conversations struck up by people asking me what does the t-shirt mean?

Also, if we go back a few months, you wore your fasting charity on your sleeve (I think there was a picture with you wearing it on your forehead actually) by seeking sponsorship for it through your blog.

The more novel and responsible ways they invent to fundraise and advertise the better in my opinion.

[Reply]

Josh Hallett
August 24th, 2005
4:46 am

Then of course there are those of us that put on a band not for marketing, or charity, but for something else and haven’t taken it off once for 20 months.

[Reply]

Darren
August 24th, 2005
8:49 am

John: Fair point on the charity, but it was only for a week, and certainly had nothing to do with trend or style (I did, after all, have a photo of myself with a bumper sticker on my forehead).

I don’t deny that it’s an excellent and fairly original (though it owes a lot to the AIDS ribbon) fundraising strategy. If I were running the campaign, I’d be ecstatic.

[Reply]

Alastair Bird
August 24th, 2005
9:56 am

Why can’t I?

Because when my cousin (age 24) was sick with her brain tumor, it was nice to know that we weren’t the only family who was dealing with this impossible situation.

I don’t wear it anymore, though. No one to wear it for.

[Reply]

Darren
August 24th, 2005
10:04 am

Alastair: Importantly, I said “I make charitable donations…” I’m guessing that your choice to wear a bracelet for your cousin had little or nothing to do with the donation or the trend it spawned. It’s unfortunate, I think, that your chosen expression of support has become a fad.

[Reply]

Alastair Bird
August 24th, 2005
10:26 am

Yeah, I completely agree about the fad part. However, it was quite comforting to know that there was SOMETHING I could do to help, which manifested itself in an outward sign. All the time I spent copying MRIs (strange things, those - it’s like looking at a very fuzzy picture of what appears to be recognizable, but the radiologists can see the most amazing things from them, but I digress) and emailing them all over the world didn’t manifest itself in any kind of outward sign to the rest of the community that there was the horrible burden that my family was saddled with. The yellow bracelet *partially* filled that void.

I think the reason why the yellow bracelet has been so incredibly successful is that people are drawn to the idea that we’re all in this together.

Further to your post, though, I do agree it is pretty awful how many different groups (and I’m not making a value judgement about whether or not they are worthy) have jumped on the bracelet bandwagon, and how the act of wearing one of those bracelets is becoming somewhat trite and diluted.

You also make a very valid point about making the donations, and I would hate to think that people would believe that giving a dollar to the Lance Armstrong Foundation (as great a foundation as it is) would somehow substitute for, say, the Canadian Cancer Society, or any of a thousand other charities who could put the money to very good use.

Two other comments:
Up until this point, with the bracelet, I actively avoided any kind of outward displays such as this. I even despise wearing logo clothes. I have no idea why the bracelet made such an impact.

And like it or hate it, the yellow bracelet was an absolute masterstroke of marketing. I think it will go down in history as one of the most incredible campaigns ever (commercial or non).

[Reply]

Darren
August 24th, 2005
10:48 am

I mean no disrespect to anyone who’s chosen the wristband in support or memory of a disease-sufferer (I choose that term because I’m unsure how many illnesses these bracelets now cover).

But things have gotten a little out of hand. For example, apparently there’s debate over which colour the mulitple sclerosis bracelet should be. The inevitable backlash is coming, when wearing a bracelet is perceived as ’so yesterday’. It’s often feast-or-famine with non-profits, though, so they ought to expect it.

And, of course, eventually you’re going to encounter the anti-trend.

[Reply]

Alastair Bird
August 24th, 2005
11:02 am

No offence taken (personally, anyway) I see the day (coming soon) that the multitudes of colour will result in a Jay Leno sketch about the mis-meaning of all the different colours, and how could you be so rude as to wear such-and-such a colour to such-and-such an event. And I also see the day when the colours of the bracelets will be like the colours of the ribbons that people wear. We all know why you wear a red ribbon, but is white for Breast Cancer or for Mothers? Maybe pink is for Breast Cancer. Both? Neither? I can’t remember. And I’m not being glib, either. I actually can’t remember.

And as a concequence, of course, the value of wearing a symbol to show allegiance to a certain cause is all but lost.

It’s actually kind of a shame.

[Reply]

Johnny K
August 24th, 2005
3:15 pm

Darren,

As you know I get emotional about all good things, like supporting charities, and if someone wants to tell me they are donating money every week to Uncle Bobs Home For Lonely Souls, I wouldn’t care less. Let them off, at least it might do some good. So my normal response to people questioning things like that is to come out in defense of the charity. I need to talk a breath and think before I respond sometimes.

I have to agree that too many organisations jumped on the bandwagon and it turned it from a good thing into a something naff.

On this side of the pond, the big reason bracelets/bands became so popular, was because of Premiership footballers sporting many different colors (red for the hillsborough justice campaign, blue for anti-bullying, a double banded white and black one for anti-racism). Did something like this happen in North America as well?

[Reply]

Darren
August 24th, 2005
5:18 pm

John: Blue for anti-bullying? Who wears those? The bullying target? That can’t help.

Regardless, yes, I think there’s been an egregious over-use of the bracelet. This was the post I’d been looking for, about the MS bracelets. A quick google search found me at least six other colours of bracelets.

[Reply]

becky
August 24th, 2005
9:44 pm

I’ve been wanting to rant about the bracelet/charity connection for a while now.

[Reply]

Alastair Bird
August 25th, 2005
11:44 am

And further to all this, there was an interesting piece on CBC radio this morning (such as it is, these days) with a ‘man-on-the-street’ interview asking if anyone knew what all the bracelets were for. No one had any idea for most of them…

[Reply]

becky
August 25th, 2005
5:40 pm

Update: there are Slurpee bracelets (that smell like raspberry!) available now. Help support the Slurpee cause today! (sheesh)

[Reply]