Cake
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
    • I had no idea about Nike and the whole PAC thing. That’s interesting. Kind of a contradiction.

      Maybe there’s polarity between the “corporation” and the “brand”. The brand is what influences people in the mainstream. If that’s positive influence, then I’m all for it. That’s no excuse for playing devil’s advocate though.

    • Maybe there’s polarity between the “corporation” and the “brand”. The brand is what influences people in the mainstream. If that’s positive influence, then I’m all for it. That’s no excuse for playing devil’s advocate though.

      Definitely agree. Nike's support for Colin Kaepernick tells countless young people that it's important to stand up (or kneel!) for what they believe, and that's incredibly valuable.

      PACs are super weird. So many corporations have PACs, and usually they don't even donate all that much money (Nike's has donated less than $150K in 2018), but they often donate roughly equally to both parties, which kinda makes you wonder what the point is (other than maintaining "access" to congresspeople, which frankly feels a bit bribey).

      Also, corporate PACs are typically funded by employee contributions. Sometimes employees are encouraged to contribute a small amount from each paycheck, but aren't really told anything about what the PAC will do with that money other than generally furthering the company's interests, so some people end up contributing to a PAC that's contributing to political candidates they personally would never contribute to and they don't even realize it.

      I'm not even close to understanding this area of politics, but I've been paying more attention to it recently and have been boggled by what I've been learning.

    • Also, corporate PACs are typically funded by employee contributions. Sometimes employees are encouraged to contribute a small amount from each paycheck, but aren't really told anything about what the PAC will do with that money other than generally furthering the company's interests

      Yep - exactly.

      Working in the aerospace / military industrial complex, you knew that the funds that were donated by the employees to the PAC would be used to "support the cause". If you thought about it for another few milliseconds, it may be able to help you retain a job for the next X number of years.

      Worker bees like myself may not contribute substantial amounts of funding, but you could see those in the C-suites (ours was called Mahogany Row) that would.

      That's not to say this company was exclusively right-leaning in the various causes they supported, as they were corporate leaders of implementing and supporting a diverse and inclusive workplace with Employee Resource Groups.   

    • Speaking of making a stance... I LOVED this Honda ad; I will probably never own a big cruiser, but if I ever feel like trying one, it'll be a Goldwing purely because of this ad. It's really sad that it stands out so much, but in an industry where 99.99% of ads are targeted at white males and where females are portrayed as either a)scantily clad accessories or b)pillion passengers and people of color are virtually non existent, this feels nothing short of revolutionary:

    • I find the most hopeful aspect of this Nike campaign is that they have obviously made the business calculation that the Colin Kaepernick theme is simply good business. The millennials want to connect to a purpose driven brand. I won't make the assumption that Nike is that brand but they obviously believe portraying themselves as such is a positive.

      There has been a big party going on for businesses such as legacy fossil fuel industries. I feel that Nike's business calculation foreshadows the fact that it's last call for companies whose profitability is at the expense of our quality of life, and the planet's health. As the Nike campaign trend expands, however, there will be more scrutiny to verify that the brand is walking their talk. I look forward to seeing how this develops.

      Great article. Thank you!

    • Maybe there’s polarity between the “corporation” and the “brand”. 

      Exactly. We can dress it up all we want, but the Kaepernick campaign is nothing more than a classic example of brand positioning. Nike is razor-focused on what their brand stands for, and have simply aligned it to consistent behaviors to reinforce and revitalize. It's what they've been doing for 30+ years.

      What irks me is the apparent discontinuity between what brands like Nike want us to believe, versus what they actually do. All those people who applaud Nike for 'taking a stand' with this campaign don't seem to have an issue with the pay and working conditions in the sweatshops where Nike's clothing is made.