Use of Homeless as Internet Hot Spots Backfires on Marketer

[Grace62]

The newspapers sold by homeless people are from a not-for-profit group that advocates for the homeless. So basically in selling this paper they are soliciting donations for a non-profit. They are not selling copies of the NY Times. BBH New York is a for profit business. Big difference.

When there is no established custom for tipping, you have to pay minimum wage. The wireless industry has no exemption from wage laws that I'm aware of. The purpose of the "service" they were selling is to increase profits for BBH.

Homeless people are not there to be experimented on.

Again, I'm fine with it. But follow wage and labor laws.

[$tevie]

I know that the newspapers are special papers. I also know that there is a business model where corporations can be created or used purposefully to funnel money into charitable enterprises. Like Product (RED), which is not a charity but rather a setup for corporate funding of non-profit enterprises. This is a widely misunderstood area for a lot of people because they don't understand the basic concept.

[OWC Jamie]

Grace62 wrote:


Homeless people are not there to be experimented on.

.

* except for when it's a progressive program designed to "help".

[Grace62]

"This service is intended to deliver on the demand for better transit connectivity during the conference."

This is what BBH is doing, it's not advocacy for the homeless, it's part of their billion dollar for-profit enterprise. They are hiring these people to help deliver THEIR for-profit service. They could accomplish the same goal hiring just about anybody to be human hotspots.
They are asking the public to donate to these people, they aren't doing the advocacy. The least they could do is pay a legal wage.

That is not the same as buying a newspaper published as a not-for-profit by an advocacy group. Also not the same thing as the (RED) foundation.

[$tevie]

Well, it has certainly gotten the name "BBH" all over the internet, so right or wrong it will be hard to convince them they made a mistake. I'm not so sure I can fall in step with the outrage in any event, because I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that they honestly thought this could grow into a revenue stream for homeless.

[Grace62]

$tevie wrote:
Well, it has certainly gotten the name "BBH" all over the internet, so right or wrong it will be hard to convince them they made a mistake. I'm not so sure I can fall in step with the outrage in any event, because I am giving them the benefit of the doubt that they honestly thought this could grow into a revenue stream for homeless.

I hope it does accomplish that. I like very much the idea of gainfully employed hipsters having to come face to face with very impoverished people. But $20/day is not a "living wage," so I hope they start paying a decent and fair wage for work that supports their bottom line.

[Dennis S]

When some of the guys at BBH were sitting around and thought of this, they had to try it. You couldn't let an idea like this pass.

[Chakravartin]

cbelt3 wrote:
Nothing like a bunch of $200 haircut $3,000 suit wearing wonks taking advantage of the po folk.

Here's another point of view:
http://www.good.is/post/the-critics-of-s...than-hill/

The homeless hotspots created this controversy largely because of the idea that homeless people are somehow different from everyone else. But when you actually speak to people like Clarence, Jonathan, and their advocates, you realize they aren’t much different from the thousands of other folks trying to make a buck off the festival—except that in so doing they’re also publicizing an important social issue that makes many people uncomfortable. “Some of us are educated, some of us had jobs, we’ve fallen on hard times,” Hill says. “Everyone is a paycheck away.”

The guy behind it was homeless for a month. In a radio interview today he said that he wanted to give people the opportunity to hear the personal stories of the homeless men and women at the shelter and to raise awareness that in this economy many of the homeless are not mentally unstable outcasts, but are often well educated, technologically sophisticated people who suffered setbacks and need a hand to get back on their feet.

Imagine that! Helping people, spreading a good message and promoting your product at the same time.

How shameful and un-American!

[Grace62]

I'm surprised someone who had actually been homeless would be callous enough to hire them to work for his extremely profitable business at below minimum wage.
After hearing that it sounds more exploitative, not less.