We all love swag. From T-shirts to stress balls, free stuff is fun except when it goes awry. Goldman Sachs recently sponsored an event and provided the guests with a swag bag that resulted in some unanticipated results.
The Harvard Women in Computer Science organized an event to increase the number of women involved in coding and computer science. The group could never have imagined the uproar that the choice of promotional products for the event would cause. When Goldman Sachs, the event’s main sponsor, provided cosmetic mirrors and nail files in a swag bag full of stuff at the WECode Conference, it sparked a debate that covered not only the appropriateness of promotional products, but also gender stereotyping and press bias.
The trouble started when The New York Times published an article entitled “Goldman Handed Out Cosmetic Mirrors and Nail Files at Women’s Coding Event.” The article featured a photograph posted to Instagram by an event attendee. It shows a pile of cosmetic mirrors provided by Goldman with the comment, “Not sure if this is #sexyfeminism or gender stereotyping.” The Times’ article ended up being about the gifts’ misstep, and not the conference.
When you take a look at the comments to the Times’ post, things get really interesting. The article provoked a robust response from Amy Yin, a representative of the event organizers, who expressed disappointment at a very one-sided story and surprise that the article didn’t give more prominence to its response to a request for a comment from the paper. Amy then went on to add another comment a few days later linking to an article published in the Harvard Crimson, which was highly critical of the reporting of the event.
The Crimson article criticizes The New York Times for using the event as a reason to criticize Goldman Sachs, rather than reporting on the efforts of the organizers and the sponsors to attract women into the field of computer sciences. Here are a few quotes that’ll give you a flavor of what was said:
“In its haste to lambast Goldman Sachs once again, The New York Times completely overlooked the company’s generosity and commitment to the noble goal of encouraging women in computer science.”
“The Times neglected to mention that Google offered lip balm and Facebook gave away copies of Sheryl Sandberg’s bestseller, “Lean In.” Instead, the Times conspicuously singled out Goldman Sachs. This selective coverage demonstrates the report’s priority to demonize Goldman Sachs over lauding the conference or even fairly reporting the news. The article is concerned less with what swag is being given out than who is giving it, much less why they are giving it.”
“Where it might have been reported that Goldman brought one of its female partners as a keynote speaker, these reporters chose instead to manufacture controversy over nail files. It defies all logic that the highest sponsor of a female coding conference is charged with sexist tactics for providing useful swag for women after being encouraged to do so by the female leadership of the conference.”
So depending on your point of view, the issue is one of mountain and molehill, or one of a legitimate slight. Either way, it highlights the point that there is a great deal to consider when selecting and sourcing promotional products for an event. Quality and safety are, as ever, of paramount importance. But event organizers and sponsors also need to be mindful of who the attendees will be, and how they fit as the target audience for the swag. In a different kind of “risk analysis”, take steps to ensure the swag doesn’t become the topic of conversation bigger than the event itself.
The articles and the associated comments are well worth a read to see the sort of reactions that can be provoked by a simple promotional gift. What do you think about the swag storm that simple dainty cosmetic mirrors and nail files caused? Who do you think is at fault? What sort of swag would have been more appropriate?
I’d be remiss if I didn’t remind you to watch closely for the April issue of Promo Marketing that’s coming soon. Riding along will be the first-ever QCAConnect supplement. Jam-packed with real world and useful information on safety and compliance, it’s designed for distributors and end-user clients to share. If you don’t subscribe, borrow it from somebody else’s mailbox. Put it back when you’re done, of course.
