The original title of this post was "Janji displays ignorance of Haiti but still would love to make money off your desire to help Haitians"
[[UPDATE Feb 10th
The comment I posted below received a reply within 10 minutes by one of the owners of Janji, Dave Spandorfer.
The way he addressed my concerns has changed my opinion of their company.
First off, it turns out that Runners World was not correct, they donate a percentage of sales, not profit (currently approximately 22.8% of sales).
Additionally, even though they were unaware of the issue I raised, they had already redesigned the shirt to be less generic. He sent me an image of the new shirts but asked that I not post that online.
Dave told me that he was going to forward my message to the entire staff and ask them to keep this in mind so they can make sure they do not make similar mistakes in the future.
He also said that they were going to get in touch with all the other groups they work with in other countries to ensure that they are not making the same mistake in other cultures.
Once the new line is available, I might just run a race in a Run for Haiti shirt.

My criticism was, in my opinion, correct. I still am not a big fan of consumerist activism. However my assumptions about the folks involved was off base. It is nice to be wrong sometimes.

------------
Original text of the post is below.
------------

In general, I have a lot of problems with consumerist activism. Purchasing goods that generate a lot of profit for a company and a tiny donation to a cause might make someone feel good, but it does little to really impact anyone's life.

Also, it does little to connect someone with the cause they are trying to support. It is based on a distanced idea of charity and not a closer idea of solidarity.

Having just returned from my second trip to Haiti, where I participated in the first ever Hackathon aimed at improving the situation in Haiti that actually happened in Haiti, I was completely blown away by the article on a company named Janji in the March issue of Runners World that was waiting for me when I got home.

Janji is a for-profit company that sells technical running shirts in the colors of countries that Janji's owners have decided to support with a small percentage of their profit. Janji's owners keep 80% of the profit and claim to send the rest to help the poor of those poverty stricken lands far away. They sell charity.

I also tend to be suspicious of companies that donate a percentage of profit and not of sales. Most small companies make 0 profit in their first few years (and Janji is a small company in its first years). Also, profit is a variable that can be, and frequently is, manipulated. Increase the pay of the top executives, and profit goes down; give better health insurance to your workers and profit goes down. Profit goes down; taxes go down. Simple accounting.

Normally my criticism would end there, but the photo of the founders of the company shows one of them wearing their "Run for Haiti" shirt.

From the design of the shirt it is very clear that they have no connection to Haiti, no one that knows anything about Haiti or Haitian history reviewed the design, and from that I can only assume that the tiny percentage of the profits that they say are being donated are most likely not going to a group that is seriously connected on the ground to communities that need the help. It is the worst possible example of the failure of this model of charity. [Correction: it turns out that the tiny percentage of profit are being donated to a group that produces a medication that is used to confront malnutrition in Haitian children, which is certainly not the worst possible place to put some funding -- although it is still an effort organized by Americans on behalf of Haitians and has not real direct connection to people on the ground and is not going to do anything to address the core and systemic issues at the heart of the problem]

If you know the Haitian flag, it has one dark blue stripe and one dark red stripe. The first thing that seems off about the design is the pale red and blue used. It can be compared to making an American flag inspired design that uses baby blue and pink. But the most glaring problem is that between those two colors is a white stripe with "Run for Haiti" written in it.

While that stripe might have made sense to the designer (hey, I need a spot to put this text, how else will people know that the person purchasing it loves Haiti), in context of Haitian history it is very wrong and somewhat offensive.

To quote from the wikipedia page about the Haitian flag: "Haitian lore holds that the newly-appointed revolutionary leader Jean-Jacques Dessalines created the flag by taking a French tricolor and ripping out the white center, which he discarded."

The white stripe of the French flag was removed to symbolize the expulsion of the French colonialists; to symbolize the end of slavery and the freedom of the Haitian people.

To add that white stripe back in as part of this act of for-profit pseudo charity speaks volumes about the people that are selling this shirt and the idea of consumerist charity itself.

The Haitian flag (left) and the shirt being sold by Jinji (right)

I am a runner. I love Haiti. On my most recent trip I managed to find the time to run a short but seriously hilly 2.5 miles in Haiti through the Pacot neighborhood of downtown Port-au-Prince. I would love to combine my passion for running and solidarity with the Haitian people. I would not be caught dead in the Run for Haiti shirt being peddled by these well intentioned but completely clueless charlatans and I hope I'm not alone in that feeling.

As this year winds down, I seem to be winding up -- putting in more miles, feeling better after long runs, really getting into being a runner again. So, here is my motivational wish list for the coming year:

1: log 1000 miles (training runs and races combined)
This year, the first full year I've been tracking my runs, I'll end up coming in between 700 and 750 miles. With my plan to run fewer but longer races this year I think I'll be able to hit 1000.

2: complete at least 2 half marathons
Manhattan Half in January and the Brooklyn Half in May (or whenever they end up schdule ing it for, it's silly but I see so many people out on training runs with their nice Brooklyn Half t-shirts I think one of the reasons I want to do this race is because I want one of those shirts).
I might find another half marathon hit as a an excuse to travel somewhere interesting.
I registered for the Manhattan Half last week, let's hope there's not a snow storm the day before like there was for last year's race.

Running in Parque Carolina, 12,000 ft elevation: Quito Ecuador

3: hit 60% age grade percentage in a race longer than 3 miles
I managed to hit 64.6% in the 5th Ave Mile, but for longer races I'm stuck in the mid to high 50s. I got close on my 4mile PR in April with an age grade percentage of 59.6%. This year, I'm going to break that threshold. 60% is the line that defines what they call "local class" which is supposed to mean that you are good enough to place (be one of the first 3 finishers) in your age group at local races (but my local races are full of local, regional, national and world class runners).

4: run some smaller non-NYRR races
I love the races that the NYRR puts on, but as an organization they leave so much be desired. They have the worst communications staff and so little respect for the membership, I need to find other races to run in order to keep from giving them too much of my money and implied support.

5: finish top 10% for my age group in at least 1 race (and if possible place in my age group)
This goes hand in hand with the 60% age grade goal and the run races not in NYC run by NYRR. The races in the City are so full of world class runners that I don't stand a chance of seeing the front of the pack, but if I run a smaller race the odds are better.
I've registered for an 8k in April in New Brunswick NJ, based on last year's results I have a good chance of placing in my age group if I train for it and push myself.

6: finish the New York City Marathon in under 5.5 hours.
Yes, I know it's insane but I want to try. I finished Grete's Great Gallop (1/2 Marathon) in just under 2 hours, so in theory I should be able to complete a full marathon somewhere between 4 and 4.5 hours -- But, I want to make sure I set a realistic goal on this one.

The cancellation of the NY Marathon has become a huge story and a giant pile of shit. Runners in NYC have been damaged by how this was handled. Once again NYRR steps in a mess of their own making.

The problem was not the decision but the timing and lack of ability to communicate; the problem was not what they did but how they did it; the problem is the lack of any sense of connection to the community.

When I showed up at the expo on Thursday, having walked there from the blackout zone, to find not one outlet available for blacked out New Yorkers to charge their phones, it was clear that NYRR had not given any thought to the storm's impact on us, the members/New Yorkers. The continued statements that the marathon would not have diverted any resources or in any way hampered relief efforts underscores that disconnect.

Now that the race has been cancelled (and it should have been cancelled that's the only thing they did right in this entire mess), NYRR should be taking an active role in organizing runners to assist those in need instead of just saying "come to the expo, buy crap and donate it." Instead, other than badly worded emails that further dig them into a hole, there is radio silence from the NYRR leadership. (if you are looking for ways to help, there is a rather comprehensive list of grassroots groups that need help online at https://docs.google.com/document/d/13siHiBucoILQs6Pmdk0Ew2K9Oi7ujblN4OjQ... )

Once again, there is a failure of leadership and communication. Mary Wittenberg is not a leader or organizer, she might be in charge but she is not a leader.

An effective leader would have told everyone before the storm that she would do everything possible to make sure the race happened but also given clear warning that there was a good chance it would not, not build unrealistic expectations that it would for certain happen.

Then as soon as the magnitude of destruction was known, an effective leader would have stated clearly and in a timely way that there was no way for the race to continue, allowing out of town travelers to change their plans.

An effective leader would have seen that it was a no win situation and taken the lead and communicated effectively to minimize the damage to the organization, not waited for the last minute when there was already a large public outcry.

At that moment, NYRR should have taken an active role in connecting runners with local organizations in need of volunteers. That would have left fewer people upset and would have raised the image of runners in the eyes of all New Yorkers.

When the race was finally cancelled, the communication should have contained some level of apology for not acting faster. It should have taken responsibility, not shifted blame to "the media."

Instead she took a path that has everyone upset and has made runners look like a bunch of self-important privileged whiners.

I hope it has become clear to all that it is time for a change at NYRR. Mismanagement Mary needs to step down for the good of the New York City running community.

slightly redundant update, Nov 9
I posted this to the NYRR facebook page and a few people contacted me privately and suggested I add it to this rant, so here you go.

----

It seems to me that the NYRR has lost its way. Under Mary's leadership it has forgotten what it is to be a membership organization. It has become more centralized; members and running clubs that used to have a voice are now just paying money for a discount on races.

Part of this is reflected in the focus on the marathon. The NYRR propaganda now states that "everything else is just a warmup for the marathon."

That's insulting to us middle distance runners. That's insulting to the folks that run the other races because we love them. It shows that the entire focus of the organization has become the Marathon, the one big money maker and high profile race.

Once, sponsors were sought for races to facilitate the mission of the organization: to enhance the lives of runners in NYC. Now membership is sought so it can be sold to the sponsors (and sponsors are being sought not for individual races, but on a more large scale and generic way). It's like the NYRR has become facebook, we the members are the value that is sold to the sponsors for profit.

The NYRR is no longer for the runners; it's no longer a membership organization; it's now more of like a sporting goods store that has a discount club that you join to get a discount. A membership organization makes it decisions based on what's best for the membership as a whole; a membership organization gives members a voice. NYRR is a corporation hiding behind the tax breaks of its non-profit status.

Mary should have been thinking about the image of the NYRR as a whole and not just making the marathon happen.

She should have given consideration to the NYRR members and other New Yorkers that were impacted by the storm, and thought about how they would be negatively impacted by thousands of people traveling to town for a race that was not going to happen. She should have understood the media image of tens of thousands of runners moving through blacked out areas, closing streets that could have been used by relief efforts, even if the Mayor was not. That's her job. She failed.

The race should have been cancelled much earlier. The idea that the NYRR keeps putting out there, that somehow the Post had whipped New Yorkers into a frenzy and that we were going to be attacked by hordes of angry thugs is just not in touch with reality.

Mismanagement Mary should have acted with the larger picture in mind, she did not. She should have been a leader in a time of crisis, she was not. She should do what's right and step down (since the dissenting members of the Board have been pushed out since she took over, there's no chance of her being fired by the Board, our only hope is appealing to her sense of what is right for the long term health of the organization as a whole.

The NYRR's lack of ability to communicate, and get ahead of this story and come out looking good is her fault. For that, and her other mismanagement moments in the past year, she should step down for the good of the organization.

Anyone know if Kathrine Switzer is looking for a job? I'd love to see her drafted to take over the helm at NYRR.

I posted this today to a mailing list I'm on. While it's not a complete set of thoughts and needs some serious rewrites, I decided to post it here as well.

For those of us that consider the Democrats and Republicans to be just two halves of the same centrist/capitalist party, and our national elections to be a charade masking the one party state we live in, there is a slogan we love to repeat.

If voting could change the system, it would be illegal.

That thought has often helped me explain my disdain of electoral politics to those that really think things can change if they vote for their favorite lesser of two weasels.

I've started to realize that I need to look twice at this long held opinion. With all of the attempts by the Republicans to limit voting; with all the effort being put into solving a non-existent problem by disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of people it has dawned on me -- they are so afraid of the electorate that they have finally started to try to make voting illegal.

This is leaving me in a very confused and conflicted state. I am still certain that neither of the major parties have the ability to actually bring about serious change. They are both owned by the same corporations and basic ideology (see the consensus that somehow Iran is "the greatest threat to our security" rhetoric for example).

Don't get me wrong, there are differences. That's part of the charade. But are those differences becoming more sharp? The center of the debate has moved very far to the right since Reagan, but it seems that the GOP is not happy having made so much progress, they are continuing to move further -- trying to drag the middle with them.

Could this be creating a situation where there is possible value in electoral politics? Hanging in the balance this year is a whole host of issues that could end up having real impact. The Supreme Court, the continued socialization of risk combined with a larger hording of privatized profit (aka corporate welfare), legislation being based on a narrow interpretation of someone's god's opinions.

Luckily I live in New York, and due to the insane system of the electoral college I am free to abstain from the election or throw my vote away on a minor party candidate without fear that I will hand victory to the proto-facsists.

With every attempt to restrict the vote, it seems to become more important to exercise that right in some way.

I'm not sure where I'm going with this, but I wanted to get this down in writing before I forgot.

This weekend I'll be running the NYRR 5-Borough Series race in the Bronx. It's a 10 mile race, my longest yet and a big milestone on my way towards the 2013 marathon.

As I've written about on my blog in the past, I started running and racing again in 2011 after a 29 year haitus.

I'm a mid-distance guy, I really love the 5k-10k distance. In some ways, I think I'm insane for having started down a long training path towards 26.2 miles. In some ways, I think that is exactly what is keeping me sane.

When my mom died in March, thinking of running the marathon as a fundraiser for the Alzheimer's Association helped me to start working through the grief. Every run was a way of taking time to think about her.

I could have run the marathon this year with the Alzheimer's Association's "Team Run to Remember", but since I did not get into the race via the lottery in order to do so I would have had to commit to raise over $3,000. That felt like a huge strain on my already strained brain; I could not handle yet another job. Also, it felt dishonest -- like I was just buying my way to the starting line.

The New York Road Runners has another way in, and I was already most of the way to completing the 9 necessary races. This also meant I had to wait an extra year, which seemed like a good thing. I did not want to push myself too far too fast. Now that I'm back at it, I want to keep running for a long long time.

At this point, I've finished the 9 races and 1 volunteer shift and the only thing between me and the 2013 NYC Marathon starting line is 14 months of training.

Since I have my own ticket to the fun for next year's marathon, doing the fundraising for the Alzheimer's Association will also be easier (they ask for a much lower commitment from runners with their own spot) and will feel more like genuine fundraising and not me asking other people to pay my way into the race.

My goal was modified -- this year I'd do a half marathon and see how it went.

Since my mom was born and bred in the Bronx, and my grandfather's store, which I have some great youthful memories of, was only a few blocks from the course of the past few years, I decided to do the NYRR 5 Borough Series Bronx Half Marathon. I thought that race would be the right way to combine my training and my desire to have my running connect me to my mom and the process of grieving. Then the NYRR went and changed the 5 half marathon race series into a series of mixed distance races.

As a result, this fall's race season has two milestones. My first 10 mile race this Sunday and my first half marathon on October 14th in Central Park. The 1/2 marathon is named for Grete Waitz, a woman who was a powerful leader in a male-centric community and who left behind more than she found as a result years of hard work and advocacy. That also feels right when I think of this as a tribute to my mom.

So, here goes -- 10 miles, most of it on the Grand Concourse which was where my mom spent so much of her time from the day she was born until after she got married. I hope to have some friendly ghosts joining me along the race course.