Philanthropy has received increased attention in recent years and is an important focus for social theorists concerned with discourse. The authors argue that the transformative potential of philanthropy—its potential to represent the need for and bring about social change—is increasingly lost in the current market-based discourse of philanthropy that includes consumption of products (i.e., cause-related marketing) and consumption of media and celebrities (i.e., “charitainment”) as the basis for benevolent human relations. This marketization of philanthropy depoliticizes the relationship between the market and the negative impacts it has on human well-being, thereby making philanthropy less likely to catalyze substantive social change. In this article, the authors argue that in fast capitalism philanthropy must be distinguished from the market, narrate on behalf of the marginalized, and be rewritten independent of the necessity of the market and marginality.
About the show. (n.d.). Extreme makeover: Home edition. Retrieved May 6, 2007, from http://abc.go.com/primetime/xtremehome/show.html
2.
Advertisement for Damiani. (2006, December). Harper's Bazaar, p. 103.
3.
Agger, B. (1989a). Fast capitalism: A critical theory of significance . Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
4.
Agger, B. (1989b). Socio(onto)logy: A disciplinary reading. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
5.
Agger, B. (1990). The decline of discourse: Reading, writing and resistance in postmodern capitalism. New York: Falmer.
6.
Agger, B. (1991). A critical theory of public life: Knowledge, discourse, and politics in an age of decline. New York: Routledge Falmer.
7.
Agger, B. (1992a). Cultural studies as critical theory. London: Falmer.
8.
Agger, B. (1992b). The discourse of domination: From the Frankfurt School to postmodernism. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
9.
Agger, B. (2000). Public sociology: From social facts to literary acts. New York: Rowman & Littlefield .
10.
Angelina Jolie: Her mission and motherhood. ( 2006, June 23). Anderson Cooper 360. CNN. Retrieved September 19, 2006, from http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/23/acd.02.html .
Baudrillard, J. (1981). For a critique of the political economy of the sign. St. Louis, MO: Telos.
13.
Bernhard, B. (2006, October 25). Pink promotions worry some in breast cancer fight: Others contend "the more, the better" for cause. Chicago Tribune. Retrieved November 5, 2006, from http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-06102404000ct25,1,3461780.story?page=1&ctrack=1&cset=true
14.
Billanthropy. (2006, July 1-7). The Economist, 380(8484), 63-65.
15.
Boris, E., & Steuerle, E. (1999, October 1). What charities cannot do. Christian Science Monitor, p. 11.
16.
Bremner, R.H. (1994). Giving: Charity and philanthropy in history. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
17.
Brooks, A.C. (2006). Who cares: The surprising truth about who is charitable, who isn't, and why it matters for America. New York: Basic Books.
18.
Chandoke, N. (2003). The conceits of civil society. New Delhi: Oxford University Press.
19.
Cohen, J., & Rogers, J. (1995). Associations and democracy. London: Verso.
20.
Curti, M. (1973). Philanthropy. In P. P. Wiener (Ed.), Dictionary of the history of ideas: Studies of selected pivotal ideas. (Vol. 3, pp. 496-493). New York: Charles Scribner's Sons.
21.
Debord, G. (1977). Society of the spectacle. Detroit, MI: Black and Red.
22.
Diaz, W. (2002). For whom and for what? The contributions of the nonprofit sector. In L. M. Salamon (Ed.), The state of nonprofit America (pp. 517-536). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
23.
Do They Know It's Christmas? (2006, November 25). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Retrieved November 26, 2006, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Do_They_Know_It%27s_Christmas%3F&oldid=89971064
24.
Eikenberry, A.M., & Kluver, J.D. (2004). The marketization of the nonprofit sector: Civil society at risk? Public Administration Review, 64, 132-140.
25.
Eikenberry, A.M., & Nickel, P.M. (2006). Towards a critical social theory of philanthropy in an era of governance. Unpublished manuscript.
26.
Eliasoph, N. (1998). Avoiding politics: How Americans produce apathy in everyday life. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Ferrell, J. (2001). Remapping the city: Public identity, cultural space, and social justice. Contemporary Justice Review, 4, 161-180.
28.
The fight over a big idea. (2006, July 20). The Economist. Retrieved August 16, 2006, from http://www.economist.com
29.
Foucault, M. (1980). Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings 1972-1977. New York: Pantheon .
30.
Fraser, N. (1989). Unruly practices: Power, discourse, and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
31.
Fraser, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere (pp. 109-142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32.
Fraser, N. (2003). From redistribution to recognition? In R. J. Antonio (Ed.), Marx and modernity: Key readings and commentary (pp. 379-306). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
33.
Gary, T., & Kohner, M. (2002). Inspired philanthropy: Your step-by-step guide to creating a giving plan. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
34.
Gibbs, N. (2005/2006). Persons of the year. Time, 166(26), 38-45.
35.
Gunderman, R.B. (2003, December). Giving and human excellence: The paradigm of liberal philanthropy. Retrieved August 20, 2004, from http://www.thephilanthropicenterprise.org/main/library.php/87/p
36.
Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere: An inquiry into a category of bourgeois society, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
37.
Hirst, P. (1994). Associative democracy: New forms of economic and social governance. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
38.
Hirst, P. (2000). Democracy and governance. In J. Pierre (Ed.), Debating governance: Authority, steering, and democracy (pp. 13-35). New York: Oxford University Press.
39.
Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. (1989). The dialectic of enlightenment. New York: Continuum.
40.
Jameson, F. (1998). The cultural turn: Selected writings on the postmodern, 1983-1998. New York: Verso.
41.
King, S. (2006). Pink ribbons, Inc.: Breast cancer and the politics of philanthropy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
42.
Luke, T. (1989). Screens of power: Ideology, domination, and resistance in informational society. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
43.
Marcuse, H. (1991). One-dimensional man: Studies in the ideology of advanced industrial society. Boston: Beacon. (Original work published in 1964)
44.
McLean, B. (2006, September 18). The power of philanthropy. Fortune, 154(6), 82-98.
45.
Nickel, P.M. (2007). Network governance and the new constitutionalism . Administrative Theory and Praxis, 29, 198 - 224.
46.
Olasky, M. (1992). The tragedy of American compassion. Washington, DC: Regnery Gateway.
47.
Patterson, P.M. (2000). The talking cure and the silent treatment: Some limits of "discourse" as speech. Administrative Theory and Praxis, 22, 663-695.
48.
Philanthropy. (1997). WorldNet. Retrieved August 8, 2002, from http://www.dictionary.com
49.
Philanthropy. (2000). American heritage dictionary of the English language (4th ed.). Retrieved August 8, 2002, from http://www.dictionary.com
50.
Poniewozik, J. (2005/2006). The year of charitainment. Time, 166(26), 93-94.
51.
Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
52.
Rabinowitz, A. (1990). Social change philanthropy in America. New York: Quorum.
53.
Said, E. (1978). Orientalism. New York: Pantheon.
54.
Salamon, L.M. (1992). Social services. In C. T. Clotfelter (Ed.), Who benefits from the nonprofit sector? (pp. 134-173). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
55.
Salamon, L.M. (1995). Partners in public service: Government-nonprofit relations in the modern welfare state. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
56.
Sanders, L.M. (1997). Against deliberation. Political Theory, 25, 347-376.
57.
Skocpol, T. (1999) Advocates without members: The recent transformation of American civic life. In T. Skocpol & M. P. Fiorina (Eds.), Civic engagement in American democracy (pp. 461-509). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
58.
Sorensen, E., & Torfing, J. (2005). Network governance and post-liberal democracy . Administrative Theory and Praxis, 27, 197-237.
59.
Steingraber, S. (2003). The organic manifesto of a biologist mother. Mothers of Organic. Retrieved August 21, 2005, from http://www.moomom.com/learn/organicmanifesto.html.
60.
Survey: Wealth and philanthropy: The business of giving. (2006, February 23). The Economist. Retrieved May 4, 2006, from http://www.economist.com
61.
Thompson, A. (2002). Publicity, philanthropy and commemoration: British society and the war. In D. Omissi & A. S. Thompson (Eds.), The impact of the South African war (pp. 99-123). New York: Palgrave.
62.
Touraine, A. (2001) Beyond neo-liberalism. Cambridge , UK: Polity.
63.
United Nations Development Program. (2005). Human development report. Retrieved July 25, 2006, from http://hdr.undp.org/reports/global/2005/
64.
Veblen, T. (1902). The theory of the leisure class: An economic study of institutions. New York: Macmillan .
65.
Wagner, D. (2000). What's love got to do with it? A critical look at American charity. New York: New York Press.
66.
Warner, M. (2005). Publics and counterpublics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
67.
Williams, A. (2006, August 13). Into Africa: For a continent célèbre, blockbuster interest. New York Times, Section9, pp. 1, 8.
68.
Wolpert, J. (1993). Decentralization and equity in public and nonprofit sectors. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 22, 281-296.
69.
Zizek, S. (2004, February 27). Passion: Regular or decaf? In These Times. Retrieved November 3, 2008, from http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/146/passion_regular_or_decaf/
