Peter Griffin: Star-fangled charity and low-paid workers

Do you feel guilty when you look at your gadgets: the iPod, the new mobile phone, the Xbox and the laptop?

If you do, Bono has the answer: the (Red) campaign. Recently launched in the US by the Irish rock star and Bobby Shriver of the Kennedy family, the (Red) campaign has the backing of several big brands which contribute a percentage of sales proceeds from certain products to the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria.

Buy a (Red) iPod from Apple for US$199 (NZ$298) and US$10 (NZ$15) will go towards antiretroviral drugs for African AIDS sufferers.

Motorola is also contributing proceeds from sales of its (Red) RAZR mobile phone to the charity. The brackets around (Red) symbolise an embrace. We're going to see more of this type of thing - the highly publicised siphoning off of a small percentage of consumer electronics makers' profits to benevolent causes.

As you browse the specifications of the latest music player or digital camera, you'll also be looking for the charitable cause your purchase will support.

Any move to divert some of the profits of a company for charity, especially in the fight against AIDS, is noble. But the electronics makers need to get their own houses in order before they jump on the star-sponsored charity bandwagon. They need to ensure that the people who make the gadgets are paid properly and enjoy good working conditions.

Most electronics manufacturing is outsourced to China, where claims of exploitation of workers are rife. Some work long hours for around $120 to $210 a month and live in cramped dorms. If they get sick, they're on their own. Occupational safety and health is often an unfamiliar concept and there's no pension plan. If they stop working they're in trouble.

Many support families in impoverished, rural areas. For millions of people in the sprawling factory compounds of Shenzhen in China, the closest they'll ever get to the latest popular electronics gadgets is the production line.

It's cool these days to be socially and environmentally aware and that's a zeitgeist the gadget makers are keen to tap into. I'm sure if any major electronics brand had the option of contributing to Bono's (Red) campaign or diverting profits to increase the wages of Chinese factory workers, they'd choose the former - because the halo effect will boost revenue as consumers buy in, offsetting the cost of the charitable move.

There's no such thing as guilt-free gadget buying. The economics of the electronics industry dictate that for the gadgets to be sold at a price that appeals to the mass market, millions of people have to slave away in factories somewhere. When China becomes too expensive, they'll simply move production to another region, eventually arriving in Africa. We get the gadgets, they get the short end of globalisation. But I'd be happier knowing that a fraction of the price of the electronics I buy is going to improve their lot than if it was diverted to some third party cause that I can contribute to separately. That's not called charity, its called a fairer deal.