business news in context, analysis with attitude

USA Today reports that a new report, funded by Corporate Accountability International and The Small Planet Fund, charges that while McDonald's gets 100 percent of the "branded benefit" from Ronald McDonald House charity efforts, it only contributes about 20 percent of the funding that jeeps it going.

"McDonald's is basically a minor financial supporter of its own Ronald McDonald House Charities and should immediately stop linking longtime spokes-character Ronald McDonald with it," the report says, while emphasizing that the questions it is raising are ethical, not legal.

"McDonald's categorically rejects this self-serving and biased document and stands proud of the significant financial support and volunteer hours we have and will continue to provide to Ronald McDonald House Charities and other charities worldwide," Bridget Coffing, senior vice president of corporate relations, says in a response to the charges.
KC's View:
To be honest, it never occurred to me that McDonald's was contributing all the money. I'm a little surprised by the ratio, but the fact remains that this is an important charity with high visibility, and part of the reason that it is a high profile charity is the McDonald's support and visibility.

If McDonald's gets 100 percent of the brand recognition for that, I don't see how this is bad, wrong, or unethical.