American Cancer Society Blogger Apologizes for Bald Barbie Flub
Email
One unlikely person apologized today after catching the wrath of the nearly 130,000 people who have joined a social media campaign urging Mattel to make a bald Barbie.
Andrew Becker, a director of media relations for the American Cancer Society, drew ire after posting a controversial blog post on the American Cancer Society’s website called ”Bald Barbie Demand Is an Over-Reach.” In the post, Becker said the Bald Barbie movement could “do more harm than good for kids and parents.”
“If they are mass marketed, many of these dolls will end up in the hands of girls who luckily aren’t likely to be touched by cancer in themselves or their mothers. But could they end up being terrorized by the prospect of it in a far outsized proportion to their realistic chances? There is no reason to create this sort of fear,” Becker wrote.
Outraged supporters of the Bald Barbie campaign took to the cancer society’s Facebook page, demanding that Becker be fired. Someone named Chanda called Becker’s blog post “callous talk.”
“There are little girls and little boys out there feeling like they no longer fit in – they no longer have children in their class they can relate to,” she wrote.
Becker took down his offending blog today and replaced it with an apology.
“When I set out to write, I wanted to raise questions about activism and social media around disease. I did not mean to imply that I or the American Cancer Society believes that sick children are not important,” he wrote.
But Becker’s response did not appease.
“He does not know who he messed with,” a commenter named Mindy wrote. “An apology on their blog is not enough. We won’t stop until there is equity in funding for childhood cancer, and this man has a new job!”
Becker told ABCNews.com in an email that he prefers to let his apology statement speak for itself.
Man Discovers He's a Woman at the Hospital 
Head Trauma, Behavior Problems Linked
Oh, his pathetic attempt at a prewritten apology for damage control speaks volumes! He dismisses any kind of apology in his 2nd and 3rd paragraph’s, that are full of excuses! ACS has already lost huge amount of suport and donations by exploiting and fraudulently using our kids photos to trick donors into thinking they are helping a child, when, in fact they do not! They have turned away hundreds of families, taken our donations and given them to causes that aren’t cancer related and refuse to truly acknowledge cure research and the need for funding for children. This idiot is just a further testiment to how worthless their organization is! I will continue to spread the word on this more than callous, insensitive, ignorant blog entry by this uneducated moron and on the ACS’s grossly negligent behavior for children! We will gladly apply donations elsewhere! They think we are just far and few, but our voices are loud and we have many who won’t stop! If that means I have to fight for equality for children or brining down this disgusting display of an organization, then I will! Mr. Becker also claims that the cancer numbers are going down. Funny he thinks he knows everything because I can personally attest to the hundreds of children being diagnosed worldwide and that number is not decreasing! He needs to pull his head out of his ass and we deserve a true and sincere apology from him and the ACS for this behavior and personal attack on our families and children! And why take down the blog post instead of allowing everyone to continue to see his stupidity??! Obviously it was something to be very shameful of or he wouldn’t have removed it! If it was just for debate, he wouldn’t have removed it! There was zero debate! He did nothing but bash our families, children and run his ugly mouth about something he knows nothing about! A debate presents both sides and allows people to make up their own minds. This was a one sided attack! Point blank! I sure hope his 3 perfectly healthy kids never get cancer because if they do, God help them! Lord knows he’ll be a lousy parent for that job!
Posted by: lisa | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 5:39 pm
Barbie does enough damage to society as it is — seemingly “possessing” lots of people with life-long affictions over body image, etc. A bald Barbie would, at least, provide a worthwhile teachable moment.
Posted by: Billie | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 5:52 pm
It was more than just those who were campaigning for the Barbie it was those of us who have kids with cancer who took offense to his statement that childhood cancer is “exceedingly rare “. As the parent of a 5 year old daughter who has leukemia I can assure you Mr.Becker that it is not. I am sure that all of the Moms that we see in the oncology clinic will agree
Posted by: Jan Webb | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 6:02 pm
The ACS has always been about making money for scum like this. They have never been in the business of curing cancer. It is much better to make domations to small groups like The Ethanol Jostad foundation I’m Oregon, or others like it o
Posted by: jim hayes | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 6:43 pm
Agreed. This was not just bald Barbie supporters. I’m indifferent on that subject. However, his insensitive remarks likening childhood cancer to lightning strike victims hit me in a place so low in my heart that there are just no words to describe it. Trivializing the pain our children go through on a daily basis deserved an apology but I can’t honestly say that that will erase the memory of his words.
Posted by: Rachel | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 8:06 pm
I would LOVE to see Robin sit down with Mr Becker and get to the REAL answers regarding the distribution of funding to pediatric cancer by ACS. I would like for him to tell her how rare childhood cancer is.
Come on Robin Roberts… this issue need YOU !!!!!
Posted by: Elizabeth Grove | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 8:14 pm
I am glad that you have shined some light on Becker and his insensitive comments. I have been a supporter of ACS for years until yesterday. I will never donate another penny to ACS. He tried to trivialize childhood cancer as not a big deal for ACS. I am so ashamed that I ever supported this organization. I think Becker should resign!!!
Posted by: Stella | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 8:20 pm
It’s not about the Barbies that he caught the flack about– it’s the fact that he trivialized childhood cancer, claiming it was “rare” and therefore not important enough etc etc etc. You people dropped the ball. Put up the quotes where he dismissed childhood cancer as “Only 41 children a day will be diagnosed, and only 7 will die”. THAT is the real outrage, coupled with the ACS’s stinginess towards funding research!!
Posted by: Cynthia Fluharty | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 8:25 pm
Mr. Becker made it difficult for anyone trying to raise awareness about pediatric cancer and get much needed funding for research into cures for the many pediatric cancers out there with his misinformation and callous portrayal of childhood cancer. He opened the door to people looking beyond these statements, that the ACS let him post as their media director, and seeing that ACS is not really doing much for pediatric cancer. So, now, not only are they not funding research – it seems they are arguing against attempts to raise awareness and minimizing pediatric cancer in general by comparing them to lightning strike victims. Not good – my money will not go to this organization. (Not a cancer parent – just a concerned advocate)
Posted by: Courtney Rasey | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 8:39 pm
The fact is, it is not just the words in the blog, but the actions of ACS that speaks volumes. The ACS as a whole puts less than 1% of moneys raised to pediatric cancer research. 1 in 330 children will be touched by cancer. 46 kids today were diagnosed, 7 died. This is NOT “exceedingly rare”
By definition a rare disease affects less than 200,000 Americans. Childhood cancer has affected, will affect, or currently is affecting almost 1 million children in America today. This is based on the US census data, the statistics of 1 in 330 children, and simple math.
What ACS has essentially told Pediatric Cancer families is they are too “rare” to matter. And in doing so they have also told the rare disease community with truly rare diseases (such as histiocytosis which affects 1 in 200,000 or apx 1600 americans) that we have no hope to find cures for our children because it is too rare to matter.
Posted by: Theresa Born | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 9:32 pm
Unfortunately, you have missed the point. The American Cancer Society holds itself out as an authority on cancer. Mr. Becker wrote that awareness of childhood cancer is not needed because childhood cancer is rare, equating it to the likelihood of being struck by lightening and noting there are no advocates calling for “lightening strike dolls.” I don’t really care if Mattel makes this doll or not, but ACS stepped in it when they trivialized childhood cancer.
ACS consistently uses bald children in their advertising and seeks out young cancer patients or survivors lead a lap at Relay for Life, but ACS does not fund childhood cancer in any meaningful way. For every dollar ACS raises, ONE-HALF OF ONE CENT goes to childhood cancer. Most parents of childhood cancer patients learn this after about a year in the “cancer world” and stop supporting ACS activities, but by this time they have already asked friends and supporters to donate to Relay “in honor” of their child battling cancer, some raising tens of thousands of dollars. Is it any wonder parents of childhood cancer patients have a lot of antipathy toward an organization that uses families and children when they are at their most vulnerable?
The childhood cancer community is not asking ACS to change its funding priorities, just to stop exploiting our children. In this case, since ACS has clearly demonstrated its lack of concern for childhood cancer patients, there was really no need for it to weigh in on this topic at all, let alone in such a callous manner.
As for Mr. Becker’s apology, it only confirms ACS’s total lack of knowledge about childhood cancer. Expressing his desire to repair the “the relationship between the advocates I have upset and the American Cancer Society ” Mr. Becker relates how he has seen “one example after another of this organization’s incredible mission being carried out, and each time, I am inspired. I have also seen success that extends to all of us, as cancer incidence and death rates continue to drop.” What Mr. Becker apparently does not know is that unlike the adult cancers ACS is concerned with, the incidence of childhood cancer is actually increasing in the United States.
Posted by: Jen | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 9:47 pm
Thank you for bringing this to the national spot light. Our children deserve toys that look like them.
Posted by: susan heard | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 10:02 pm
Barbie is a terrible toy for healthy kids, let alone sick ones. I’m pretty sure that even if she’s bald and undergoing chemo, she will still be a 36DD and a size zero. Wonderfully realistic and I’m sure totally comforting to kids from all walks of life.
Posted by: J. Glasgow | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 10:10 pm
Childhood Cancer no longer becomes “rare” when you have to spend 1to 2 weeks at a time on the pediatric oncology floor with your child just ask me I know. I lost my son to NF and Cancer he was 16. I was a mother of 3 now I am a mother minus one.
Now we help kids just like my son.
Posted by: Karinsa Viramontes | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 10:14 pm
The Bald Barbie should never happen. Not because it’s ‘wrong’, but because why should a billion dollar company like Mattel rake in the profits from it, when pediatric cancer funding is in such dire need? To market a doll to this cause without forfeiting the profits in a much needed way is like rubbing salt in the wounds of these families affected by it. If any company decides to do this, they need to make sure their heart is in the right place. And by the way, pediatric cancers aren’t rare. They just don’t get the amount of awareness that most others do. This needs to be remedied immediately.
Posted by: Mobalajee | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 10:38 pm
On an earlier post, I referenced a foundation In Oregon. Because this smart phone is anything but smart, it changed what O had typed in here. The foundation should have read, The Ethan Jostad Foundation.
Posted by: jim hayes | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 11:23 pm
No Followers – though this struck a chord so I wanted to comment… never tweeted or commented before in my life…. I must say though, in response to the
Bald Barbie that The commercialization of Cancer, particularly Breast Cancer, has the potential to negate the trauma experienced by the patients and their loved ones…
Posted by: My Thought | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 11:43 pm
I would rather see a different brand or type of doll marketed for children living with cancer. Barbie is a terrible example. I’m sure another company would be happy to help.
Posted by: mnmom1980 | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 11:43 pm
And I agree with MOBALAJEE
Posted by: My Thought | January 18, 2012 January 18, 2012, 11:50 pm
I have only this to say..As the mother of a 16yr son who has Leukemia, I can only hope and pray that through this mans idiocy, it will bring awareness, research, and funding to find a cure for our precious babies fighting this monster called cancer. God works in mysterious ways, so perhaps through the outrage this has caused our voices may finally be heard!
Posted by: Amber | January 19, 2012 January 19, 2012, 1:02 am
Heck, I thought all of them were “bald”, with interchangeable “wigs” and such … shows what I know about Barbies … anyway, how about “full figured” barbies? … as a statement to the age we live in …
Posted by: yeah.i.said.it | January 19, 2012 January 19, 2012, 1:24 am
Wow, ABC! Talk about not telling the whole story. If I hadn’t read the comments, I would be in the dark about the ire surrounding the statements made about bald Barbie. That’s because you left out the real story behind it. Now I get it, and I agree with the parents who took the time to expose the truth. Not only did he say that childhood cancer was so rare that most little girls would never get it, but he also inferred that cancer in women was also rare because most mothers would never get it. The question remains as to how he got his job and how he manages to keep it considering he knows nothing about cancer and its victims.
Posted by: micheleinca | January 19, 2012 January 19, 2012, 2:41 am
Facebook users are the worst. That says alot about these people that they are using facebook as a statistic to force mattel into making this doll. This is not the full stroy , there something not being told and want everyone to hate on this guy . LOL I remember my freind told me Ememin is more famous than Michael Jackson cause hes got more fans on facebook than MJ. Right sure and you 80,000 people that said yes or clicked yes all want a cancer-stricken Barbie?
Posted by: Jagger Olson | January 19, 2012 January 19, 2012, 10:02 am
Most of the people who are outraged about Mr. Beckers post and subsequent apology don’t have anything to do with the Bald Barbie issue. We are angry that someone in his position would actually think that childhood cancer is rare, and that the American Cancer Society, while using children to raise money for their cause, do very little to nothing at all for the children. Try getting your story right with more facts, read what people have to say, we are angry and for good reason.
Posted by: Michael Cooke | January 19, 2012 January 19, 2012, 1:34 pm
We are a small Foundation that helps kids with NF and Childhood Cancer. we are based in Longview Washington and I can tell you Childhood Cancer is NOT RARE!!!! The Dino Doozer Foundation hooks up with CCA every year and sponsors kids with Cancer to come hang out with Dino Doozer on Race day at the South Sound Speed way in Tenino just to give these kids a break from the every day pokes and meds that Cancer brings. Barbie or no Barbie Cancer is not RARE the Cure for this Cancer is what is RARE!!!! Lets find that
Posted by: Doozers mom | January 19, 2012 January 19, 2012, 2:52 pm
I think a bald Barbie would be really cool…and yes, as a full figure woman I know that she is not realistic in her proportions… it would mean something to many kids around the World and not just hear in the US who are battling Cancer. I was diagnosed with Cancer at 18, unfortunetly it was misdiagnosed from the onset at age 13. I didn’t understand what was wrong with me, though I knew something wasn’t right. Cancer in females is NOT RARE Mr. Beckers! in fact more females will be touched by Cancer than by lightning…and I’d like to see the emperical proff of that report in which you calusly quoted.
As a sociology student it would do great amounts more good to have this kind of a doll than it would do harm. Not only is it saying that bald is beautiful, which it is, but it’s saying that it’s okay to go through this nightmare because there are others just like you who are going through it as well.
Even being an adult going through cancer it is an extreamly fearful situation. One that should never be trivialized by people that we are supposed to look to for help and support in these times of need and grief.
I for one want more than just an apolpgy from not just Mr. Becker, but the ACS as a whole. This man should have never been able to speak for a company whos soul purpos is prevention and cures of cancer as he did. I think his job position needs to be looked at very closely…and I mean the lack of him in that position!
P.S. I think that if a bald Barbie was made, Mattel would send a portion (more than 1%) to the cause of childhood cancer.
Posted by: Leslie Harbin | January 20, 2012 January 20, 2012, 1:48 am
Let’s face it, every family out there has been affected by cancer in some way…..whomever would not back a project like this is just plain ‘out of touch.’ If I had the money, I would back this idea myself. Not just from a business point, but because it is an amazing idea. Healing, acceptance, compassion, awareness….to name a few.
Posted by: Lisa Bradbury | January 20, 2012 January 20, 2012, 2:47 am
Doll is a waste of money. I am not from the US but heard that it’s very expensive to get treament for cancer. How much is ths cost for chemo and radition? 5000? 10,000? I don’t know but from reading this and the other story, the woman and her child are in safe hands. Why is it important for them to make a bald doll? This guys said some stupid stuff but he is right in a way.Childhood cancer is not rare but I haven’e seen many kids at Wal-Mart or Disney Land who look bald (or wearing wigs) from cancer. Maybe they are hiding it but I don’t see many of these kids in the public.
Posted by: Lauren Cosmo | January 20, 2012 January 20, 2012, 5:47 pm
The cancer society needs to replace this guy immediately. Maybe he can help out over at the Obama administration. Seriously, how uncaring of families, especially children, who are fighting cancer.
Posted by: Removing Skin Tags | January 20, 2012 January 20, 2012, 8:24 pm
I under stand If they can’t make their doll like that maybe another doll maker can make them. My grand daughter has ALL-B Olivia is 4 years old and fixing to find out what not having hair is about. She told me the other day Mema my hair is going to be gone and when it goes back I hope it comes back pink. I am going to go buy a doll and make her hair pink and also wear a pink wig for her tell her hair grows back. So Olivia will be getting a pink wig to wear around. And I also will shave my head If she is hurt about not having hair. I told her that I will and she looks up at me and said Mema I love you.
Posted by: Donna | January 20, 2012 January 20, 2012, 9:59 pm
It is not so much the doll that upset the parents but the fact that despite 46 children being diagnosed daily of which 7 children pass away daily this guy said childhood cancer is rare. There is nothing rare in losing 2555 lives annually to some form of pediatric cancer
Posted by: Linda Zietsman | January 22, 2012 January 22, 2012, 12:42 am
This is just another show of american stupidity. I like the fact that probably most of these people pushing for a “bald Barbie” are either cancer survivors, relatives to those who have cancer, or have cancer themselves. I love how no one in america gives a crap about a disease like cancer until it becomes a part of their lives in some way. Then they try and take action and act like just because they know someone or have it or have had it that they should be treated differently or act like they deserve more. This is another instance of that rash of selfishness that has tore this country appart. You think you need a bald barbie to help raise cancer awareness and to help children cope with cancer so they think they are not alone? I agree somewhat with what Mr. Becker said that it could inadvertantly trigger fear of cancer in children who don’t have it. Can you picture a child asking why barbie is bald and having to say ” Because she has cancer” then the child getting up set and asking “Will i get cancer?” Being honest with your child at this point could reinforce that fear of uncertainty if you say “I dont know but i sure hope not “. And lets face it the only people who will BUY this barbie are these people gunning for it. I cant imagine a parent of a child who DOESN’T have cancer to buy this for his/her little girl. You also need to look at it from a buisness standpoint not whats logical or ethical OR profitable. If the cancer people get a barbie then everyone else will want their OWN Barbie. If they cave for these people then they will have to cave for EVERYONE who wants a special barbie. Whats next? Quadrouple amputee barbie? Hairlip Barbie? Flat chested barbie? As soon as they do that they might as well stop making barbie because then everyone will say ” hey the cancer people got a barbie why cant we have one?!” Then mattel will be in an even bigger mess they they are. They should stick to their guns and just avoid the situation simply because it will stir up more trouble if they go along with it.
Posted by: Chris | January 22, 2012 January 22, 2012, 6:18 am
What does Obama have to do with this? He does more work than any of you people blogging here. All of you who claim you will “buy” this doll and are “hurt” buy his comments are hyopcritical yourselves. How does the fact he said this hurt you?
Posted by: Joan Younes | January 22, 2012 January 22, 2012, 5:48 pm
LOl Chris you said the truth! I agree. I am so annoyed by all these cancer awareness people who will even ruin the lives of others just to get a statement. Mattel said no and they still are saying look it over. Umm what does the fact that Mattel said no mean? It means sorry we don’t like this idea so we won’t do it. Just read on Facebook, They are willing to do a protest called Occupy-Mattel just for this thing. So immature ,even though these are grown women.
Posted by: River Colbie | January 22, 2012 January 22, 2012, 5:53 pm
Technically childhood cancer is in fact rare. Horrible? Yes! Devistating? Yes! And rare? Also a yes. A disease is considered rare by yearly diaganosis numbers, not by how many people are living with the disease at any one given time duing a year (as stated in a comment above). A little over 11,000 kids will be diagnosed with cancer this year. In my opinion that’s about 11,000 too many. We need to stop discussing “rare” when it is- and start focusing on a CURE!
Posted by: Vivian Mateo | January 23, 2012 January 23, 2012, 10:18 am
its not a matter of fear its a matter of understanding to promote understanding and support for those unfortunate little girls who have been tortured by this unfortunate illness and understanding for the girls who who dont know what it is as well as awareness the more you know about something the more understanding you are…i want my kids to be aware that this is not a perfect world that people get sick and just because someone is sick doesnt mean that you cannot relate to that person or have compassion for that person….i think the bald barbie is one step toward teaching our kids that there are things that can happen in life and as far as the comment people already fear life threatening dieases and that wont be changed but we can help people understand it a little better and what better way to bring kids into the world of the kids who feel lonely and forgotten and different bc they have to lose their hair and possibly their lives my children know about cancer we have lost a lot of family members from it and friends but when my kids go in the grocery store and see a bald woman they make remarks bc they dont understand at 5 and 7 why that woman has a bald head or why that little girl is bald so having a bald barbie they could start seeing bald as beautiful you dont have to have long hair or a skinny waist or a size 2 butt to be beautiful…. it amazing and i will be standing in line to buy my kids one!
Posted by: shannon | January 24, 2012 January 24, 2012, 10:05 pm
sorry i wasnt just talking about little girls i was talking about children in general
Posted by: shannon | January 24, 2012 January 24, 2012, 10:07 pm
i think that the barbie company should def donate a huge percentage of their profits to the childrens cancer research
Posted by: shannon | January 24, 2012 January 24, 2012, 10:13 pm
Bald Barbie is a terrible idea. What I have noticed that it’s mostly WHITE women who seem to have this stupid idea that ” Barbie is a bad role model for young girls” but now these whites are saying ” Oh Bald Barbie is a great idea” yeah , Babs with no hair but has her big eyes , high cheekbones, full red lips , small nose is sending the message to young white girls that it’s okay to be bald but still have the perfect facial features. The comments about that Mattel SHOULD donate most of their proceeds to charity is hilarious. Why don’t these white cancer supporters women come up with the money and donate themselves? There is no free lunch . What next ,you are all going to harass Bill Gates or Warren Buffet to donate most of their money to chairty? Bullocks. The people who started Mattel did not start the company to give money away to chairty or create statement dolls, it’s their hard earned money and they should spend it howver they like. Not by what you all think, and I am talking to you white women especially.
Posted by: Tanisha Grady | January 25, 2012 January 25, 2012, 1:45 pm
Bald Barbie is a terrible idea. What I have noticed that it’s mostly WHITE women who seem to have this stupid idea that ” Barbie is a bad role model for young girls” but now these whites are saying ” Oh Bald Barbie is a great idea” yeah , Babs with no hair but has her big eyes , high cheekbones, full red lips , small nose is sending the message to young white girls that it’s okay to be bald but still have the perfect facial features. The comments about that Mattel SHOULD donate most of their proceeds to charity is hilarious. Why don’t these white cancer supporters women come up with the money and donate themselves? There is no free lunch . What next , you are all going to harass Bill Gates or Warren Buffet to donate most of their money to chairty? Bullocks. The people who started Mattel did not start the company to give money away to chairty or create statement dolls, it’s their hard earned money and they should spend it howver they like. Not by what you all think, and I am talking to you white women especially.
Posted by: Tanisha Grady | January 25, 2012 January 25, 2012, 1:49 pm
no sicko barbie please
Posted by: lexon | January 25, 2012 January 25, 2012, 1:51 pm