What do you make of this?

Ford is recruiting "Warriors in Pink"

Am I being a curmudgeon, or is this pretty crass commercialism? Is it ok to try to sell cars by providing a themed outlet for peoples' love and concern for a woman in their life who has breast cancer?

I'm struggling with this - is the good of the efforts of those who participate greater than the commercial motivations of those who have sponsored the thing? (Or is the original motivation perhaps not commercial? Certainly the effort is now commercial). Is it possible for a company to do this without the taint of self-interest?

If this is truly charity, and I'm not convinced it is, it is certainly the lowest form of it. Maimonides systematised levels of charity in the Mishne Torah:

Maimonides' Eight Levels of Charity
Mishneh Torah, Laws of Charity, 10:7-14

There are eight levels of charity, each greater than the next.

[1] The greatest level, above which there is no greater, is to support a fellow Jew by endowing him with a gift or loan, or entering into a partnership with him, or finding employment for him, in order to strengthen his hand until he need no longer be dependent upon others...

[2] A lesser level of charity than this is to give to the poor without knowing to whom one gives, and without the recipient knowing from who he received. For this is performing a mitzvah solely for the sake of Heaven. This is like the "anonymous fund" that was in the Holy Temple [in Jerusalem]. There the righteous gave in secret, and the good poor profited in secret. Giving to a charity fund is similar to this mode of charity, though one should not contribute to a charity fund unless one knows that the person appointed over the fund is trustworthy and wise and a proper administrator, like Rabbi Hananya ben Teradyon.

[3] A lesser level of charity than this is when one knows to whom one gives, but the recipient does not know his benefactor. The greatest sages used to walk about in secret and put coins in the doors of the poor. It is worthy and truly good to do this if those who are responsible for distributing charity are not trustworthy.

[4] A lesser level of charity than this is when one does not know to whom one gives, but the poor person does know his benefactor. The greatest sages used to tie coins into their robes and throw them behind their backs, and the poor would come up and pick the coins out of their robes so that they would not be ashamed.

[5] A lesser level than this is when one gives to the poor person directly into his hand, but gives before being asked.

[6] A lesser level than this is when one gives to the poor person after being asked.

[7] A lesser level than this is when one gives inadequately, but gives gladly and with a smile.

[8] A lesser level than this is when one gives unwillingly

(interesting that the highest level of charity is to help a fellow Jew lift himself to self-sufficiency: gentiles need not apply?).

But I don't want to dilute my point that self-promoting charity or action in a good cause is somehow tainted. Could Ford have done something good about breast cancer without such a public splash? Of course - but it would have damaged their commercial purpose. WHich is, IMHO, what this regretable "Warriors in Pink" promotion is ALL about. It's like a sad joke......