More and more companies are subscribing to the idea that giving back isn’t just the right thing to do – it’s good business, too. Corporate giving rose 10.6 percent in 2010, according to a recent report by the Giving USA Foundation.

Some organizations are taking philanthropy a step further, creating charitable campaigns that emphasize brand attributes and align with their business objectives.

Pepto-Bismol gave $1 to Feeding America for every Facebook fan who "liked" this photo.

While most Pepto-Bismol users are seeking relief from overeating, the brand’s Thanksgiving-themed Facebook campaign invited consumers to help those who don’t have full bellies. For every fan who “liked” a photo of “Modern Family” actor Eric Stonestreet posing with a turkey, the brand donated $1 to Feeding America.

A New York Times article about the effort noted that Pepto-Bismol’s parent company, Procter and Gamble, is no stranger to charitable initiatives capitalizing on product features, such as the Tide “Loads of Hope” and the Duracell “Power Relief” programs.

Meanwhile, the snack company Planters has funded several city park projects that feature elements like peanut-shaped trellises – promoting the iconic brand image while showcasing a commitment to earth-friendliness.

Done well, strategies like these can elevate consumer perceptions – and, of course, benefit deserving causes. Do you know of any other companies that incorporate brand attributes into their social responsibility efforts?

Mary Tindall is a staff writer at Costa DeVault. Pregnancy-induced heartburn is making her seriously consider sipping some Pepto-Bismol.

Kenneth Gronbach, a noted demographer and author of the book “The Age Curve,” recently spoke at PRSA Orlando about trends in demographics and how changes in our population translate into value for your business.

He shared an interesting example about work he did with a motorcycle maker in 1979 relating to demographics. Business was booming for them and all of sudden … splat! Sales bottomed out – dropping 80 percent over the next five years, to be exact. The product hadn’t changed, advertising and other communication was steady and customers were happy with the product. So, what happened to cause such a dramatic dip in sales?

Here’s a question: Who buys fast, flashy motorcycles? Men ages 16-24. When the now 78.2 million Baby Boomers were in that age range, motorcycle sales were sky high. But once these men approached their mid- to late-twenties (and “sold their bike to buy a ring,” claims Gronbach), the motorcycle market was left with a tremendous void that Generation X just could not fill.

As communicators, we’re always looking for the next trend. Gronbach’s advice is to get in front of the market that’s coming – not the one that’s shrinking away from you. Take a look for yourself and think about the industries you or your clients are in. What does this mean for you?

Toyota has spent decades, not to mention billions of dollars, spreading the message that their vehicles are superior – in safety, style and value. The recent PR debacle facing the automaker goes to show the vulnerability of a brand. Years of maintaining a solid reputation can be shattered in less than 24 hours.

Consumer confidence in Toyota is definitely at a pivotal point. First, the floor mats. Next the sticky accelerators – linked to 19 deaths. Then, with the promise of a “fix” on the horizon, Toyota announced last week that there is a problem with the Prius’s brake system. Where does it end?

Some think that the Toyota brand is done – that they should throw in the towel and start anew. After the contamination issue in 1982, Johnson & Johnson had to repair the Tylenol brand, but no need to scrap it all together. Neither did Firestone or Exxon after their respective catastrophes. Toyota’s major problem, aside from the obvious engineering flaw, in my opinion is the mixed messages being disseminated, further fueling consumer anxiety. Drive. . .Don’t drive. . .It’s electrical. . .It’s mechanical. . .We know. . . We don’t know. . . Get your message straight! This lack of clarity is just further aggravating an already fragile situation.

To a certain extent, loyal patrons are forgiving and would be willing to trust Toyota again. But when is enough, finally enough? As a Camry driver myself, I am waiting (and waiting. . .and waiting) to see if the company can pull a U-turn and boost my confidence or if the crisis will continue to go down hill.

If you were in the driver’s seat of Toyota’s messaging during this fiasco, would you have done anything differently?

Photo credit: Robert Vinet

Very rarely does an ad generate editorial media coverage. Generally, advertising is confined to its paid space – until the ad itself becomes the news. This is what’s happened for one controversial Super Bowl commercial: gay dating site ManCrunch.com. The ad depicts two men kissing and was denied by CBS.

Since the rejection, the company has received an enormous amount of publicity. Stories in news outlets, blogs, television and radio have created discussions in numerous public forums. This just adds value to the nearly $3 million price tag CBS is charging for a 30-second spot.

But why the uproar? Controversial subject matter always strikes a chord and advocates on both sides of an issue will make their voices heard. In fact, it was reported that CBS believed ManCrunch submitted an ad they knew would be rejected in an effort to generate free publicity. ManCruch denies the accusation.

And while ManCrunch is receiving a fair amount of free publicity, are they better off? As of today, the ManCrunch commercial on YouTube.com has been viewed more than 400,000 times. Last year, Wikipedia reported that the Super Bowl was watched by 93.2 million people. Would the aired ManCrunch television commercial create the same level of conversation? Would the controversy have as much value without social media?

The Wall Street Journal recently launched a multimedia branding campaign titled “Live in the Know.” The campaign stresses the value of the in-depth research that the paper brings that goes beyond chatter and sound bites. In a time where major newspapers are fighting to keep their readership, I thought the campaign was an interesting approach.

Yesterday in my mailbox, I was surprised to find a package from Kiss My Face. It’s an organic and natural cosmetics and skincare line … one that I had never heard of. Until yesterday.

Apparently, I had won some contest I had entered online, and this was the prize. As a products “junkie,” I was excited to open all the testers and flip through the marketing materials. The pamphlet directed me to the company web site, so I immediately logged on to the computer to check it out. (Yes, a marketer’s dream … I’m “one of those people.”)

Almost an hour later, I had read through pretty much the whole site and made a list of stuff I wanted to try. The only thing I was disappointed in was their blog section, which hadn’t been updated since February … and the one before that was September 2008!

This got me thinking … what were the missed opportunities here? What if their blog was updated frequently? I would have subscribed – a weekly, if not daily, reminder of their products. Perhaps I would have followed them on Twitter, too. The point is: Their contest was a success. I learned about their products, and I intend to buy … and how much did it cost them? A few samples and a dollar in postage? But how much further could they have gone?

That said, at least I’m thinking about their products. And blogging about them, too.

At Blogwell, a social media conference taking place today, Scott Cook (founder of Intuit), offered an interesting definition for a brand.  He said:

“A brand is no longer what we tell the consumer it is; it is what the consumers tell each other it is.”

Here’s the thing: Has defining a brand ever been as simple as what a company says?

At Costa DeVault, we’ve been in the “branding business” for more than two decades. But, we’re constantly reminding our clients that a brand isn’t a logo … or a tagline … or a piece of collateral. Those are tools that convey your brand.

A brand is the perception formed by your audiences about your company and/or product. That definition remains as true today as it was 20 years ago. Social media doesn’t change the definition. But, social media does offer a new set of tools that companies can leverage to help influence public perception. Companies that embrace social media can engage stakeholders and shape their perceptions.

No matter how many new tools are introduced to the marketplace, it’s important to remember that old adage, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” A brand is still a brand — defined by public perception, not corporate speak.