Basically, the article said that none of the 100 or so companies that AANR approached saw any value of working with AANR. In addition, one of the top marketing pros, Karen Post, weighed in with a really interesting remark. (For people who don’t understand her, Karen Post is a top brand and advertising specialist who has been on every major news network, and the author of “Brand Turn Around: How Brands Gone Bad Returned to Glory and the 7 Match Changers that Made the Difference”). Susan Weaver, the current president of AANR, brushed off that suggestion saying that she was proud of it.

Now, I don’t know what others might think, but if someone like Karen Post says something like that, I believe it should be taken seriously. Simply because we enjoy something, it does not mean that it’s the best option. At least AANR conceded that their website needs work, but that they will do it with the new funds generated from sponsors. I find this odd AANR boasts about having a $1.5 Million budget and yet they don’t have the funds needed to revamp their website? Plus, from the way the article is written, AANR might need to wait quite , so where does that leave its members who might need a better looking and more user-friendly site?
Another problem that got many nudists disturb is the fact the acting executive director of AANR, Jim Smock, is not a nudist. I see their purpose, but it never really bothered me till I saw the graphic in the article today. What sort of signal does that send? Why the need to fake? It made my heart drop once I saw it because it adds to the opinion the article is one big joke or a game (at least that is what some of individuals said).
The “naturist movement,” as it is perceived by the general public is somewhat of an oxymoron. Naturists are seen as being an overweight and aging population that simply loves sitting around and sunbathing naked all day long. There is no lack of interest but there’s an image issue. Let’s face it, it isn’t perceived as cool to be a naturist. This article now didn’t help, and things like make it even more challenging to shift the people’s perception. Sometimes it is better to say no, even if it’s the Wall Street Journal.
In the US we’ve larger organizations like TNS and AANR. But the fact that no one really knows why, when or what they do, is a major roadblock as it pertains to getting support. Now, naturism is another kind of cause (maybe because it is not generally perceived as a “cause”). Anyone on the road would likely say that when someone wants to be naked then they should go home and take their clothes away Should somebody want to participate in social nude tasks then there are a group of beaches, clubs, resorts and home get-togethers. So no requirement for advocacy there. So, support from non-naturists would be difficult to get unless one promotes another set of principles which might be now not being addressed by any other organizations.
Very few people would donate to AANR or TNS simply because they believe in “the cause” or “mission.” TNS has a good publication which is why most people become members. People join AANR because they desire discounts (and some are basically forced to become members if they wish to be part of particular naturist resorts or clubs). People that feel passionate about a cause or organization will donate regardless of what they’re going to get in return. Since there is absolutely no accurate nudist advocacy organization out there today, there is nothing for nudists to drum up support for or rally behind.
FKK is most likely the weakest of all the naturist groups and yet we’re the most vocal and effective. Curating content that addresses particular problems chooses a lot of time and devotion and while other groups ARE ABLE to do this, none of them actually do.