
Guilt learning is uninspiring…not to mention just plain old
When campaigning for peace in war torn countries or trying to inform new audiences about government atrocities - NPOs need an extreme makeover.
Some of the scariest websites are designed by NPOs. Either you get blasted with horrific statistics about violence, rape, government wrongdoing etc., or, straight up - someone asks you for a donation. Then they list a number of dry reasons as to why you should part with your hard earned dollars.
Celebrity endorsements are a catch-22. You can alienate just as many people as you seek to inform.
It’s scary. And, it’s pathetic. Sometimes, NPOs act like doing business is a dirty word. The tendency to adopt an attitude of martydom towards their own campaigns sucks all the life out of advocacy work. If you are fund raising for women’s rights, peace or to end conflict - don’t act like that’s the only reasoning you need to provide potential (new) donors or advocates.
Unfortunately, it’s not enough.
It’s lazy. Or, perhaps, it’s naive incompetence. Focusing so much on guilting people into learning about their cause, NPOs forgo engaging in a lasting dialogue. The dialogue is a conversation that can resonate with newer audiences (and add relevance). The goal is not, necessarily, to keep the same audience.
The key is to spread your mission to new learners.
Pictures are a 1000 words…maybe
NPOs have a bad (PR) habit of using photos that make the viewer shrink back in utter horror …or not care at all. It’s one thing to show the true realities of living in Darfur or surviving in the Congo - but it is truly another to showcase photos of disembodied body parts of violence survivors.
How are you truly empowering the people you seek to help? There is nothing empowering about a victim remaining a victim.
In reality, these tactics create even bigger distances between the NPO’s mission and the people they hope to reach.
Simply, social justice NPOs are competing for people’s time - not just their money.
It’s the attention that keeps the campaign relevant. If such organizations reposition their mission around that, they can gain an even larger momentum around their cause.
Poor, poor social media - where for art thou?
If an NPO has caught the social media holy ghost - it doesn’t mean they’ve become true believers. They might be on Twitter, but they haven’t tweeted anything in months. They have a Facebook page - but that’ s it. No notes or photos attached.
If there is a blog, it’s updated sporadically with press releases, which I can see on their website anyway.
Visiting these websites is equal to an exercise in master level brain teasers. They are either dense, poorly updated, or (God forbid) both.
Website visitors have no idea these other tools are connected with their NPO of choice. Largely, this disconnect is working against them. And, to some degree, NPOs know that. But they don’t care.
Why?
Because they haven’t fully embraced the value of incorporating such tools into the larger sphere of their conversation. The purpose is to widen the conversation, not shrink it or have it exist in individual vacuums.
I've worked for several nonprofits and this is such great, original critical thinking. Building a relationship with donors is often the most complex part of the job and the most difficult, but it's about empowering the donor to help, not scaring them away or making them feel bad. Nobody wants to live in a world like that. Great post.
And the end result for many of us potential donors, is outrage fatigue.
Iraq, Iran, Darfur, East Timor, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Bosina, Chechnya, Liberia, Zimbabwae, Somalia, Nigeria, Ethiopia, Egypt, the West Bank, Gaza, Myanmar, Tibet, North Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Guatamala, Ecuado, Paraguay, Mexico, Turkey, Libya, Basque, Northern Ireland, Honduras, Haiti, where does the bombardment end?
It's no wonder that potential donors will just finally give up, because the problems seem to be so huge, pervasive and complex. They appear to defy solution, and a donor's seemingly meager contribution is nothing more than a drop of water on a forest fire.
@Jrandom 42
I think that's the unfortunate result with some social justice NPOs...they make everything seem endless. It's torturous. I think the best strategy is to guide/ease people into believing that they can help and that there is a way to abolish/ease the injustices they see in the world. Not everything can be solved in one day - but making it seem like it can never be solved (and just throwing money at it) doesn't get the job done in any event.
Why did you put Paraguay on your list other than it being the 2nd poorest county in South America (after Hati)? I was a Peace Corps Volunteer there and in some ways, I'm just happy when Paraguay gets the world's attention. It's often just ignored (except when its former Catholic bishop president announces that he had a baby with a girl when she was 16. But in Paraguay the age of consent is 15 after the Catholic quincinera).
@Jrandom 42
I don't think that's the right way to approach it. Social justice can't (or shouldn't) be measured in what is most worthy. If you want to think in terms of who is worthy - do a heart check. What gets your gears turning?
When you are deciding between what "little" you have to give and deciding who gets it - prioritizing does little good. I think potential donors need to focus on what drives them towards certain causes and not concentrate on so much on who is the "best" or "most noteworthy" cause...