How To Raise Funds Online
For months, we’ve been urging readers to track the online fundraising exploits of presidential candidates, where new ground has been broken almost weekly … especially by Barack Obama.
The Obama campaign is to online fundraising what George McGovern was to direct mail fundraising in 1972 … the trailblazer. Though the Obama folks might not like the comparison, given the electoral fate of George, running against what’s his name.
Here’s the latest example of why the Obama campaign has done so well at online fundraising. It features a video briefing by campaign manager David Plouffe, backed by slides, explaining how the campaign expects to contest the election in all states … a strategy made possible — he emphasizes over and over — only because of the terrific grassroots donating and organizing achievement so far by the supporters watching the video … who now need to do just a bit more.
It’s a terrific execution of historically proven fundraising technique in a new medium.
Check it out. Can you imagine your CEO delivering such an appeal? Why not?
Tom
6 responses to “How To Raise Funds Online”
Behavioral Science Q & A
Integrating an individual giving appeal with other communications from a charity can have both positive and negative effects, and the outcome largely depends on how it’s executed. Advantages of Integration Brand Consistency: Maintaining a consistent appearance and messaging across all communications can reinforce the org’s brand identity and strengthen brand recognition and trust among your […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not aware of any in-market tests specifically comparing recurring vs. gift frequency language. I suspect the answer might not be the same with all gift frequencies, nor with all people. It sounds like a great opportunity for you to test and find out what works for your audience. Based on the literature, here’s a couple […]
Read Full Answer
Based on what we know from existing data, those renewal notices can actually be pretty effective in getting people to donate. They tap into our psychology – creating a sense of urgency, reminding us of past support, and using personalization to make the message hit home. They’re playing on our natural tendencies to feel obligated […]
Read Full Answer
Interesting question. I had a quick look at the testing done on this topic. On the positive side, in all cases, over half of donors decide to cover the fee. In some cases, it goes as high as 65%. Not a negligible percentage at all. Here’s another test from iRaiser showing consistent results (see point […]
Read Full Answer
There’s just one thing to consider when designing a supporter journey: the supporter. More specifically, you need to take into account: Who the supporter is i.e. their identity, which is the reason they support this cause, and their personality, which describes the way they “see” and process the world. These will determine the kind of […]
Read Full Answer
I’m not an expert in this but a quick search surfaced this article on the effect of tax reforms on 2019’s charitable giving. The researchers didn’t find a reduction. Actually, they observed an “increase in charitable contributions in 2019, even with the lower tax rates and the dramatically smaller number of taxpayers who itemize their […]
Read Full Answer
Wasn’t the Dean campaign to online fundraising what George McGovern was to direct mail fundraising in 1972? And Obama is to online fundraising what Dean was to online fundraising? Dean II, revenge of democracy…
Sorry, I just finished reading Joe Trippi’s “The Revolution Will Not Be Televised: Democracy, the Internet, and the Overthrow of Everything” and I’m all wound up. It’s about the internet-driven Dean campaign of 2003.
http://www.amazon.com/Revolution-Will-Not-Televised-Everything/dp/0060761555
I’d wager the book is quicker and more fun than following the current campaigns. It’s certainly a great introduction. I’m sure the Obama people read it.
Anyway, I’m right with you about the video. Excellent! And it’s worth keeping in mind that if charities aren’t using video as ‘just another communications medium’ in an ongoing dialog with supporters, then before long commercial brands will. And they aren’t in a position to use it well – they have nothing to talk about. Actors portraying CEOs will come on and read from scripts prepared by a PR firm. It won’t be authentic, earnest, relevant, or entirely truthful. It will be like TV on the internet. They’ll talk and we’ll listen. The next time we’ll switch it off and learn to avoid such things.
On the internet, charities have no choice but to lead.
They’ve done a good job of what has been called the “GPS” of our American culture. Request an action, reward that action, request another action (or perhaps the reward is getting the next action) all with a larger mission on a stated time line. By “GPS” I’m saying that all these smaller steps help us to understand how their supporters are getting to the larger goal of electing the next president.
In this video, they do a good job of providing a reward. The reward here is a pat on the back for a job well-done. And with that pat comes the next task… also part of the reward. “You’ve done a great job and we need you to do more.”
They’ve also provided emotional reasons for action with logical alibis to do so. They emotional reasons are obvious, Obama’s whole campaign is about “change.” The analytical alibi to support the emotional brain’s desire to act is shown graphically in the difference between the RNC and DNC bank accounts. Negative ads? Against a wall of money? Oh my gosh, we have to give more now!
Nicely done, Obama.
Thanks for the example. Yes, I can see my new Executive Director doing this. Will be perfect for a rebranding campaign we’ll be launching soon.
So my question is, why does this video look so technically bad? It must be intentional, what with the extremely poor lighting and fidgeting speaker. One of my interns with her camera phone could have made it look better. However, is that the point?
I think that *is* the point, Gayle. I expect the creators had to choose between having the speaker backlit, but having a background with some depth, or having him front lit, but sitting in front of a flat white wall. They chose the former. (Still, they could boost the levels to get the lighting of the speaker correct.)
But anyway, as you say, that’s not the point any more than when we hear Martin Luther King do his “I have a dream” speech and complain about the PA system.
This is meant to be quick and dirty video and it is. For more examples, check out how Avaaz is using video to allow people in need to make an ask for themselves: quick and dirty, direct to camera, one take….. video is the new telephone.
http://autoscopia.com/?p=58
Another aspect of online fundraising is the immediate feedback. When social media is incorporated, the whole tone of the donation changes.
When I followed Barack Obama on Twitter during the campaign, his profile had a tool that automatically followed you back. It’s silly, but I got excited when I saw that email in my inbox. That got me emotionally involved in the campaign.
Indeed the digital marketing is now an important piece for any fundraising event!
Love the article!