More Caution Re Online Social Nets
Yesterday I suggested that fundraisers not go overboard with the resources you devote at this stage to social networking sites like MySpace, Facebook and LinkedIn.
Here is some more caution.
As reported by Mediapost, a recent study by market research firm IDG found that members of social networks tended to click on ads less than US internet users overall — nearly 80% of all US web users clicked on at least one ad in the past year, compared to only 57% of online social network users. Social net users also made half as many online purchases.
Said IDG: "The fact that people use social networking services for communications puts them in a mindset that is less receptive to advertising than when they are using other websites like Yahoo or Google." Nor do social net users want marketers to use them as conduits to deliver ads. Only 3% would allow publishers to use contact information (i.e., friends) for advertising.
A NY Times article (Dec 14) cited the IDG study while reporting on unsuccessful efforts by Proctor & Gamble to exploit social net sites and on "high traffic, low revenue" associated with leading social net sites. Observed reporter Randall Stross: "When advertisers invite members to come to pages dedicated to their products, they can attract visitors only by investing in expensive creative material or old-fashioned promotions like prize contests."
And from another social marketing maven, Chad Ciesel of WhittmanHart Interactive: "Every marketer should strive for viral and social distribution of content, yet very few create anything that people want to engage with, let alone share with their friends."
If you’re thinking about using social net sites for fundraising, you might want to check out these sources first. Then ask: What do I have that my donors will enthusiastically share?
Tom
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