Two Views Of Social Media
This post might separate The Agitator’s ‘communicators’ from the ‘fundraisers’!
Here’s how Jeff Brooks at Future Fundraising Now views social media — basically, as the enemy of fundraising!
Here’s how Beth Kanter at Beth’s Blog views social media. She’s more interested in ‘change’ than fundraising.
Which ‘school’ do you belong to?
Or are you a marketer? In which case you should both pin Jeff’s infographic to your bulletin board AND read Social Media for Nonprofits: A Field Guide!
Tom
8 responses to “Two Views Of Social Media”
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
Ahhh Jeff…..you make my heart sing.
Jeff’s point is interesting, but more points out the lack of a professional outlook on the space and inexperience. I happened to be flipping channels a few nights ago and came across an old Seinfeld episode where Elaine had just giving Jerry her email address. His response ‘Email, what the hell is email, what am I suppose to do with that’?
Fast forward about 12 years – what would you do without email? We are only a few years into social and the communication channel is still being developed. It may be less fundraising and more information sharing….but then, I think if you talk to the Planned Parenthood peeps – they may just look you in the eye and call you crazy. Their social network seemed to raise plenty of money when the network was most needed…..
Ha! The two schools argument.
I’m in favour of whichever tools, channels and messages generate funds effectively.
There’s no reason why social media channels should by default fall outside of those available to fundraisers. Equally there’s no reason why anyone should use social media channels to the exclusion of others.
But I must admit, I’m itching to share that infographic on Pinterest, so you can probably guess which side of the argument I’d jump if pushed 🙂
I think Jeff’s point is that social media is not the Holy Grail of fundraising. It’s not going to raise money if the fundamentals aren’t there. And right now, it’s not likely to raise any money at all. (Those few who do are rare).
When the fundamentals are there, using SM to strengthen relationships with current supporters, or to begin the process of engaging new ones makes sense to me. But it’s not free, and it will take time and effort – so if the fundraising efforts that actually raise funds are put aside in favor of SM, you will most likely be in trouble.
It’s not an either/or, it is a question of priorities and focus.
I probably tend to agree with Jeff a bit more. Though, even I find that surprising as I am a fundraiser under the age of 25 so it seems like I should be on that band wagon.
I think what I find frustrating about social media is that its purpose in the context of a nonproft is misunderstood. Many organizations that I’ve worked with believe it’s purpose is for low-cost fundraising when in fact it should serve as a supporting player in your fundraising efforts. After all, you should never place all your eggs in a new basket.
Also agree with Mary’s point that social media is a relationship strengthener. In the case of getting the word out about what your organization is doing, sometimes you need to meet the audience where they are.
In a partnership with one of our major corporate supporters we raised almost $100,000 in less than a week with a facebook app that spread like wildfire. The donor was the corporate partner, who got about 600,000 new “likes” – a marketing bargain in their view.
We are a hospital foundation, not an advocacy group.
The effort was reinforced by an associated product and other, multi-channel marketing, which brought the fundraising total to well over a quarter million dollars. It was a coordinated, synchronized effort in which social media played an integral fundraising (yes, fundraising!) role. Our corporate partner won several accolades and awards for its marketing savvy and fundraising success with us as its charity partner.
I feel extremely lucky that we were able to be a part of one of the most successful social media fundraising efforts I’ve heard of. This was in 2010.
Suffice it to say, I think Jeff’s diagram is a little short-sighted. With the right kind of partnership and marketing savvy, social media audiences can be moved en-mass with a speed untouchable by most other forms of communication. And with the right supporting strategy it can actually translate into significant charitable fundraising. However, I’m the first admit – it’s easier said than done!
Social media is communication.
Direct marketing is communication.
A planned giving seminar is communication.
A charity newsletter is communication.
The video played at a gala is communication.
A grant application is communication.
A donor meeting is communication.
A phone call to say thank you is communication.
Good fundraising is good communication.
I think if we communicate better (no matter which tool or media we choose), then we’ll fundraise better. Plus, as with every fundraising stream we work in, good strategy and coordination lead to success.
Very apt contrasts! Social media is a vehicle for awareness for fundraising, not the way of fundraising. Jeff provides a drastic view on the misuse of social media. Social media is a means to the end and should be part of the overall strategy to building and enhancing fundraising. One of my recent blog posts highlights a broader tension between marketing and fundraising-would love your thoughts! http://researchsense.wordpress.com/2012/03/05/marketing-and-fundraising-playing-in-the-same-sandbox-the-time-is-now/
Interesting…and some what disappointing. Any organization (or consultant) who sees social media as an “enemy of fundraising” is more stronlgy rooted in the past than in evolving, embracing marketing change and meeting consumers where they are. While I think we all have to be aware of the challenges associated with all the digital marketing opportunities that are available, as an industry we have to embrace them. I often think of it from the perspective of “Go willingly or be dragged…by your own customers”.