Campaign Ads To Be Ashamed Of

October 31, 2006

We're now a week away from the long-awaited mid-term elections. Conventional wisdom runs deep that the GOP will post big losses and the Dems will gain. Meanwhile, the remaing days of the campaign countdown will find millions of television -watching voters exposed every 10 or 15 minutes to a barrage of campaign spots.

The New York Times has assembled some political campaign ads it considers the “best” at what they do … which in all but one case means … trash your opponent. We're supposed to revile the target; but we can't help wonder about the character of the sponsors too.

Call us hopeless romantics at The Agitator, but we would like learn of any candidates who would actually be proud to say to their children or grandchildren, “Let me show you the campaign ad that told the people what I stood for … it got me elected.”

People bad mouth regular TV commercials, but when was the last time you saw a TV spot from Coke saying:

“Watch out for that Pepsi, we hear it's made with toxic chemicals by a company that employs slave labor from China and whose wife-beating CEO secretly channels its profits to Osama bin Laden.” That's the product equivalent of today's typical political ad. And we don't allow it in commerce, so why do we where our democracy is concerned.

In fact, there is more than ample evidence that public revulsion over these tactics may be reaching new heights (or depths) both outside and inside the Beltway. Michael Abramowitz in a piece on Karl Rove in yesterday's Washington Post notes that the GOP's loss of either the House or Senate could embolden some of the GOP establishment to seek an end to these polarizing tactics.

The Center for Responsive Politics estimates that $2.6 billion will be spent on campaigning in the 2006 cycle, easily topping the 2002 mid-term cycle's $2.2 billion. As usual, incumbents soak up the money, with Senate incumbents enjoying a 4:1 funding advantage over their rivals and House incumbents holding a 7:2 advantage.

If only the Republicans hadn't gone so over-the-top in making themselves disliked, we just might have had the opportunity to throw out ALL the incumbents on a totally evenhanded bipartisan basis!

By the way, if you haven't already overdosed on 2006 election info, you might want to check out the new 2006 US Election Guide that's been added to Google Earth. Just load Google Earth, activate this new “Layer” in the Layer menu box, and stars will appear on the map representing each congressional race. Clicking on a star opens you to a plethora of info on the candidates in that race, as well as pertinent voter registration and campaign finance info.

Posted by admin | Filed Under General Post, politics | Leave a Comment 

Into the Darkness: An Editor’s Plea

October 30, 2006

Each day five or six of us read dozens of news items, a half dozen polls and research studies and try our best to put together the 'editorial budget' for The Agitator.

Noble, sure. Effective, I'm not so sure. Why?

Each week hundreds of regular, repeat readers visit this site. You are folks who clearly want to stay abreast of what's happening. You are listening. That's nice.

But you don't talk back. This suggests a worrisome degree of lethargy and complacency that I fear reflects our trade. Please speak up. So much is at stake. Non-profits are failing. They're endangered.

And the biggest of them — the dinosaurs and woolly mammoths –don't seem to get it. Or don't respond. Apparently, they just want to go to lunch on their vendors.

What is most frightening to me is the number of over-fed, over-paid execs who run business-as-usual nonprofits who don't seem to either care or know they're presiding at the deathbed of the causes they're so highly paid to represent. Maybe it's more accurate to say their institutions are dying … the causes are likely to persist because the underlying needs and threats endure, and eventually new, more vigorous and more innovative champions will arise.

Three weeks ago we published a summary of Target Analysis Group's Quarterly National Index of fundraising. It clearly showed acquisition and retention in BIG trouble. Yet no one seems to want to listen or offer up ideas. Frankly, it's hard to believe that everyone's in denial.

Day after day we alert folks to the unfolding change that will alter the way we all do business. This is serious stuff. But, do we get questions? Pushback? Some, but not nearly enough.

What is really bugging me is my own ineffectiveness as a communicator, as a sort of Paul Revere of the revolution that is already upon us.

Help me. Help The Agitator. Help yourself. But most of all help the causes you care about. Jump into the discussion, please. The stakes are so high. Sleeping at the switch, remaining uninvolved, collecting a comfy paycheck while the Visigoths of Change are storming the walls is simply unacceptable.

May we hear from you? Please write, before it's too late.

Posted by admin | Filed Under General Post | Leave a Comment 

You Can Win $1,000, Maybe Even $100,000

October 29, 2006

No, not by completing our Staying Ahead of the Curve survey (see right column, top). For that, you simply earn our gratitude and some insight into how your peers are doing when Agitator reports the results.

For $1,000 or $100,000 in prize money, you need to win Carson Daly's (originator of MTV's “TRL” phenom) “It's Your Show TV” home-made video contest. As reported by the New York Daily News, you enter a video in one the twenty weekly challenges, like “Bald Is Beautiful,” and the winner of each challenge goes into the final, where the grand prize is $100,000 and a showcasing of your video on an NBC Special. Hurry, the contest is already underway!

Good fun. But meanwhile, where are all the nonprofit marketing sleepyheads who are failing to capture the energy of the “consumer-generated content” revolution ushered in by MySpace, Yahoo Videos, YouTube and others?

Why are there no comparable contests for best videos rallying support for action on global warming, human rights, AIDS, child welfare, clean energy, civil liberties, whatever? The surge of interest — no, not mere interest, rather participation — in online video sites underscores is that there is a volcano of creative energy boiling out there, just waiting to be tapped. You don't need a $100,000 prize to do this, just some imagination and a few fun incentives. And you might even be taught how to deliver your message more powerfully!

Instead, most nonprofit campaigners still act as though the cutting edge is asking their supporters to send a canned email to Congress, which is largely ignored.

As Daly says:

“People want to be heard. People want to be seen. They've just never had the ability until now. They can make videos. They can write blogs. Before, when they wanted to read the news, they went and got a newspaper. Now they can become the news.”

Posted by admin | Filed Under General Post, new media, online advocacy, online video | Leave a Comment 

We’re Flabbergasted

October 28, 2006

This post in Don't Tell The Donor really surprises us, since we generally find this guy quite insightful … hence his inclusion on our blogroll.

Basically the post calls “total rubbish” the following comment by a writer for a local business publication:

Today, nonprofits need to operate like a business. Budgeting funds is a must, along with executing careful and appropriate fund raising with outcome measures in place to asses its use of funds and success.

For the record, the local biz writer goes on to say (here's the full article):

Measuring outcomes is more than just good management. Having accessible outcomes data also improves the organizations’ capacity to fund raise and advocate on behalf of its mission and clients. Nonprofits need to market what they do to their community and have open books for their funders.

To which we say: Absolutely! Absolutely! Absolutely!

“Total rubbish”!?

To not understand that the fundamental demand for accountability is growing — in fact, becoming paramount — among each and every donor category is like denying gravity exists. Indeed, that's one of the key strategic conclusions of the very NYU Wagner School study on donor confidence apparently misread by Don't Tell The Donor. Here's our review of the must-read Wagner Study from awhile back, which includes a link to the full study.

If you “Don't tell the donor” how you are achieving outcomes and carefully stewarding her or his contributions you might as well kiss that donor good-bye. Whatever the role other institutions, like big business, have played in undermining public trust in general, like it or not, that diminished trust in all institutions is the reality every fundraiser and every nonprofit must confront head-on today.

Posted by admin | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, charities | Leave a Comment 

Email Heresy

October 27, 2006

Recently we Email Heresy and Email Heresy - The Sequel — is that e-advocacy doesn't cut it. Congress doesn't pay attention to this noise. And so the perpetrators of these campaigns are fooling their naive e-warriors … indeed, helping citizens assuage their outrage with impotent action).

From his perspective, when the e-campaign vendors argue over who has the best mousetrap, it's “a little like debating whether or not to use Little Mermaid or Mickey Mouse-themed Band-Aids on a patient with broken bones and severed limbs.” In Gavin's view, the real issue is that “the public's voice” is broken, and we don't know how to restore its efficacy.

A provocative view. What do you think?

Posted by admin | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, online advocacy, politics | Leave a Comment 

Give Vilfredo Pareto More Respect

October 26, 2006

In 1906 Vilfredo Pareto made the observation that 80% of the property in Italy was owned by 20% of the population. With further embellishment, this morphed into the Pareto Principle, or 80/20 rule, which posits that for many phenomena, 80% of the consequences stem from 20% of the causes.

It's also called the law of the vital few, which perhaps makes its relevance to marketing and fundraising more readily apparent.

Major gift fundraisers, with their donor pyramids, apply the principle everyday. They routinely apply the most and best cultivation resources against the top layers of the pyramid. And they produce nifty Powerpoint slides using an inverted revenue pyramid next to the donor pyramid to illustrate that the few give by far the most. If you've ever been to a nonprofit board meeting, you've seen that slide!

What's not as obvious, or at least not as aggressively acted upon by most nonprofit marketers, is the application of the law of the vital few to rank and file donors and members … the ones you direct market to.

Sure, most direct mail (and now, online) fundraising programs make a nod toward some rudimentary segmentation of the house file on the basis of giving history, usually to drive a “high dollar” track for their special appeals solicitations. For most orgs, this probably amounts to sending a slightly more “upscale looking” package to folks whose last previous gift was, say, $100 or more.

We suppose that's better than no segmentation at all. But not much. Pareto deserves more respect.

Today's database tools, coupled with the ability to customize appeals (especially online appeals) far more cost-efficiently, enable nonprofit marketers to optimize their donor bases to a much greater degree, generating more funds and less cost per dollar raised.

Here are some steps and issues to consider …

Continue reading “Give Vilfredo Pareto More Respect”

Posted by admin | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, donor retention, fundraising | Leave a Comment 

Two (Make That Three) Things That Kill Marketing Creativity

October 26, 2006

Marketing creativity is a favorite theme of Seth Godin's, and his comments here nail it.

Still, to his two creativity killers, I'd add a third: Fearful, unimaginative bosses.

Posted by admin | Filed Under General Post, Seth Godin | Leave a Comment 

Madonna Deserves A Raise

October 25, 2006

Madonna is being villified for seeking to adopt an orphaned Malawi child. Here, from the Chicago Tribune, is a typical article, which disparagingly concludes:

“When the public tires of Madonna's latest exploit and the media moves on to something else, little will have changed for Malawi and the million orphans she left behind.”

To which I say, elephant poop!

It seems to me that the operative words in the Tribune reporter's conclusion are these: “When the public tires …” and “the media move on.” Isn't it rather disingenuous to somehow blame on Madonna the fact that the public and the media have the attention span of a gnat? If the U.S. media addressed the issues of human suffering in poor countries as rabidly as they cover homicides in America, maybe they'd inspire some real consciousness, interest in relevant public policies, and individual generosity.

Consider for a moment some of the reasons someone might decide NOT to give a damn about human misery in Africa:

    • Duh, Malawi … is that outside of Cleveland?
    • My puny contribution can't possibly make a difference given the magnitude of the problems.
    • Money has been “thrown” at Africa for decades, and the problems persist … they must be insoluble.
    • Governments in Africa are corrupt, violence prone and incompetent, they stand in the way of solutions, so why waste my money?
    • We have enough problems to tackle in our own backyard.

Given the prevalence of notions like these, it's astonishing that anyone gives a hoot or contributes anything to trying to improve the human condition in Africa.

So along comes Madonna. She decides to adopt one child. That's already more than what 99.9% of us are doing. Would we feel better if she anonymously sent $30 a month to Save The Children? My daughter Claire does that, and I think it's great. But I'm not displeased that Madonna can and does do more, and, of course, does it more visibly.

And, oh, by the way, she's also founded and committed to raising millions of dollars for the Raising Malawi charity to help Malawi's orphans.

Like she needs to do this to advance her career. Give me a break!

If it takes Madonna baring her breasts in Trafalgar Square to bring attention to the plight of millions of suffering human beings, then I'm all for it.

Commenting on what she calls “the Bono effect,” Heather Paul, CEO of Children's Villages-USA, which provides care for thousands of orphaned children in Malawi, says:

“We don't know what [their] intentions are, but we know that the orphans are in need. If through their actions they give us all cause to pause to see what each of us is doing to make the world a better place, if that thinking becomes a trend, that is wonderful.”

Absolutely.

Madonna, as far as I'm concerned, your concern and involvement is every bit as welcome as that of Claire Belford, Heather Paul, Bill Gates and, yes, Brad and Angelina. In fact, you deserve a raise.

I just hope that the knowledgable practitioners in the field, whether locals or outsiders, don't squander the precious visibility you bring to their cause.

Posted by admin | Filed Under You Deserve a Raise, celebrities | Leave a Comment 

Pass The Dopamine, Please

October 24, 2006

In an article titled “The Joy of Giving,” The Economist reports on brain research that seeks to explain the mental processes involved in making donations.

Researchers at the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke used a standard technique called functional magnetic resonance imaging to map the brain activity that occurred when test subjects were asked to consider making contributions to controversial charities. The test causes included support for abortion, euthanasia and sex equality, and opposition to the death penalty, nuclear power and war.

In layperson terms …

When an individual donates, what is activated is the brain's reward center … the area responsible for doling out the dopamine-mediated euphoria associated with sex, money, food and drugs. Hence the “warm glow” of giving!

But there's more. Donating also engages the part of the brain that plays a role in the bonding behavior between mother and child, and in romantic love. The chemical agent here is oxytocin, a hormone that increases trust and cooperation. However, when test subjects oppose an issue, a different area is activated … an area thought responsible for punishment.

And yet a third area is activated when subjects must to make tradeoffs between self-interest and moral beliefs. A good friend and fellow student of brain research, Rob Smith, suggests that this last area, recently evolved and thought to be unique to humans, is the locus of what Abraham Lincoln called “the better angels of our nature.”

Lesson for fundraisers: include a dose of dopamine with your fundraising letters and proposals, with instructions: Take Before Reading!

For serious students, a reprint of the full study can be purchased for $10 from the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Posted by admin | Filed Under Hot Research, research | Leave a Comment 

The Philanthropy 400

October 23, 2006

The Chronicle of Philanthropy has released its annual Philanthropy 400 survey.

Get your hands on the full report. But here, from the publicly released summary, are some highlights that impressed The Agitator:

    • Donations to the largest 400 charities grew by 13% in 2005, to $62.7 billion (the second year of double digit growth … 2004 giving rose 11.6%). Excluding $2.6 billion these charities received for the Katrina and tsunami disasters, growth still reached 8.3%.
    • These top 400 charities accounted for more than $1 out of every $4 raised by charities last year.
    • Charities needed to raise at least $37.7 million to make the top 400 list.
    • Donor-advised funds are proliferating, with 89 of the top 400 offering this option.
    • The biggest “loser” category, down 10.6% in otherwise rosy results, was the Arts & Culture category, which includes libraries, museums and public broadcasting.
    • On the upswing was the Environment & Animal Welfare category, up 16% in 2005 and reversing a downturn of 2.8% in 2004 (attributed to concern over global warming and animal rescue donations after Katrina).
    • But community foundations saw the biggest rise — 41.6% for the year.

A couple of interesting fundraising initiatives caught our eye as having lessons for other causes and charities:

    • St. Jude's Children's Research Hospital raised $3 million in a two day, 20 station Spanish radio campaign, demonstrating the strong giving potential of Latino donors.
    • Boys & Girls Clubs of America generated $40.8 million in new contributions in 2005, after investing $3.5 million in training 368 of its local clubs to conduct face-to-face solicitations with potential donors.

Posted by admin | Filed Under General Post, charities, fundraising, philanthropy | Leave a Comment 

Next Page »