Idol Gives Back … And It Ain’t Cheese!

April 30, 2007

Back in March we defended American Idol, the “cheesy” (many say) pop talent show, for tackling extreme poverty. Philanthropy purists and cultural highbrows sniffed at the notion that a crass entertainment program and its grubby corporate sponsors might aspire to do good.

Today we're back to give a standing ovation for their tremendously successful program last week, Idol Gives Back.

$60,000,000 and counting ain't cheesy!

And there's more to come …

  • Donations are still being solicited on American Idol's homepage, more names and addresses are being captured for future fundraising;
  • Additional donations, not yet reported, are flowing directly by the charities featured in the program;
  • ONE: The Campaign to Make Poverty History picked up 70,000 supporters in response to Bono's appeal on the show;
  • Given that American Idol is syndicated worldwide, with a bit of editing its message can inspire international audiences to fight poverty elsewhere in the world;
  • And there's the small matter of sensitizing 26 million viewers to global poverty.

Not bad. But don't rely on our opinion.

Just ask these charities, all benefitting from Idol's ability to deliver an anti-poverty message to over 26 million viewers for two hours …

  • Save the Children
  • America's Second Harvest
  • Boy's & Girl's Clubs of America
  • Children's Health Fund
  • Global Fund to Fight AIDS, TB and Malaria
  • Malaria No More
  • Nothing But Nets
  • U.S. Fund for UNICEF

From a purely fundraising standpoint, could the show have been executed for even greater response and impact? Possibly. Many more viewers “voted” than actually contributed.

But we'll say it again, $60,000,000 and counting ain't cheese!

Well done American Idol.

Roger & Tom

Posted by admin | Filed Under Don't Miss these Posts, cause marketing, communications, fundraising | Leave a Comment 

Online Social Networking — Getting Serious

April 27, 2007

Many nonprofit fundraisers and communicators are getting deeper into exploring the potential of online social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook. Here are two timely studies that look more closely at visitors/users of these sites and their potential value. Serious online marketers should take a look.

Forrester Research has developed a typology for characterizing participation in online social networking activities, called the “ladder of participation.” Here's a peak (the full study is available for purchase):

(For a higher resolution version of this diagram, click here.) Note of course that 52% of American online consumers (”Inactives”) have not participated yet in the social networking phenomenon at all. Still, there's no question that the buzz about sites like these is justified. Even the sites that originally attracted the under-30 crowd have been creeping steadily up the age scale. That means more and more nonprofit donors are getting familiar with and using the sites.

And what is the value of all this online social networking?

A new study called “Never-Ending Friending” by Fox-owned MySpace and agency Carat USA attempts to answer that question in greater depth, going beyond the basic reach and visitor stats. This impressive research looked at nearly 3,000 US internet users, as well as data from clients who have used MySpace for marketing campaigns.

What this study is trying to get at is the value of, for example, an Adidas online evangelist adorning his MySpace home page with Adidas-branded wallpaper. Do his friends take note? Are they impressed? How valuable is this to Adidas? How do they factor this into their ROI in assessing the campaign.

The researchers point to a “Momentum Effect” where these cumulative qualitative impacts take on greater value than a mere eyeball count would suggest. One strategist suggests that 70% of the value of a campaign originating on a social networking site might be attributable to the Momentum Effect.

More than 40% of social networkers say they use the sites to learn more about brands and products, and 28% say that a friend has recommended a brand or product to them through such a site. Most social networkers use the sites to connect with family and existing friends as opposed to meeting new people. Hence, perhaps, the special referral influence of these sites.

All of this is relevant to nonprofit marketers as you assess whether the time (and audience) is right for your organization to step up its own presence in the social networking arena.

Roger & Tom

Posted by admin | Filed Under Hot Research, online advocacy, online fundraising, social networking | Leave a Comment 

Grenade Throwers Unite!

April 26, 2007

I see that Nick Allen of Donordigital has merged with David Fenton of Fenton Communications. These guys “get” the necessity and efficacy of integrating online and offline advocacy and fundraising strategies.

Nick has always been a new media pioneer.

I met him in the early 80's when he was trying to do something I was beating my brains out to get advocacy clients to try … using video to raise money for causes! Nick was doing it to end US wars in Central America. In those days, quaint rules like the Fairness Doctrine actually worked perversely to make it virtually impossible even to buy your way onto the airwaves with a controversial message. Cable TV, and specifically Ted Turner, was just beginning to offer an alternative to broadcasters for issue advocates.

But what we really needed was an Internet! And more clients with Nick's curiosity and enthusiasm for trying something new.

David organized for me the launching press conference for Turner's Better World Society in 1985. I still remember his courageous attempt to “coach” Ted! He's ably represented scores of hugely important and successful causes over the past 25 years.

I can't think of two smarter, more imaginative guys to entrust the marketing of a cause to. And now that they're on the same team (again) blending their talents, even better.

Tom

P.S. Both of them are peace-loving guys … not sure how they'll feel about my calling them grenade throwers.

Posted by admin | Filed Under General Post, communications, online advocacy, online fundraising | Leave a Comment 

How NOT to Be Relevant

April 25, 2007

Minutes, hours passed. Finally, damn near a day after the tragedy of Virginia Tech's massacre, the Brady Campaign, the voice of America's hand gun control movement, at last weighed in.

All of which raises questions:

  • Do they get it?
  • Why so late?

We can only imagine the internal debate.

  • Will we be seen as “opportunists” if we come out too early?
  • Do we really have anything to say?
  • What have we done in Virginia?

Well, the Brady Campaign has done a lot. The probem is, they've not involved the world on this, quickly and in real time.

They should be fired.

Posted by admin | Filed Under You Oughta Be Fired, nonprofit management | Leave a Comment 

Offer Expires April 25

April 24, 2007

Attention nonprofit marketers! Still looking for your viral marketing home run?

Marketing Sherpa offers a great report on online viral marketing, based on a survey of nearly 3,000 marketers.

You'll see what tactics your commercial brethren have found most effective, what they pay for “cool microsites” … the #1 tactic (electronic postcards are so yesterday!), how they try to jumpstart viral campaigns, metrics for success and how often they succeed, and more.

Definitely worth a look. Here's a chart showing which tactics get “Great Results.”

BUT, the study is only viewable for free 'til April 25.

Roger & Tom

Posted by admin | Filed Under Hot Research, direct marketing, online activism, online fundraising | Leave a Comment 

Learning From Competitors

April 23, 2007

Competitors?!

That's a nasty word in nonprofitland. We're all one big happy family, aren't we?

Our boards want us to cooperate with other groups in our field. Our major donors urge us to collaborate, even while investing in us as “the best.” By nature we tend to be huggers and team players.

But it's a jungle out there.

Competitors poach our contributors, win our grants, get better media coverage, throw flashier events, copy our best ideas and innovations, deride our mishaps, confuse policymakers with alternative strategies and proposals, disorient our coalitions, and have cooler online bells & whistles.

Although it's impolitic to crush your competitors in nonprofitland, you can at least learn from them!

Here's how, courtesy of Heidi Cohen, marketing consultant and NYU prof.

Start by identifying your competitive set (don't be too restrictive); gather competitive insights about their strategies, target audiences, offerings, website, media coverage, etc.; use competitive analysis tools like gap analysis (where/how are they better, and how can you close/negate the gap?) and SWOT analysis (strengths-weaknesses-opportunities-threats).

Put this all together and soon you'll understand how to crush, excuse me, play nice with your competitors.

Tom

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

Direct Mail Fundraising As It Should Be

April 20, 2007

Here's how a 73-year-old nonprofit brand, Easter Seals, keeps itself fresh and successful in the mail …

Testing, testing, and more testing.

This review from Inside Direct Mail of the current control package used by Easter Seals for prospecting describes the careful testing that yields an acquisition package delivering 3.8% response.

Are you testing enough?

Chris Cleghorn at Easter Seals is. And for this, he deserves a raise!

Roger & Tom

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

We’re Watching You

April 19, 2007

Nonprofit fundraisers seeking to raise money online will need to master a blossoming art called “behavioral targeting” (BT).

In a nutshell BT involves tracking netizens as they browse the web (that's their online “behavior”), using the electronic cookies they accumulate in that process. This information is combined with aggregate demographic information about the sites visited. The result is that an online marketer can then target relevant online messages/ads to precisely the folks the data suggests are their prime prospects.

As online fundraisers venture into online prospecting, as opposed to online donor development, sooner (we hope) or later you will need to experiment with targeting strategies like this.

Here are some articles that explain and illustrate the BT process:

What Obama and Clinton Fans View Online … this article illustrates how an analyst can come to the conclusion that Clinton fans dig horror flicks and are in the market for full size vans and Miami vacations. While Obama fans love indie films, luxury vehicles, and are addicted to their Blackberrys. How? By tracking the other websites visited by individuals who first visit those campaign websites.

The Three Ws … this interview explains how different online targeting methodologies can be used together to reach prospects based upon WHO they are, WHAT they like, and WHERE they are. If you're targeting female prospects online, is it good enough to simply stick an ad on iVillage? With BT, not anymore.

Hello, My Name Is Gord, and I've Been Behaviorally Targeted … this amusing piece gives another simple illustration of the BT process. Gord tells how, after a couple of weeks of hopscotching around the Web researching travel arrangements for a trip to China, he visited a totally unrelated site on a completely different matter and was served up an ad for a hotel deal for precisely the location he was interested in. NOT a coincidence! Gord, himself an online marketer, was a bit rattled to see the tables turned. He wonders whether he and others will resort to wrapping their computers in tinfoil!

This previous Agitator post, Wanna Make Millions $$$?, also urges nonprofit fundraisers to look into BT and links to another article describing the process.

Is anyone out there in nonprofitland experimenting with BT? If so, The Agitator would like to hear. Because you deserve a raise!

Tom

Posted by admin | Filed Under You Deserve a Raise, direct marketing, online fundraising | Leave a Comment 

Online Fundraising Ain’t A World Apart

April 18, 2007

There's a lot of buzz already about the online fundraising success of the presidential contenders, with Obama, Clinton, Edwards and Romney leading the pack so far.

The buzz treats “online fundraising” as something independent of and a world apart from “traditional” fundraising. But that ain't true.

I've launched the small gift fundraising programs for a host of advocacy
groups from Amnesty and Greenpeace, NARAL, NOW, you name it. I've also
been involved in lots and lots of political campaigns … the McGovern campaign in 1972, Udall ('76), Kennedy and Anderson ('80) and 40 or so other candidates and causes, plus building and selling (before the bubble) a sizeable new media company.

Based on these 35 years of raising money I want to modestly offer some perspective.

The online world is NOT independent of the paper/direct mail and telemarketing worlds. They operate best when used together.

There is a myth that somehow the online world is cleaner, better, cheaper,
whatever than the other, earlier, realms.

The powerful (I believe MOST powerful) trait of the internet is that it provides the “when” dimension. In postal, tv, telemarketing channels it is possible to target the “who” (folks most likely to give), the “what” (the offer and the amount), but not the “when”. The internet provides folks the vehicle for giving WHEN they want to give or otherwise become involved.

*Believe me, any consultant worth her/his salt knows this and will properly take advantage of it. That's why every well-prepared direct mail piece, telemarketing script, tv spot, or event presentation should urge potential or repeat donors to go online and make her/his contribution — right now.

“Frankly, Ms. Donor, we don't have a moment to lose. Rather than writing a check and waiting for it to arrive at Campaign Headquarters, we can have the money tonight if your will simply go online and contribute right now. And, by doing this you also save us lots of postage and processing money — money that can be put to work immediately in the campaign.”

*In reality, there is no competition or verifiable cost savings between
the new media and the old media if used in tandem and in an integrated manner. Fundraisers succeed best by using ALL CHANNELS.

In addition to the speed in collecting funds, the reality of online fundraising is that, in the U.S., it can only be done through the use of credit cards. And, for nearly 30 years we've seen that when someone uses a credit card the average gift is almost always higher.

Because of the WHEN FACTOR, the internet is the candidate and consultant's
best friend. Breaking event> News conference> Increased website traffic> Increased contributions. Ink doesn't have to dry. Postal Service carriers don't have to deliver the mail two weeks after the event.

Make no mistake. Partly because older folks are now more comfortable with
transactions on the internet, online fundraising is already powerful and it's growing rapidly.

But it ain't a world unto itself. Not some pristine realm free of greedy direct mail and telemarketing consultants. But a world that helps bring greater productivity and ROI to those who know how to incorporate it with the other, proven and predictable channels.

Roger

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

A Nation Of Public Affairs Dummies?

April 17, 2007

Pew Research Center wouldn't put it so harshly. But the verdict appears to be YES!

Nonprofit fundraisers and communicators be aware of these findings as you craft cause-oriented appeals and messages. Don't aim too high!

Pew has just released a study indicating that most Americans cannot pass a basic test of our knowledge of public affairs.

Twenty-three questions were asked, ranging from “who's the VP?” (69% got it right) to “which party controls the House” (76% got it right) to “how many troops does President Bush want to add in Iraq” (61% correct) to “have both houses passed a minimum wage hike?” (24% correct).

Only eight people in an entire 1502 person sample got all 23 answers correct! The average number of correct answers was 12. Using 60% correct as the pass/fail mark, fully half failed.

Where do the best informed folks go most for their news? Fake news programs like Jon Stewart's “The Daily Show” and The Colbert Report”! Those who know the least watch things like network news.

And they say we get the leaders we deserve!

If you're a glutton for punishment, you can take an abbreviated version of the test Pew has posted online. Good luck!

Roger & Tom

P.S. Non-US readers, we can hear you chortling!

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

Next Page »