Posts tagged ‘video’

November 6, 2015

Is a Zombie Video Good for Charity?

Halloween has passed, but zombies are still with us!

While checking my email Inbox recently, one subject line in particular caught my eye:

Zombie overpopulation video for Halloween by Population Matters.”

Halloween season or not, I like zombie films and television shows. For example, my favorite TV show of the moment is iZombie. If you haven’t seen iZombie, don’t judge me; instead, checkout an episode. Then, thank me.

Anyway, I quickly opened the email from a fundraising professional who I respect greatly. Her message piqued my interest even more:

I can’t believe that any communications or development department ok’d this! Horrible.”

Normally, “horrible” might be a good word to describe a zombie video, but that clearly was not the case in this situation. My fellow fundraiser believes that the video is problematic for the charity even if, on a superficial level, it might be mildly entertaining. So, doubly intrigued, I clicked on the link to the video by the UK charity Population Matters. You can watch it here:

On a superficial level, I kind of like the video. It isn’t great, but it is a bit fun while raising awareness about an important issue. I also acknowledge a few key points:

1.  The video is a British production for primarily (though not exclusively) a British audience. The British sense of humor and use of humor is very different from the American. What works in one country might not be appropriate in the other.

2.  Adults are not the primary target audience. The organization says “young people” are. I can understand how a zombie-themed video could capture the attention of the intended target audience.

3.  The video is bound to attract plenty of eyeballs that will achieve the objective of creating awareness for the issue of over population.

It was not until I thought about the video more deeply, viewed it again, and discussed it with colleagues that I began to see the problems with it.

Racism. At worst, the video is seen by some as racist. At best, it’s considered racially insensitive. The problem is that when mentioning the explosive population growth, only children of color are shown. No white babies or children are shown to illustrate the growth in population. Here’s what one colleague at an international social-service agency had to say about the video:

From our perspective, when people talk about overpopulation, they are often referring to black/brown folks in the global south and Africa. There can be a strong undercurrent of racism there, so connecting ‘too many black and brown people’ with zombies has an extremely negative connotation. In the human rights world, this kind of video is considered to be pretty racist. It got a uniformly negative response from the folks here in our office. So, even if millennials would like it, it’s very much out of step with the way family planning/population issues are framed in the human rights world, and makes it harder for groups like ours to even approach the overpopulation issue without being called racist.”

Overwhelming Use of Statistics. The video provided a number of interesting statistics. The trouble is, the use of statistics was overwhelming and abstract. As a result, even after watching the video three times, I cannot remember a single statistic cited. I suspect casual viewers will experience the same thing.

No Emotional Pull. While the video is somewhat fun, it lacks emotional pull. Greg Warner, of MarketSmart, pointed that out to me along with the next two points.

So What? This is one of my favorite questions when evaluating something. As Greg told me, “There’s nothing to answer the question any individual would ask while viewing it: ‘What’s in it for me?’” Yes, the video attempts to point out how the world and our species would be better off by reducing population growth. However, those “benefits” are abstract, particularly to young people who have some sense of immortality and narcissism.

Weak Call to Action. There are two calls to action in the video. Neither is compelling. First, viewers are encouraged to have smaller families. This is not immediately relevant to the target audience of teenagers. The second call to action is to go to the organization’s website for more information. As Greg mentioned to me, “[The call to action] is not all that exciting.”

Given my own thoughts about the video and the comments I received, I had questions about the production. So, I emailed Population Matters. I received a quick response from Simon Ross, the organization’s Chief Executive:

read more »

May 20, 2015

Special Report: Watch This Fun Video about Monthly Giving

[Publisher’s Note: “Special Reports” are posted from time-to-time as a benefit for subscribers and frequent visitors to this blog. “Special Reports” are not widely promoted. To be notified of all new posts, including “Special Reports,” please take a moment to subscribe in the right-hand column.]

 

Experts have been telling nonprofit organizations for decades to start a monthly giving program.

Have you listened? Does your nonprofit organization have a monthly giving program?

If you do run a monthly giving program, great! Please share a comment below about the effectiveness of your program or what advice you have for others.

If your organization does not have a monthly giving program, why not? Please use the comment section below to let me know.

The first time I recommended monthly giving programs was way back in 1989. In an article I wrote for The Donor Developer newsletter, I even predicted that virtually all charities would have a monthly giving program within five years. Well, I couldn’t have been more wrong. I shouldn’t have been wrong, but I was. Now, 26 years later, I’m still amazed at how many organizations have failed to adopt a monthly giving program.

As it turns out, I’m not alone in my frustration. A number of other fundraising experts share my consternation:

Recently, the team at Sumac, the nonprofit software company, invited the four us to share our thoughts about monthly giving in a special video. In this two-minute, light-hearted presentation, we come clean about how we feel when you ignore our advice to start a monthly giving program. We also tell you, one more time, why you must start one today. Watch it now:

read more »

May 9, 2015

If You Want $1 Million, Be Creative

A wise person once said, “It’s not just what you say, but how you say it.”

Another wise person once stated, “A picture is worth a thousand words.”

Creatively taking these two aphorisms together can lead to great fundraising success. Consider what happened when the City of Philadelphia competed for a $1 million grant in the Bloomberg Philanthropies’ Mayors Challenge:

Mayors Challenge InfographicGood Company Ventures, the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania, and the Philadelphia Department of Commerce collaborated on a grant application for their Philadelphia Social Enterprise Partnership.

With over 300 cities from 45 states competing, the Philadelphia collaborative knew it needed to do something to standout. The Philadelphia team prepared the required written proposal, which came in at 30 pages of dense content.

Then, they contracted with David Gloss and his team at Here’s My Chance, a Philadelphia-based creative agency that works with nonprofit organizations. HMC was tasked with helping Philadelphia’s proposal submission standout from the crowd.

Gloss went to work and produced an infographic that would accomplish two things: 1) Distinguish the Philadelphia proposal from the others. 2) Provide an easy to understand summary of the 30-page proposal.

With an energetic, clean infographic branded in Philadelphia’s colors and a detailed written proposal, the Philadelphia team earned a spot as one of the Top 20 finalists. In the next round of the competition, finalists were asked to submit a short video describing their proposed program and the impact it would have.

Once again, HMC went to work. Here is how HMC describes what happened next:

Being a Top 20 finalist is pretty sweet…but winning is even sweeter. For the next round, all finalists created videos, and we knew ours had to be the Beyoncé of all entrants: bold, professional, and flawless. To allow for more freedom and flexibility for that, we decided to produce an animated video. Then, we booked the talent. Not only did Mayor Michael Nutter provide a voice over for the video, but he appeared in it as well.”

At the end of the long competition, Bloomberg Philanthropies named Philadelphia as one of the five winners, awarding the city $1 million! By the way, Philadelphia was the only winner to have submitted an animated, rather than live-action, video.

So, what can we learn from this?

read more »

May 6, 2011

3 Elements of a Successful Planned Gift Marketing Effort

Not long ago, I was asked to cite my three “best” tips for any planned giving program. It wasn’t easy for me to limit myself to just three. But, I had to be brief. I was being interviewed by Jan Uekermann, a fundraising professional from Germany, during the Association of Fundraising Professionals International Conference in March.

Jan Uekermann

Uekermann was putting together a Fundraising Podcast series from the Conference which he has now posted on YouTube.

Regardless of what country you are in or the level of sophistication of your planned giving efforts, these are the three universal elements that I believe are essential to any successful planned gift marketing effort:

1.  Be Donor-Centered

Donors are not dependent on us. We are dependent on our donors. If a donor is unhappy with us, she can seek out another organization to fulfill her philanthropic aspirations. If we want a prospective donor to give his money to our organization, we better make certain to focus on his needs and wants. Our job as development professionals is to build relationships so we can appropriately match a prospective donor’s philanthropic interests with an organizational need.

Let me share with you a story which I included in my book, Donor-Centered Planned Gift Marketing, that illustrates how things can go horribly wrong if you’re not deeply committed to being donor-centered:

“An elderly woman in Philadelphia contributed a $25,000 charitable gift annuity to a well-known hospital in New York City. In addition to sending an acknowledgment letter, the development officer contacted the donor by telephone to thank her for her generous gift and to arrange a meeting when he was due to be in Philadelphia. So far in this story, the development officer has behaved in a donor-centered way. He has personally thanked the donor, learned a bit about why she made the gift, and has arranged to meet with the donor to learn more about her and her philanthropic interests. To recognize her generous support, the development officer invited the donor to lunch which she accepted. When they got together, the development officer picked up the donor at her home and drove her to the Four Seasons Hotel for lunch in the very lavish Fountain Room. The donor was appalled. She refused to be seated and told the development officer that lunch in the more casual, and less expensive, Swan Lounge would be more appropriate.

“When relating the story to a friend, the donor expressed her outrage that the hospital would waste her money by taking her out to such a fancy restaurant. She even thought the more informal Swan Lounge was too much. When asked if she would be making another gift to the hospital, she said, ‘Absolutely not! They waste too much money.’

“While lunch at an exclusive restaurant might be something that donors in New York might appreciate, this frugal Philadelphian most certainly did not. Unfortunately, the development officer, while trying to do the right thing, made a simple mistake. He assumed something about the donor that he did not know. A more donor-centered approach would have been for the development officer to simply have asked the following in the initial telephone contact, ‘I’ll be in Philadelphia next Wednesday and would love to talk with you more over lunch. Would you be available? … Great! Where would you like to go?’ With that one simple question, the development officer would have remained donor centered, would have enhanced the relationship, and would likely have secured another gift. Sometimes donor-centered marketing really is that easy.”

read more »

%d bloggers like this: