Tell me a story, about strategy

Michael - thank you, firstly, for answering back!! You make my day and have deservedly distracted me from work matters!

I agree, I think! Sure, email may not be the done thing in 5 years let alone 20 years. In fact, a recent opinion poll in Denmark already puts snail mail ahead of email in the popularity stakes. And a blog I have just been reading said email has already become like junk mail with all the good stuff buried under a tonne of rubbish.

It's definitely not about flogging any one channel until it dies or until another becomes a refreshing surprise! It's about appropriateness which I think is what you are saying. And that's not a one strike game - it has to be appropriate in terms of timing, message / format, and especially audience. Maybe you're right that the MySpace people will be lapping up charity print mail some day in the future because it's far less exhausting to 'participate' in and it's technically undemanding! Phew, they'll say, give my fingers a rest for a change.

But today, charities aren't even exploiting email effectively let alone abusing it. Virtual Promise 2006 shows 53% of those surveyed have an email newsletter (I'm saying that's not high enough), and 59% allow their users to leave their email address for follow-up contact whilst only 45% make use of the opportunity. So their email lists lie fallow.

And today is their window of opportunity. Whilst a solicited, tailored and well-worded email (perhaps even a video mail) from your favourite charity(ies) is what's wanted and what feels refreshing, charities should be taking advantage. They may have to return to the more expensive paper fashion again. Or, more likely, they will find they have to be adept at each and every relevant method of communication. One trick ponies just won't do.

It's ironic isn't it? Until we get to the stage where donors are getting the messages that interest them in the right format, then no-one will notice anything. Door drops to people who 'myspace' won't work.

Fast forward 20 years to a time when charities all do things by email (which will be passe by then).

"Tomorrow's donor ...is going to be a bit dumbfounded when they get their first charity door drop, aren't they?"

YES, and they'll think, 'hey this must be important if it came through my door, NOTHING does that any more.

Hi Bob - not so great stuff judging by how long it has taken me to come back to you on your very interesting comment!I can no longer really blame baby matters, so I'll have to come clean and admit I've been through a bit of a phase of disillusionment - in charity sector new media - and in blogging (seems too much talking out loud and very little getting answered back)....

I think I must have been falling foul of the lack of emotional capacity myself.

But I'm through that now and firing on my few remaining good cylinders so I wanted to say how right you are - about the emotional deficiency of the Internet.

And yet charities (and others) have had to fare previously with simple linear media to bring their message and mission to life, and to connect with their supporters. So we really can't grumble with what we've got now can we? I mean there is interactivity on the Internet, even if we grapple with the right ways to exploit it.

I know you're not going to disagree, and that your point is that the Internet does not yet go far enough, certainly to invigorate the messages that charities want to bring out.

But it seems to me that rather than try to make the most of the new properties inherent in digital media, we've become rather busy lamenting what we haven't got and going on about how the Internet hasn't 'delivered' or met our expectations.

Well baby, you've got to work it to make it real. (Trying, miserably, to bring in a rallying American tone)

It seems to me that the conventional methods are still being over-used by high numbers of charities. I seem to remember reading some consumer research saying that people would rather receive an email from a charity than a mailer. Yet most charities cling desperately to the methods of fundraising and communicating that have historically brought them their results, without thinking about the history or legacy they are leaving. Tomorrow's donor - brought up on social networking sites (which incidentally here are continuously being brought up on the radio) - is going to be a bit dumbfounded when they get their first charity door drop, aren't they?

What the networks like MySpace, YouTube etc etc have succeeded in doing, is creating communities. So although in format they force charities into the wrong shaped hole, they are bang on the money in terms of offering them an insight into how the Internet can really connect with people's everyday lives and typical interests. And as tomorrows donors are most likely there, it's worth a little discomfort to share the experience with them.

Great stuff as always Sarah! I was having lunch with a VC here in the states and we got on the subject of emotions and the Internet. Or, more like the lack of emotional capacity in the Internet - you know it is bad when you have to do emoticons all the time ;)

I think this is where the "old" Internet (call it web 1.0) failed nonprofits and NGOs - for the most part, their message is all about emotion. Don't tell me how many new shelters you built, show me pictures of the people who live in them now. Tell me about how their lives have changed because of what you (and the future me through my potential financial support) have done.

Until the web can realize its full potential to providing an emotional connection for people rather than an informational connection, NGOs and nonprofits will not be able to reliably transfer what works in the "real world" to the online world.

In the meantime, the "new" Internet - the age of YouTube, MySpace, and Flickr - has slightly opened the door to online emotional appeals. Staff working in local crisis areas can upload a video of what they are doing almost in real time, closing the loop between need->funds->action. Same for Flickr. This content can be easily posted on a website, sent out through viral email, and seen by tens to tens of millions.

MySpace and the many other social networks around the world (Bebo, Mixi, FriendsReunited, etc.) offers another interesting opportunity to reach out and integrate into young people's lives - but usually at a superficial level right now. Take a look at Mercy Corp's myspace page (http://www.myspace.com/mercycorps) and you'll see not the profile of an amazing charity, but rather a page for a person representing Mercy Corp (which is apparently a Capricorn.) Charities are forced to fit their square peg into these network's round holes - and the results are not pretty.

And, until these technologies are more commonly used by people in the "right" demographics for the organization (35+ as a start), why even bother throwing significant resources at it. I have yet to hear of an effective new media strategy based on YouTube, Flickr, or MySpace which provided more than interesting blog PR for the organization.

But, I remain hopeful it will happen soon. Oh, with a smiley face :)