I diluted my own opinion in my last post. What I said I wanted was a way for people who are part of YouTube’s nonprofit program to be able to collect email addresses and not just donations. YouTube doesn’t do that. You will only get someone’s email if they actually donate. I then said, well… maybe it would be OK if they allowed you to connect like in Facebook.
The problem is, YouTube isn’t Facebook. While there are people who use YouTube as a pure social network, the majority of YouTube users are passive viewers of video. So connecting through the traditional social networking type of connections doesn’t have the impact on YouTube as it would on Facebook.
So, back to my original request. YouTube knows the email addresses of every registered user. With a single click, a user could give their information to the nonprofit, through YouTube. That would be a huge benefit to the nonprofit and I think it would prove to be much more valuable than the donation functionality they have given. It could be a double opt-in — meaning the individual would first have to click on the opt-in on the video page to give their name to the nonprofit, then they would get an email from YouTube giving them a link to confirm that this is what they wanted to do. In this way, no one would mistake their opt-in for spam.
We can thank Google for giving nonprofits access to Google Checkout. But a cynic might point out that Google is trying really hard to get people used to using Google Checkout and so this gift has a self-serving feel to it. Add to their functions the ability to really give the nonprofits something of value — a relationship with individuals on their own terms — then we could really celebrate the Google/YouTube Nonprofit initiative.
As part of the new YouTube for Nonprofits, Google has integrated Google Checkout donation processing for organizations in the program. What this means is that if you are in the program, viewers will see a “Donate” button both on your channel page and when your video is playing in a standard page.
If you are a 501(c)3 it’s a no-brainer to sign up. Why not?
What we don’t know yet is whether it will work. If a decent percentage of people who view a nonprofit video actually give, then we have a revolution on our hands. The viewers/donors might look similar to what we see on Facebook causes but we will wait until we have some real data before speculating further.
What we at See3 would like to propose to Google is an addition to their nonprofit program that could greatly enhance the value to organizations. We all know that a newsletter sign-up or advocacy ask is an easier ask than a donation. Imagine if next to the Donate button we had a “Join This Cause” button. And when a registered YouTube user clicked on it, the email address (and other info) of the user was transfered to the nonprofit. (Like with comments, the system could tell a non-registered user that they needed to register.)
Another approach — not as good for the nonprofits but maybe more acceptable to Google — would be more like the Facebook approach. Don’t give me their email, but connect me to them through the social network. I think there has to be something more than Subscribe — which they already have. There has to be a way to say, “I am a supporter, but this doesn’t mean I have to watch every video you produce all the time.” A one-click to Join would have the most benefit if it enabled the nonprofit to message the viewer on a regular basis beyond pushing out new videos.
Facebook has taught us that people will opt-in to support the cause far more than they will donate. You can see the evidence in the mostly small donation totals in the Causes application.
Maybe we can make this request to Google through out friends and partners at NTEN. What do you think Holly?
This is a terrific customer service story and I think Seth is right that this was not about PR or anything but kindness and thoughtfulness. How are you as a nonprofit practicing this kind of caring with your stakeholders? How are we as a business practicing this kind of caring with our customers? People will go to the ends of the earth for you if they feel you are about them.
As I have written here in the past and as I tell audiences of nonprofit professionals on a regular basis, Second Life should be down (at the bottom) on the list of communications, fundraising and marketing priorities. There is no reason to be an early adopter in Second Life when I am certain you have what to do with your email program, your website, your use of video, and your activity on Facebook and other social networks. When you contrast the number of people engaging in online video — more than 80% of everyone online! — with the tiny community of active users on Second Life (peak time active users reach 40,000 in the whole virtual world), you can make an informed judgment about the likely return on your investment of time and money.
Here’s a quote from the article:
The paradox of a virtual world is that it adds human interaction to the online experience, while at the same time making sure you never have to actually interact with anyone. Now, instead of merely buying a book on a website, you can browse a virtual bookstore along side other virtual patrons, without ever leaving your home. This logic—that you’d want to give up both the speed of online shopping and the social experience of actually shopping, that you’d want to spend time in a bookstore but not actually go to one—is depressing, to say the least.
From a review of its billing records, T-Mobile has determined the amount of your Incremental Charge. That amount is shown above…
If you are a former T-Mobile subscriber, the amount of your Incremental Charge will be donated to City Year, a national youth outreach non-profit organization. However, if you want to receive a payment in the amount of your Incremental Charge instead of having that amount donated to City Year, you may notify the Settlement Administrator of your preference by visiting www.WongSettlement.com or calling (800) 282-5966, in which case you will receive a check in the amount of your Incremental Charge.
I am not making this up. Good for City Year. I hope they have a lot of former T-Mobile customers with lots Incremental Charges, whatever they are!
One of the things we know about email fundraising and advocacy is that requests that are timely are more likely to result in gifts. For example, if legislation is being voted on today and I get an email today asking me to call my Senator, I am more likely to do it than if I received the request two weeks earlier. In fundraising, if I am told that we have 36 hours to meet a deadline so that food aid can be delivered with the next convoy — this is a compelling ask.
I have noticed recently the added idea of speaking to me like I am an insider. I am seeing this mostly in political fundraising. I got a note from Barak Obama last week. Have a look:
I’m just now leaving New York, and you’ve got me fired up. Nearly 25,000 people came together last night for the rally.
Here’s the video:
I’m inspired by your continued energy and support. But we’re still shy of our goal of 500,000 donations to the campaign by Sunday’s deadline.
Make an additional donation now and help us get there:
https://donate.barackobama.com/promise
More soon,
Barack
Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to: michael@see3.net
To unsubscribe, go to: http://my.barackobama.com/unsubscribe
The subject of the email above was “Hey.” Hey? As in, “Hey, I just wanted to fire off a quick note to my buddy.” The signature was the uber-personal “Barack”. Yeah, we go way back.
The next day I got an email from Michelle Obama with the subject line “re:Hey” It’s like we’re all friends on a normal chain of emails.
Today, I received an email from Rahm Emanuel at the DCCC.
Hi Michael,
I know it’s Sunday so I don’t want to take up much of your time. You know me, I like to speak frankly.
Here’s the reality check: This election is far from in the bag. There are 60 Democrats sitting in seats that Bush carried in 2004 and there are eight Republicans sitting in Democratic seats. We have a lot of seats to protect and an historic opportunity to expand the playing field. The resources we have now will determine whether or not we win next November.
The FEC end of quarter deadline is MIDNIGHT TONIGHT and the DCCC is just $38,000 shy of its goal. House Dems are matching every gift until midnight tonight so please give what you can before this critical deadline.
http://www.dccc.org/r/99581/3018530/
On to Victory,
Rahm
Sent Wirelessly Via Blackberry
I like the urgency. We have hours to go and we need your help. But “Sent Wirelessly Via Blackberry”???? Yeah, sure. I wonder how my good buddy Rahm got all of this far at the bottom of the email:
To unsubscribe from this email list, please paste this URL into your browser:
http://www.dccc.org/unsubscribe/?p=MTQxNCwzMDE4NTMw%0A
To make sure you always get our emails add dccc@dccc.org to your address book. Find out more about adding us to your address book here.
http://www.dccc.org/r/99582/3018530/
Paid for by Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
430 South Capitol Street, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20003
(202) 863-1500 www.dccc.org
Not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
Contributions to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee are not tax deductible.
That’s a lot of Blackberry typing for him to remember.
Yes, friendly and urgent work. But maybe sometimes you need to give your audience a more little credit.
I recently wrote about matching fundraising campaigns where one donor agrees to match the contributions of a set of additional donors, up to a certain amount. A twist on this is a kind of contest with a big payoff for the organization at the end.
The Ploughshares Fund has launched a similar contest with a twist. For the Yahoo!/Network for Good contest the winner was the one who raised the most money using a charity badge (a kind of simple widget) distributed on sites across the net.
The Ploughshares Fund has launched something called the Peace Primary. It is a kind of online popularity contest/election. But you can’t just vote. You have to pay $1 per vote (minimum 10) and those dollars go to the organization. So its a combination contest/fundraiser. Nice!
You can vote for as many organizations as you like. In fact, voting for multiple groups is strongly encouraged.
How many times can I vote?
Each vote costs $1. For each group you select, there is a 10-vote minimum and a 1,000 vote maximum.
Where does the money go?
Every dollar you contribute with each vote goes directly to the group you are voting for. All donations are completely tax-deductible.
I don’t know if I like the idea of money for votes.
Neither do we in actual elections, but in the Peace Primary nobody loses — every dollar raised goes directly to the the participating groups to support their efforts to raise the profile of peace issues in the coming months. There are also strict spending limits in the Peace Primary — no more than $1,000 per voter per group — to maximize every group’s chances of winning. And, unlike real-world elections, voters are allowed and even encouraged to vote for as many groups as they want.
When can I vote?
You can vote any time between September 1 and October 31, 2007.
How will the winner be chosen?
The group that receives the most votes will receive a one-time grant of $100,000 from the Ploughshares Fund, a public grantmaking foundation that supports the smartest people with the best ideas for preventing the spread and use of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, and identifying new ways to prevent armed conflict.
How were the participating groups chosen?
The Ploughshares Fund submitted a list of organizations to an all-star panel of leaders (see above) from across the peace and security community, and that panel voted for the 12 finalists. The panel was chaired by actor Martin Sheen and also included writer, commentator and religious scholar Reza Aslan, a member of Ploughshares Fund’s Board of Directors; the Reverend Dr. Joan Brown Campbell of the Chautauqua Institute; Bonnie Jenkins, program officer at the Ford Foundation; former Congressman Paul N. (Pete) McCloskey (R-CA); author Jonathan Schell; Katrina vanden Heuvel, editor-in-chief of The Nation, and Ploughshares Fund Executive Director Naila Bolus.
What criteria were used to nominate the groups?
We looked for organizations that represent a wide range of approaches to peace and human security; that have a commitment to action and policy advocacy; that have a base of grassroots support and a national or broad regional constituency; that have the capacity for online communication and outreach to constituents; and that have a record of making an impact.
What the Orthodox Jewish sect can teach us about how to use Facebook, MySpace, YouTube and the emerging social web.
It would seem that the ultra-orthodox Chabad Lubavitch have little in common with your nonprofit. Whether you are a direct service provider, an international relief agency, an advocacy group or a trade association, you probably couldn’t imagine what a bunch of black-suited, black-hatted ultra-religious Jews could teach you about outreach, marketing and fundraising. And it seems far fetched to imagine that they have something to say about social networking and internet strategy, in all of its universalistic narcissistic decadence.
But alas, they have a lot to teach us.
I don’t know what you know, if anything, about the Chabad-Lubavitch, so first, a little background. Here I am going to quote extensively from the Wikipedia article on Lubavitch.
Chabad-Lubavitch (also known as Chabad, Habad or Lubavitch), is one of the largest branches of Hasidic Judaism and one of the largest Jewish movements worldwide, especially in the United States, the Former Soviet Union, Europe and Israel. Chabad (חב”ד ) is a Hebrewacronym for “חכמה Chochmah, בינה Binah, דעת Da’at” (”Wisdom, Understanding, Knowledge“). Lubavitch, taken from the Russian Любавичи, Lyubavichi, is the name of the town that served as the movement’s headquarters for over a century. In 1993 there were over 200,000 adherents to the movement some estimate today that there are over a million.
OK, so we have this Jewish sect with maybe a million members. If you live in New York, or a college town, you have probably seen some Chabaniks around town. They look like this.
Chabad, unlike other ultra-Orthodox Jewish sects, don’t keep to themselves. They have it in their DNA to go out into the world and, with incredible passion, reach out to every Jew they can.
Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson spurred on the movement to what has become known as shlichus (”being emissaries [performing outreach]”) after becoming Rebbe in 1950-1951. As a result, Chabad shluchim (”emissaries”, sing. shliach) have moved all over the world with the stated mission of helping all Jews, regardless of denomination or affiliation. They assist Jews with all their religious needs, as well as with physical assistance and spiritual guidance and teaching. The ultimate goal is to encourage Jews to learn more about their Jewish heritage and to practice Judaism.
The movement, motivated by Rabbi Schneerson, trained and ordained thousands of rabbis, educators, ritual slaughterers, and ritual circumcisers, who are then accompanied by their spouses to many locations around the world. Typically a young Lubavitch rabbi and his wife, in their early twenties, with one or two children, will move to a new location, and as they settle in will raise a large family who as a family unit, will aim to fulfill their mandate of bringing Jewish people closer to Orthodox Judaism and encouraging gentiles to adhere to the Seven Laws of Noah. They will carefully seek out and search for and recruit Jews they have identified and contact them and start the process of encouraging them to observe Judaism, encourage Jews to strengthen their commitment to Judaism. All over the world Lubavitchers (including those not formally in the position of emissaries) assist and support the religious needs of tens of thousands of Jews.
Chabad Houses
Chabad today has centers around the world. Centers are called a Chabad Houses. They are Jewish community centers providing educational and outreach activities for the Jewish community. Level of observance is irrelevant; no minimal level of observance is a requirement for using facilities. The centers are informal in setup. They primarily serve both educational and observance purposes. Effort is made to provide an atmosphere in which the nonobservant will not feel intimidated by any perceived contrast between their lack of knowledge of Jewish practice and the advanced knowledge of some of the people they meet there.
Mitzvah campaigns
Chabad aims to attract non-Orthodox Jews to become Orthodox, and believes this is part of the process of bringing the Messiah. This practice is called “mivtzoim” - meaning “campaigns” or “endeavors.” At one time, Schneerson issued a call to every Jew: “Even if you are not fully committed to a Torah life, do something. Begin with a mitzvah - any mitzvah - its value will not be diminished by the fact that there are others which you are not prepared to do”. Schneerson also suggested ten specific mitzvot that he believed were ideally suited for the emissaries to introduce to non-observant Jews. These were: lighting candles before Shabbat and the Jewish holidays by Jewish women; putting on tefillin; affixing a mezuzah; regular Torah study; giving charity; purchasing Jewish books; keeping kosher; kindness to others; Jewish education, and keeping the family purity laws.
Camps
Chabad has set up an extensive network of camps around the world, most using the name Gan Israel, a name chosen by Rabbi Schneerson for the first overnight camp. There are 1,200 sites serving 210,000 children—most of whom do not come from Orthodox homes. Of these, 500 camps are in the United States.
Campus
In recent years Chabad has greatly expanded its reach on university and college campuses. Chabad Student Centers are active on over 100 campuses, and Chabad offers varied activities at an additional 150 universities worldwide. Professor Alan Dershowitz has said that “Chabad’s presence on college campuses today is absolutely crucial”, and “We cannot rest until Chabad is on every major college campus in the world”.
So what we have here is a group that is mission driven. They have created a vast network of people able to carry their message out to the world. And they are investing in young kids and college kids.
I must mention that the Chabad are not without controversy. Rav Eliezer Shach, who was the patriarch of some of the largest ultra-orthodox communities around the world acerbically called Chabad the “sect closest to Judaism” because of the movement within Chabad to proclaim their late Rabbi Schnerson the messiah.
And while I have a serious problem with both of those issues, there is no arguing with their success in building communities of active supporters all over the world. There is no arguing with their success in getting secular Jews to take on some aspects of Jewish observance (a high priority among those who believe intermarriage and assimilation are the biggest threats to Jewish continuity). There is no arguing with their success in getting high-net-worth individuals to part with their money. And there is no arguing with their success in getting people who don’t even believe in their world view to support them every year with donations large and small.
And don’t think that they have this massive centralized fundraising machine that makes it all happen. More from Wikipedia:
Fundraising
Funds for activities of a Chabad center rely entirely on the local community. Chabad centers do not receive funding from Lubavitch headquarters. For the day to day operations, local emissaries do all the fundraising by themselves. The monies fundraised in the local community is invested in that local community. The emissary takes a minimum salary and seldom goes on vacation. Sue Fishcoff writes, “Emissaries in the field may sink millions of dollars into their center, synagogues and Mikvahs, but their own homes are modest, again patterned after their Rebbe’s lack of personal ostentation.”
So how have they done it? How have they been able to get people who will never adopt their lifestyle or world view to support them financially? How are they able to send ultra-Orthodox rabbis to places like Boise, Idaho and expect – know – that they will make it somehow? How are they able to bring non-religious Jews into their synagogues and to their events when their world view and lifestyle is so foreign? And finally, what can their success teach us about fundraising generally and online social networks specifically?
A Theory of Acceptance – Or At Least Tolerance
If I went into a typical Orthodox synagogue in a t-shirt and jeans during the Sabbath service, I would likely have someone ask me to leave. They would tell me that, while they mean no offense, that my clothes are not appropriate for the day or the place and that I am welcome to return in more appropriate attire. If I walk in to a Chabad synagogue on the Sabbath in a t-shirt and jeans I am likely to be given an Aliah – a special honor when you are called to participate in the Torah service. From the Chabad perspective, the one who doesn’t know enough to wear the right clothes is just the person who needs to be brought in and cultivated, not turned away.
Another example. Most Orthodox synagogues close off their parking lots on the Sabbath. Why? You are not allowed to drive on the Sabbath according to Orthodox rules, so having the parking lot open is an tacit invitation to drive, an invitation to break the Sabbath. Makes sense, no? While the Lubavitch take their Sabbath observance very seriously, their parking lots are open and they won’t tell you not to drive. If you drive, drive. Just come.
When Conservative or Orthodox synagogues have group Friday night meals (the beginning of the Sabbath), the evening will include rubber chicken that you most likely had to pay $35 (in advance) to get in the first place. In a Chabad House, you will often get a more elaborate and home-cooked meal (usually prepared by the Rabbi’s wife) and a side order of rousing singing and flowing alcohol. It’s a lot of fun. In fact, the feelings of camaraderie are infectious. No one will ever be made to feel that they are bad or wrong for not taking the Lubavitch path. And no one will ever be asked to pay!
In these three examples we get the core of Lubavitch success that I will try to distill into a few principles:
· Show acceptance and understanding for where people come from
· Never make people feel bad about what they don’t know
· Make them feel welcome in your space
· Teach them by first by example and only explicitly when they ask
· Give them small, non-threatening steps to advance their connection
The most secular person in the world can have a terrific time at a Lubavitch event or even attend their services on a regular basis. They can enjoy speaking to a rabbi whose life is light-years removed from the secular world. And they routinely go out and tell anyone who will listen about the amazing soul that accepts the visitor and gives of themselves without asking for anything in return. That’s magic. Imagine people talking about your organization like that!
Taking the Lessons to Our Fundraising
The lesson I take away from their success for organizational fundraising is that guilt is a losing long-term strategy. Yes, it can work in the short-term. But instead of making me feel bad about what I haven’t done or what I need to do, make me feel good about what you are doing. Inspire me with your dedication. Allow me to participate in a small way, but don’t treat me like a small person for it. Cultivate those who take the first step as if they can become the biggest donor you have and make them feel important for whatever it is they have chosen to do.
The number of organizations that use guilt is staggering. It’s an easy strategy to implement and we see it a lot in direct mail. I recently received a mailing with a nickel in it. “Don’t let this nickel go to waste” they begged me. The same is true with mailing labels. Here are these things with your name on it and you will surely feel guilty is you use them and don’t pay us. This is not how you create deep connections and long-term supporters. (Here is an article in Fundraising Success Magazine that looked at and ranked emotional motivators for fundraising. Guilt was near the end of the list.)
Another lesson that organizations can take from the Lubavitch is in having people on board who are passionate about what they do. Now I don’t expect that most organizations can get to the level of passion of the Lubavitch. These folks believe that their lives, all of our lives, and the future of the universe is at stake. That’s strong motivation and most people who work at your nonprofit won’t come with that level of dedication. But if you are choosing between two employees and one is deeply passionate about your mission and the other one, though more qualified, is seeing it as just another job, pick for passion. (You can see this dedication at work in many organizations. I am seeing it more and more with environmental group staff who are genuinely scared for our collective future and energized by the change that is possible. You can see this dedication in the staff of the New Israel Fund — those in Israel in particular — where I was once a fundraiser. The Israel staff wants desperately to live in a democratic Israel and so they live the change they want to see every day.)
Lessons for Social Networks
The reason I wrote this post was because of a eureka moment I had in connecting the Lubavitch success with social networking. I had this moment last week when I was in Manhattan and I passed the Chabad Mitzvah Tank in Midtown. I had my handy-dandy video camera with me, so you can see:
(I have to pause thank Beka Economopoulos here for planting the seeds of this idea. Beka works for Greenpeace. I saw her speak at the Yearly Kos conference and then suggested that we at See3 invite her to co-present with us at the Craigslist Foundation Nonprofit Boot Camp in New York a couple weeks ago. Beka runs the Greenpeace online organizing program and has seen some amazing success with it and we are grateful for her participation with us in what turned out to be a terrific and well-attended session.)
The average organization, if they have a social network strategy at all, think of social networks as a way to meet people, with the goal of then convincing those people to give the organization their email address, go to their donation link or otherwise become members/donors/activists of the organization in the same way everyone else is. Meaning, they will get the same emails, see the same website, and take the same path to further activity as other prospects. They are using the social networks to meet people, but only see their outreach as successful if they can get those people to do what everyone else is doing.
Part of the problem here is that organizational management hasn’t yet internalized social networking metrics. For Greenpeace, those 68,000 friends on MySpace are just like 68,000 email addresses. For most organizations that would not be true. You are looking at email opens and average gifts from your online donations and these metrics are not really reflective of the potential you have in social networking. (Allan Benamer, a big believer in these tools, writes about this problem on his blog. You should also be reading Beth Kanter and Ruby Sinreich on these subjects.)
Now think of the Lubavitch philosophy. You are a MySpace person. You are comfortable on MySpace. I build a MySpace page to show you I can speak your language. This is where you live. Acceptance means I have to stop trying to get you to leave. Acceptance means creating things you can do right there on MySpace. Acceptance means treating my ability to message you on MySpace the same as if you are on my email list – without forcing you to change.
When you start to care enough you might come on over to our site. When you are impressed with how we “walk the walk” you might get out of your comfort zone by doing something offline. I am not going to force you to change. I am not going to limit your access or the information you can get because you live this “alternative lifestyle”. I am going to respect you for who you are! (Or at least I am going to pretend to.)
All of this is connected to the permission-based marketing society we are in today. Top down advertising is working less and less. Word-of-mouth is more important than ever.
Showing people what you do and why it matters is critical to capture people’s attention. Getting your supporters to recruit others is becoming a central strategy. Your content and your passion are what will carry the day and bring people to your cause. Social media marketing is not about tricks or techniques as much as it is about finding your authentic voice and inviting people to share in your passion at the level they are most comfortable in the venue of their choosing.
[The irony of all of this is that Chabad-Lubavitch does everything wrong on their own MySpace page, which I assume is run by one person in a decentralized way. They don’t follow their own script for offline engagement, which would also bring them online success. On MySpace they seem insular, political and shrill – everything they don’t seem in person.]
In Sum
Be passionate in your work and be grateful to those who come and take interest – at every level. Meet people where they are without judgment or condescension. Make your programs and your content accessible to those who come from a different place than you do. This philosophy is the core of what you need to be successful in social networking strategy.
Tell me how you do or don’t apply these principles to your own online and offline marketing by leaving a comment.
I wrote recently about the Johnson & Johnson lawsuit against the Red Cross. Basically, J&J has rights to use the red cross symbol to sell their medical products. The Red Cross is now using the symbol now to sell third-party products, many of which compete directly with J&J’s products. J&J files a lawsuit.
The point of my previous post was that for J&J to file the lawsuit means the Red Cross must have pushed them very far on this issue — and what does selling stuff have to do with their mission anyway? First aid kits I get. Red Cross is all about first aid and preparedness. But the products they are selling “include humidifiers, medical examination gloves, nail clippers, combs and toothbrushes.” A little off-mission I think. (Seth Godin agreed with me here.)
The Red Cross just responded to the suit with some claims of their own:
American Red Cross Files Response to J&J Lawsuit
Sets the Record Straight on Use of the Red Cross Emblem: Raises Counterclaims, Requests Dismissal of Certain Claims
National Headquarters
2025 E Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
www.redcross.org
Contact: Carrie Martin
Phone: (202) 303-4459
WASHINGTON, Thursday, September 20, 2007 — In its legal response to Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J) recent lawsuit, the American Red Cross said today that Congress and the Federal government have long recognized the right of the charity to use the Red Cross emblem on products sold to support its mission. It requested a dismissal of several counts on legal grounds. In addition, the Red Cross filed counterclaims to the J&J lawsuit, accusing the for-profit pharmaceutical company of improperly using the Red Cross emblem.
“Johnson & Johnson’s lawsuit is wrong on the facts and on the law,” said Mark W. Everson, President and CEO of the American Red Cross. “For more than a hundred years, in keeping with our Congressional charter, the Red Cross has used its own emblem to support its health, safety and preparedness mission. We will vigorously defend our right to provide the American people with products and services that advance this mission,” said Everson.
In papers today filed with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Red Cross makes clear that:
* Congress has given the Red Cross, through its charter, explicit rights to use the Red Cross emblem for the “purpose of trade or as an advertisement to induce the sale of any article whatsoever for any business or charitable purpose.”
* In 1978, the Justice Department, calling the American Red Cross an “instrumentality of the United States,” recognized the right of the Red Cross to use its emblem in arrangements with other entities, such as those attacked by J&J.
* Clara Barton, founder of the Red Cross, registered the trademark nine years before J&J did.
* Congress specifically intended for the Red Cross to have wide-ranging use of the Red Cross emblem, in support of its humanitarian, preparedness and health and safety-related mission.
* During World War II, J&J approached Congress asking it to limit the Red Cross’s use of its own emblem: Congress refused.
The Red Cross response also contends that J&J has worked to expand its use of a red cross symbol beyond its grandfathered rights, at the expense of the Red Cross and its mission.
* Congress “grandfathered” J&J’s use of the red cross symbol – placing very specific, narrow restrictions on what the for-profit company could do.
* Today, J&J uses the Red Cross emblem beyond their “grandfathered” rights.
“While it’s unfortunate that the issue has reached this point, we have an obligation – on behalf of our chapters, blood donation operations, and hundreds of thousands of volunteers – to protect the proper use of the Red Cross emblem,” Everson continued. “Red Cross chapters across this country and Red Cross societies overseas have encouraged us to defend the Red Cross against this unjustified attack.”
The Red Cross is charged with the mission of helping Americans prevent, prepare for, and respond to disasters and emergencies. One way the Red Cross advances this mission is by providing first aid, health, safety and emergency preparedness products that people can conveniently purchase at places where they regularly shop. The Red Cross invests the proceeds from the sale of these products into fulfilling its humanitarian mission.
The J&J lawsuit comes as local Red Cross chapters are busy with National Preparedness Month. Research shows only 7 percent of Americans have taken the necessary steps to prepare for disasters, but that 82 percent would get prepared if it was easier to do. Red Cross items such as those that are the subject of the J&J lawsuit help families take the necessary steps to Be Red Cross Ready: to get a kit, make a plan and be informed.
It seems like everyone these days is talking about how nonprofits need to use more video, especially online. To all of these people, I say “Welcome!” We founded See3 and DoGooderTV to be THE video people for nonprofits and so it is very nice indeed to see our colleagues starting to beat the same drum.
The latest nonprofit consultant/professional talking about video was Tom Belford from The Agitator blog.
“As I’ve written before, I think it is crucial for nonprofits to master this medium for conducting your fundraising, advocacy and educational efforts,” Tom writes.
* Over 133 million Americans watched online video in July — or 74% of US internet users.
* They watched more than 9 billion videos, 27% of them on Google sites (mostly YouTube).
* More than one-in-three (37%) US internet users viewed video on YouTube.
* Online viewers watched an average of more than 3 hours of online video during the month, with an average video duration of 2.7 minutes.
* The average viewer consumed 68 videos, or more than two per day.
So while we don’t yet have all the metrics we need to show that video will actually improve/increase fundraising online, we know that this is the content people are gravitating towards. You don’t have to have more metrics to understand that in order to capture and keep the attention of you target audience that you have to have good, compelling visual stories. And now we know, online video is the best way to do that.
