September 28, 2007
Raising Money on Facebook
In June the popular social-networking site Facebook released a programming language that allows developers to create new applications that tie into the site and its 40 million users.
Already, four major applications have been introduced that nonprofit groups can use to raise money, Peter Dietz, a consultant in Montreal, writes on his blog, About Micro-Philanthropy.
He says that learning how to take advantage of the tools could be a valuable way to reach out to young potential donors.
“When it comes to online fund raising, an obvious tip is to meet your current and potential donors where they are,” writes Mr. Dietz. “Today, millions of prospective donors between the ages of 18 and 35 find themselves on Facebook.”
In the article, Mr. Dietz profiles the four tools — created by the companies Change.org, ChipIn, Firstgiving, and Project Agape — and offers advice on how to use them.
He recommends that organizations try more than one of the tools.
“Nonprofits are learning — if slowly — that maintaining an authentic presence on social networks is hard work, but necessary,” he writes. “One way to ensure success is to experiment with what’s cool in the same way that your supporters are experimenting.”
What do you think? Will raising money on Facebook and other social-networking sites be an important part of online giving going forward?
— Nicole Wallace
Comments
Commenting is closed for this article.
Previous: Donors Urged to Focus on Human Suffering, Not Their Own
Next: Text-Messaging Campaign Tests Telecommunications Policies
Thanks for blogging about my Facebook article.
Two updates:
(1) I posted a blog entry with links that help answer the question “Are Organizations Raising Money On Facebook”. You can find the link on my blog.
(2) I just noticed that ChangingthePresent now has a Facebook application. This addition brings the number of major fundraising applications to five.
— Peter Deitz Sep 28, 01:13 PM #
I think Facebook will play a role in online giving, but probably not in the direct way that we’ve come to associate with online appeals. Facebook seems to be more of a recruitment tool and a marketing tool, both important in the fundraising process.
—Michael Stein
http://www.michaelstein.net/
— Michael Stein Sep 28, 01:51 PM #
Social Networking tools like Facebook are terrific lead generators. The question is whether we will fully transition — will appeals via social networking sites become the norm?
Nonprofits are beginning to integrate these tools into their tool box.
There’s also a shift here of the donor being more proactive – deciding what to give to — not waiting for an organizational aask. As a result, many on social networking sites are advocating and raising money for causes and organizations, but doing so without any direct guidance from, or communication with the organizations.The more “traditional fundraising” methods are all still working very well. The transition ia about planting seeds with small-scale online campaigns that require little effort — or cash.
— Beth Kanter Sep 28, 02:20 PM #
I am working with several organizations to help develop an updated curriculum program directed at engaging youth in philanthropy. Social networking has emerged as a key element in this program.
http://pdeely.blogspot.com/
— Phil Deely Sep 28, 03:06 PM #
Fundraising and marketing on the high seas (Facebook, MySpace and other networks) is appealing because of exposure to new audiences (and all the kids – myself included – have a little extra cash than past generations).
That said, there’s still some reservation on the part of groups who aren’t interested in the smaller, one-off donations from the 20 and 30 somethings who play in those spaces. I’ve talked with some nonprofit pros recently who want one thing: large donations from flush donors. And they don’t think that they’ll find those people within social media. I think that’s wrong. Anyone want to help me prove it?
— Qui Diaz Oct 3, 11:55 AM #
How funny that 4 of the 5 comments above are from people plugging their own websites?!
— Steve Oct 5, 04:28 PM #
Off the topic, but to “Steve’s” point:
I count only three: one is the focus of the article; one is the author’s signature; and one is a resource related to the issue at hand.
Why criticize? Isn’t that why we’re here, for education and resources?
— Jeff Oct 8, 01:28 PM #