Obama Strategist Urges Charities to Eschew E-Newsletters

February 20, 2009

Obama Strategist Urges Charities to Eschew E-Newsletters

A leader of President Obama’s groundbreaking online campaign is advising charities to ditch e-mail newsletters, calling them “a waste of time,” reports the Web site Third Sector Online.

Speaking at a presentation in London, Thomas Gensemer, managing partner of Blue State Digital, said short, personalized e-mail messages to supporters that offer clean instructions for participation are a more effective online strategy. “E-mail is still a killer application but only when used properly,” he said.

Blue State ran Mr. Obama’s electronic campaign, which raised more than $500-million in Internet contributions and spawned tens of thousands of online support groups.

Comments

Mr. Gensemer’s advice may be appropriate for an organization such as Barack Obaba’s election campaign, which had millions of donors. But for agencies whose taget audience is much smaller—a school or community group, for example—a well-written e-newsletter can be an asset. In organizations which serve a small, local area by design, supporters value their personal relationship with the organization. A periodic newsletter lets them know exactly how their donations have helped, and conveys the message that they are personally important to the organization.

— Phyllis Nutkis Feb 20, 03:01 PM #
I agree completely with Ms. Nutkis’ comment above. As the communications person for a small nonprofit, we have tested various forms of electronic communication, and our e-newsletters receive the highest open and click-through rates (with the simple subject line, “News from [our organization]”).

I’m a little surprised that the Obama folks would give advice like this — not only because their cause is different from the average nonprofit, but also because the advice might be perceived as encouraging the less “green” alternative of (gasp) print newsletters.

— Lynne Feb 20, 03:27 PM #
I totally agree with Nutkis’ and Lynne’s thinking on this matter. I am surprised by Gensemer’s advice. I do agree that email is the choice medium for communication today (and Facebook, Twitter, etc.).

— Dr. Steve W. Batson Feb 20, 03:33 PM #
While newsletters may be a good way to connect with a small target audience, I believe Mr. Gensemer’s recommendation that nonprofits rely more on personalized emails is good advice. With the myriad electronic and other communications the average person receives daily, people are feeling overwhelmed and unable to manage information overload. Typically, people are more likely to read and respond to a brief, clear, focused email message than to read a newsletter however infrequently the newsletter is sent. Moreover, an email message to an individual is more personal than an e-newsletter that can make individual recipients feel reduced to an entry in a mass mailing.

— Eugenia Colon Feb 20, 03:53 PM #
Thanks for the thoughtful dialogue. I don’t know the answer.

— Gary Sweeten Feb 20, 04:19 PM #
Interesting debate. I think for most nonprofits, the advice to ditch email newsletters is wrong. But the glut in the in-box for most people is real. I think the right response is to make email newsletters into something more like email news blasts – short and focused. Say, one brief article, perhaps an event announcement, and a blurb about who you are.

— Anne McCarten-Gibbs Feb 20, 06:38 PM #
Yes, ditching the e-mail newsletter is a bad strategic move for non-profits. If your non-profit’s mission is raising money for a short-term project like winning an election, Gensemer’s strategy works. That’s not a successful long-term strategy for non-profits. They must effectively tell their story to maintain or enhance their relationship with stakeholders and solicit donations. Gensemer does provide a teachable lesson. Making e-mail newsletters and appeals more concise and enticing is critical for success.

— Joe Mueller Feb 20, 11:56 PM #
Mr. Gensemer’s comments don’t surprise me at all. After all, Obama’s campaign lacked substance. That’s what e-newsletters depend on — substance. There’s only so much you can say about “hope and change” without providing the details for how change will occur.

E-newsletters that speak to the latest work and impact of nonprofits are very effective — and they’re “green,” Mr. Obama! There’s nothing to dispose of when your finished reading it.

Concise blasted messages have their place. Bulletins and time-sensitive opportunities are a good use for these.

The idea is to have a good variety of touchpoints that reach people often and in different ways.

— Kevin D. Feldman Feb 21, 08:28 AM #
Communication is so vital right now that newsletters are important whether they are mailed, emailed, hung behind an airplane, or written across a blimp. But they have to be sensitive to the donors and well written. Right now, personal messages are extremely important. Newsletters (or short email messages) are fine if they are part of a much more personalized program of donor contact. I was thrilled with how the Obama campaign achieved such support. I would like to ADD the concept of their approach, rather than instantly replace things that are familiar…

— Susan Scribner Feb 21, 11:35 PM #
Gensemer isn’t saying the newsletter is bad. He’s saying that targeted communications in support of discrete objectives are likely to be more effective. He challenges nonprofits to analyze the newsletter’s return rather than assuming its value a priori.

Implicit in Gensemer’s remarks is a call for a more disciplined approach to nonprofit strategy, establishing a direct link between communications activities and tangible results. The traditional nonprofit newsletter is a grab bag of event announcements, reports about past events, giving appeals, program news, impact stories, or announcements of major donations. That mix supports volunteer recruitment, volunteer and donor appreciation, donor solicitation, community building, and program participation. This sort of fuzziness leaves newsletters in the realm of “things nonprofits are supposed to do” rather than “things we do because they are the most effective means of achieving our objectives, which are x, y, and z.”

The Taproot Foundation’s donor database program is one way nonprofits can get expert help to analyze the effectiveness of their various outreach and fundraising activities. One organization I know of learned that some of their development activities had very poor yields relative to the staff and volunteer effort and hard costs they required. (www.taprootfoundation.org)

— Faith Peterson Feb 22, 11:53 AM #
Blue State Digital is suggesting to remove cultivation and stewardship email communications from their client’s outbound email strategy.
Even for a large non-profit, this is NOT a good route to take. Removing newsletters and stewardship pieces and blasting your audience with appeals TOO frequently will increased attrition rates, cause constituent confusion and lose the Organization subscription expectations.
For a political campaign, it may work. You have all the publicity you need in a short time frame across mediums. People are picking from ONLY a half a dozen options, rather than a non-profit who is competing against 100’s of other organizations. Responses will indeed be higher with appealing all the time, it’s 1 out of 6 versus 1 out of 100’s for competition. You have a presidential candidate that needs to be in and out quickly with contributions. There’s an END point in site: to the campaign, to the audience.
When you apply this to a well established non-profit organization, this takes a toll. I ask them to provide concrete case studies… Targeting your newsletters, YES, but removing them, absolutely NOT!

— Kimberly Reckner-Gromada Feb 23, 02:54 PM #
Based on the benchmarks and success of well done enewsletters we agree with the people posting here and disagree with Mr. Genesemer’s advice. In fact Vinay Bhagat our chief strategy officer offers a strong counter argument based on experience and donor research at http://www.connectioncafe.com/posts/2009/february/are-nonprofit-email.html

— Tad Druart, Convio Communications Feb 25, 10:10 AM #
Wholesale rejection of a great channel of communication is silly and counterproductive, in my view. Email newsletters remains appropriate for certain constiuences/org. types, and some have commented that their own testing confirms its validity and usefuleness as a both a communication tool and a stewardship device. Additionally, many constituents like to receive e-Newsletters since it is a green medium. Of course, each of an organizations’ marketing/communication channels should cross reference to others, so an email can link to an online version of your newsletter, and both of them would link to online giving and action opportunities, and so forth. But to reject out of hand what is a known valuable piece of an overall constituent communication plan just doesn’t make sense.

— Dave Moffatt Feb 26, 11:22 AM #

Commenting is closed for this article.

Previous: 'Slumdog' Producers Disavow Charity Connection
Next: Glass Tycoon Set to Become China's Biggest Philanthropist