Go to content Go to navigation Go to search

October 28, 2009

Americans Unsure About Social Media's Charity Benefits, Survey Finds

Americans seem to be conflicted about the role of social networks as a way to support the causes they care about.

According to a new survey, while nearly eight in 10 people who use new media think the technology can help companies and nonprofit organizations to raise money and awareness for causes, fewer than one in five has made a donation using the tools.

In September Cone, a Boston marketing firm, asked 587 people who use new media a series of questions about how they use the technology to interact with companies and nonprofit organizations.

For the study, the company defined new media as “dialogue among individuals or groups” on social networks, blogs, Twitter, online games, mobile devices, message boards, and sites that allow people to share photos, audio, and video. In some cases, the company also included e-mail and Web sites.

Nearly three quarters of respondents agreed with the statement that new media raise their awareness about causes but do not motivate them to do any more to help, and 39 percent said they didn’t trust that their efforts would actually help the cause.

Among the other reasons participants sited for the lack of engagement:

• I’d rather spend my time and/or money supporting causes offline. (31 percent)

• I didn’t see any existing results or impacts. (27 percent)

• I felt overwhelmed by the number of causes on new media. (22 percent)

• My favorite issue, cause, or organization doesn’t use new media. (19 percent)

• I didn’t understand the tool/application. (17 percent)

“Americans are actively engaged with causes on new media, but they’re lacking a degree of trust that takes them to the next level of engagement,” Alison DaSilva, Cone’s executive vice president of cause branding, said in a written statement. “Organizations can overcome this barrier by showing tangible and compelling results, offering multiple consumer touch points, and making the bridge to offline activities wherever possible.”

— Nicole Wallace

Wednesday October 28, 2009 | Permalink

Comments

1. Thank you for an insightful entry. In South Africa, where a recent study showed that only 1% of NGOs use the social media leading tool, Twitter, we have been urging peers to explore the potential. It is an uphill battle and very much related to digital difference issues and also the same concern raised here – need for tangible results and offline touch points.

   — Alanagh Recreant    Oct 29, 01:15 AM    #

2. Regarding – “ they’re lacking a degree of trust that takes them to the next level of engagement….Organizations can overcome this barrier by showing tangible and compelling results, offering multiple consumer touch points, and making the bridge to offline activities wherever possible.” We here at GreatNonprofits (www.greatnonprofits.org) see nonprofits increasingly demonstrate trustworthiness and results by pointing people to their reviews. Many nonprofits link to their reviews from social networking sites. The reviews – written by donors, volunteers, and clients – help make the work of the nonprofit real and credible.

   — Perla Ni    Oct 29, 02:36 PM    #

3. First, regardless of the marketing channel, anyone using it must already be skilled at both marketing and writing donor-centered copy. These are essential if any channel is to be effective for the nonprofit. And it includes the use of social media (SM).

   Next, it’s not clear to me how the following conclusion was drawn based on the referenced survey: “Americans are ‘lacking a degree of trust’ and that’s why they’re not using SM to donate or otherwise engage.” There’s much we don’t know by reading this article. Many possibilities on why donors aren’t taking action come to mind including … perhaps the calls to action in the SM communications were weak or nonexistent. On the other hand, nonprofits are wise to include messages in the mix that are pure cultivation. Every communication cannot be an “ask” for money, for example. This drives donors away. Have a brief message with a link to the nonprofit website for the full story – a success story that reveals how the nonprofit helps people thanks to the support of donors. Naturally somewhere (easy to find) on the web page is a DONATE button.

   Track all the inbound traffic and use analytics to see how many convert to donations or other desired actions. This is some of the valuable data to seek and it will show the results of your SM and any other marketing channel.

   Bottom line: Understand marketing and how to effectively communicate with donors. Know how to effectively use each marketing channel because each is unique and requires some customization. Finally, do what you can to track results all the way through to conversion. The results for your own organization are what matter most. Don’t let surveys like this discourage you.

   Karen Zapp, Fundraising Copywriter
   http://www.PKscribe.com

   — Karen Zapp    Oct 29, 03:40 PM    #

4. My first thought is (SM) is not the format for collecting money. Facebook, Twitter etc, are more suited to informing & encouraging low level direct participation. Effort is a valuable resource many times much more useful than money in proceeding to worthy goals.

   — Doug McKay    Nov 9, 09:06 AM    #

	Post a comment:
Your name		Remember
Your e-mail address
Post this comment
		Textile Help
	Your e-mail address is required, but it will not be posted.

Previous: Church Donations Remain Resilient This Year, Study Finds
Next: Aid Group Taps Book Clubs to Help Raise Money and Awareness

---

Copyright © 2009 The Chronicle of Philanthropy