Comments on: Questions about the @ChildFund Twitter campaign

By: Twitter community-building initiative by ChildFund International draws some flak « Giving in a digital world

Tue, 14 Jul 2009 18:52:17 +0000

[...] So, it looks like there’s a key lesson to be learned here. Before launching any such social media initiative, do make absolutely sure that you’ve thought the whole thing through and are able to explain exactly what the deal is – in this case where the matching funds came from and just what else ChildFund has in store for those who sign-up, beyond the knowledge that they’ve contributed one-two-hundredth of a set of farming supplies for a family. That way you pre-empt any unnecessary suspicions and resulting tricky questions and you’re far more likely to generate a good-sized pool of genuinely interested followers. Indeed, this learning goes for any such prospect pool building initiative – online or offline – although you’re potentially dealing with a more savvy and challenging audience when you embark on Twitter-based initiative than when using more traditional channels (as poor Mr Livingstone has discovered). [...]

By: Answers About, Insights Into the @childfund Twitter Effort » The Buzz Bin

Answers About, Insights Into the @childfund Twitter Effort » The Buzz Bin — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 16:44:00 +0000

[...] comments that have arisen about the @childfund Twitter campaign. Specifically, people have questioned the funding of the effort, and the rising trend of providing a reward for following (Fishing Pond Construction image by [...]

By: Geoff Livingston

Geoff Livingston — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 15:06:29 +0000

Fact, money was raised for the Twitter effort specifically, I was corrected this morning. It’s all new money set aside for Tweeple.

By: zoe

zoe — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 13:51:49 +0000

i think i’m still confused. what’s the simple answer to your original question colin? For every 200 new followers on their twitter account ChildFund gives money from the marketing budget towards the actual charity?

some conversations are just not made for twitter.
z

By: David Hylton

David Hylton — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 12:52:30 +0000

Colin, Thank you for your blog post and your questions. We want to clarify a few things about the Twitter campaign. We are not actually using any of our allocated money. We’ve reached out to donors who have said they will fund this campaign. This is above the amount they usually give. The Twitter campaign isn’t about raising money. It’s about raising awareness of the work that we do for deprived, excluded and vulnerable children in the 31 countries where we work. We wanted followers to see firsthand how the money can make a difference. So as we reach the thresholds we’ll purchase the items and then send them to the countries. We’ll get photos and videos and share the stories of those who received the gifts. Thanks again!

By: Geoff Livingston

Geoff Livingston — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 10:47:17 +0000

Thanks, Colin. Regardless of where we sit on method, I sense you and I both care about this issue very such, and want the best for the beneficiary. That is something we can both celebrate: The desire to change the world for the better and help children (and others) in need globally, and locally.

For me, ChildFund offers a great opportunity to make a difference through this effort. I hope you’ll understand my passion.

By: Colin Carmichael

Colin Carmichael — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 04:44:20 +0000

I never questioned spending money on marketing and communications – a very necessary part of the work.

As to my take on the re-brand, that was more tongue-in-cheek than anything – though I do keep almost saying ChildFind (the missing children folks) instead of ChildFund.

By: Geoff Livingston

Geoff Livingston — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:22:18 +0000

Thanks for your continuing concern about this issue, Colin. Our efforts are being funded out of the marketing budget not pre-earmarked dollars given by sponsors for gifts. Those marketing dollars have been re-allocated from traditional advertising to social media.

Per our Twitter exchange, rather than buying as space or SEO ads on Google, we are using them to reward Twitter followers with 1) sponsorship of gifts and 2) accountability by reporting back what’s done with those gifts. So in fact, ChildFund is giving more than it would have normally. We are showing the wares, so to speak.

As you also admitted in our Twitter discussion, every charity uses a portion of its budget for communications, and so we are using it in this fashion rather than traditional means to bring awareness of our rebranding effort to ChildFund International (which you also mentioned you did not like on Twitter, if I recall).

We intend to post further on this on Wednesday if not sooner and I promise to link back to this post in reference, but thank you again for raising the question again.