5 ms·

UNICEF: Give Money, Not Facebook Likes

78 points by PankajGhosh 13y ago

Skr1bd 13y ago
Point is well taken, UNICEF. But are the people who Like the pages the same people who are likely to donate? I suspect that many of the people who Like the sites are either unable to donate or are too young to donate. So the Likes are a good idea because they encourage involvement and influence future behaviour when such people are able to do more. Might not help in the short term, but it will likely have great benefits in the future.
walshemj 13y ago
As Bob Geldoff said so elegantly at live Aid "People are dying NOW. Give us the money NOW!"
jasallen 13y ago
Fully on bored with UNICEF, but this article is poorly written. First of all, the entire article says nothing I didn't get out of the headline but it used a lot words to say it. And, the paragraph that quotes Zeynep Tufekci seems to misunderstand, or the very least mis-apply Tufecki's statement. After all, it never took a full-on activists to donate four euro to UNICEF.
- zrail 13y ago
  OT: "on board", not "on bored".
  - jasallen 13y ago
    yes, that.
anoncow 13y ago
Likes can lead to money. Think of likes as volunteers helping to spread the word.
- smokinjoe 13y ago
  Wouldn't the 'share' button be more analogous to spreading the word? At least with sharing, you have the ability to add some of your own personal language.
  - nijk 13y ago
    Likes are used to place ads. Likes is like subscribing for mail.
- mrtksn 13y ago
  Actually, likes and shares may make people feel like they did their part and can move on. Donate, then share culture would help but if everybody thinks they are doing great job by "charity marketing" then we have a problem. Probably UNICEF has a problem so they are taking an action against it. I would not say that sharing the word is volunteering because it's so trivial that people share and like things by mistake all the time. When was the last time you heard somebody accidentally helped somebody in need?
  - nijk 13y ago
    As far as slacktivism goes, people shouldn't feel good about themselves unless they are actually making an impact. Trying, be it likes, shares, or giving money to an incompetent or corrupt organization, just doesn't count unless they have evidence of results. Just like any real world project. Otherwise, these actions are just video games for personal entertainment.
  - anoncow 13y ago
    >Actually, likes and shares may make people feel like they did their part and can move on. That is true. Perhaps people who donate can share a different message. Not everyone on FB may be able to donate, but they will help spread the word which may prompt someone in their network to donate. Ignoring this base might not be smart, but yes, the message should be to donate instead of like/share/retweet.
    - 13y ago
smackfu 13y ago
Seems like they want it both ways. They put share and like and follow buttons all over their site, but then they say it's meaningless. "Likes" seem very similar to ads and mailers. They generate donations. At least Likes don't cost Unicef anything... that mailer they send me stops some kid from getting a polio vaccination.
- UVB-76 13y ago
  They're not saying it's meaningless, just that it's not going to have any direct impact.
- nijk 13y ago
  Do you have an A/B test to back up your claims of fundraising effectiveness? Fundraising finances vaccinations.
  - smackfu 13y ago
    Oh, on average, I'm sure the mailers have a net positive, or at least I hope so. I'm saying the particular mailer they send me is costing money and they aren't getting a donation from me because I already have my charities, so it's actually worse than me Liking one of their posts on Facebook.
LatvjuAvs 13y ago
Apparently throwing money at dying people does not help much either. It is like child you should feed all your life. Charity went wrong some time ago. By removing yourself from line of action and involving middle men who profits from your ignorance, this feeding can go endlessly. It works, in every aspect.
jfb 13y ago
If people do things, they're by definition not "slacktivists".
- bostonpete 13y ago
  Clicking a mouse button once counts as doing something?
- smackfu 13y ago
  The odd thing is that the biggest link on Unicef USA's page is a "Take Action" button that has you... sign a pledge. http://www.unicefusa.org/ http://www.unicefusa.org/ (Obviously, the real intent is to get your email and then send you requests for money, but they are walking a fine line here.)
- DannyBee 13y ago
  Liking is not doing something, the same way people commenting on internet forums about something (patents, privacy, whatever) is not actually doing something.
  - nsmartt 13y ago
    Commenting on internet forums and engaging in debate is at least better than clicking "like". In terms of conversation, the "like" button is DH3, where comments and debate can potentially be DH4 or higher (http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html). If I "like" a support page about marriage equality, I'm not convincing anyone who holds an opposing view. That's not necessarily true of commenting on e.g. HN. Of course, commenting does nothing for many issues, such as those requiring money, but a comment can be marginally better than a "like".
- jfb 13y ago
  Too late to edit; what I meant to say was not that "Liking" is doing; but rather, that if someone does something real, they're no longer a "slacktivist". Continue to "Like" away and salve those troubled consciences, Youth of Today.
columbo 13y ago
I'm not on facebook, but from what I've seen there doesn't seem to be an easy way to broadcast your donation. I wonder if people would be more inclined to donate if it also broadcasted "columbo gave $2" over "columbo likes this". If it sorted the highest donations to the top it'd even encourage large companies to donate for the free advertising - "Nissan gave $2,500"
- camus 13y ago
  it's up to them to create a facebook app that will broadcast messages on their page whenever someone donates. And I can help , they can hire me since I can do it ! ;)
  - rurounijones 13y ago
    Yep, they could easily add this to their donation system, I am kind of surprised they didn't do this already. Hell, this is one instance where they wouldn't even have to be sneaky about this like some scummier apps. A big "Post this donation on my facebook page" checkbox/link etc would be enough since a good number of people would probably want that feature. It seems we are living in an age of increasing open'ness (dare I say narcissism?). Might as well harness it.
    - waps 13y ago
      Because the vast majority of UNICEF money comes from having friends inside governments and employing the -usually moronic- kids of foreign government officials, to give them salaries exceeding the President's pay. Just like most worthy causes, money comes from relatively few (still hundreds to thousands in the UNICEF case) very big donors. Small donations just transfer money to banks.
  - omni 13y ago
    All they would have to do is ask; surely someone would be willing to build something simple like this for them as a contribution.
- vbuterin 13y ago
dopamean 13y ago
Maybe there should be a "Like+" button or something. You can fund your facebook account and every time you "Like+" an image the person or entity who posted the image receives a dollar which is deducted from your account. Maybe only certain types of accounts, like UNICEF, should be eligible to receive funds.
- efuquen 13y ago
  Have you heard of flattr? It operates pretty much in the way you've described: http://flattr.com/ http://flattr.com/
  - dopamean 13y ago
    I have not heard of it. Pretty cool, though it doesn't seem to be available for Facebook.
benajnim 13y ago
Bitcoin could play a key role here. In my experience, donating using bitcoin feels clicking a "like" button. After learning about the system and how to use the client, its as easy as logging into facebook to like something.
- vbuterin 13y ago
  Leaving this here: http://reddit.com/r/bitcointip http://reddit.com/r/bitcointip
bjhoops1 13y ago
I take offense at this. My facebook activity has yielded hundreds of grains of rice for starving children! I also stopped Joseph Kony and brought about marriage equality.
pointernil 13y ago
I'm working on an idea to tackle/nudge slacktivists into become really active ... or at least make visible to them how volatile and in the end meaningless their +1, Likes and Favs really are when true/real world/operative support would be due. If you are interested please stop by at www.sustinion.com as I'm looking for "external" feedback to validate the ideas.
nodata 13y ago
upvoted
paprika 13y ago
All in all, bad darts from Unicef as 'likers' donate as well. Basically they say we don't want likes, just money please. The solution is simple. The platform (in this case Facebook) has enough money to step up and give 0.01$/0.1$/1$ for each like of the photo/page. I am pretty sure it wouldn't be a significant dent for Facebook's finances, actually with proper campaign it could go in their favour via stocks. But then again, Unicef isn't the only charity in the world and supporting one and ignoring the others isn't fair as well.
xiaohanzhang14 13y ago
It's very disappointing to see such a smart community bicker about a topic they clearly know little about and have done even less research to back up their comments. Let's cut the crap about Bitcoin, building esoteric Facebook apps to broadcast message, and A/B testing funding effectiveness to prove a point. An article from Humanosphere (full disclosure, I work with this organization) http://www.humanosphere.org/2013/04/unicef-sweden-wants-your-money-not-your-likes/ http://www.humanosphere.org/2013/04/unicef-sweden-wants-your... actually digs a little deeper into the topic. Regardless of what you think of The Atlantic's article, the UNICEF campaign is fully integrated with press ads, tv spots, radio commercials, digital material, and PR. An integrated campaign on this scale is (unfortunately) relatively unheard of in the development community due to funding issues and uproar whenever any non-profit's seen to be spending excessively on initiatives that don't directly go to the task at hand. I personally think the campaign is effective; UNICEF is going against the grain by calling out the shortcomings of social media when most other non-profits (I've had experience working with a couple) are all using likes, retweets, and pins as KPIs (but clearly don't have a perfect correlation with the bottom line)

78 points by PankajGhosh 13y ago

Point is well taken, UNICEF. But are the people who Like the pages the same people who are likely to donate? I suspect that many of the people who Like the sites are either unable to donate or are too young to donate. So the Likes are a good idea because they encourage involvement and influence future behaviour when such people are able to do more. Might not help in the short term, but it will likely have great benefits in the future.

walshemj 13y ago

As Bob Geldoff said so elegantly at live Aid "People are dying NOW. Give us the money NOW!"

jasallen 13y ago

Fully on bored with UNICEF, but this article is poorly written. First of all, the entire article says nothing I didn't get out of the headline but it used a lot words to say it. And, the paragraph that quotes Zeynep Tufekci seems to misunderstand, or the very least mis-apply Tufecki's statement. After all, it never took a full-on activists to donate four euro to UNICEF.

zrail 13y ago
OT: "on board", not "on bored".
- jasallen 13y ago
  yes, that.

anoncow 13y ago

Likes can lead to money. Think of likes as volunteers helping to spread the word.

smokinjoe 13y ago
Wouldn't the 'share' button be more analogous to spreading the word? At least with sharing, you have the ability to add some of your own personal language.
- nijk 13y ago
  Likes are used to place ads. Likes is like subscribing for mail.
mrtksn 13y ago
Actually, likes and shares may make people feel like they did their part and can move on. Donate, then share culture would help but if everybody thinks they are doing great job by "charity marketing" then we have a problem. Probably UNICEF has a problem so they are taking an action against it. I would not say that sharing the word is volunteering because it's so trivial that people share and like things by mistake all the time. When was the last time you heard somebody accidentally helped somebody in need?
- nijk 13y ago
  As far as slacktivism goes, people shouldn't feel good about themselves unless they are actually making an impact. Trying, be it likes, shares, or giving money to an incompetent or corrupt organization, just doesn't count unless they have evidence of results. Just like any real world project. Otherwise, these actions are just video games for personal entertainment.
- anoncow 13y ago
  >Actually, likes and shares may make people feel like they did their part and can move on. That is true. Perhaps people who donate can share a different message. Not everyone on FB may be able to donate, but they will help spread the word which may prompt someone in their network to donate. Ignoring this base might not be smart, but yes, the message should be to donate instead of like/share/retweet.
  - 13y ago

smackfu 13y ago

Seems like they want it both ways. They put share and like and follow buttons all over their site, but then they say it's meaningless. "Likes" seem very similar to ads and mailers. They generate donations. At least Likes don't cost Unicef anything... that mailer they send me stops some kid from getting a polio vaccination.

UVB-76 13y ago
They're not saying it's meaningless, just that it's not going to have any direct impact.
nijk 13y ago
Do you have an A/B test to back up your claims of fundraising effectiveness? Fundraising finances vaccinations.
- smackfu 13y ago
  Oh, on average, I'm sure the mailers have a net positive, or at least I hope so. I'm saying the particular mailer they send me is costing money and they aren't getting a donation from me because I already have my charities, so it's actually worse than me Liking one of their posts on Facebook.

LatvjuAvs 13y ago

Apparently throwing money at dying people does not help much either. It is like child you should feed all your life. Charity went wrong some time ago. By removing yourself from line of action and involving middle men who profits from your ignorance, this feeding can go endlessly. It works, in every aspect.

jfb 13y ago

If people do things, they're by definition not "slacktivists".

bostonpete 13y ago
Clicking a mouse button once counts as doing something?
smackfu 13y ago
The odd thing is that the biggest link on Unicef USA's page is a "Take Action" button that has you... sign a pledge. http://www.unicefusa.org/ http://www.unicefusa.org/ (Obviously, the real intent is to get your email and then send you requests for money, but they are walking a fine line here.)
DannyBee 13y ago
Liking is not doing something, the same way people commenting on internet forums about something (patents, privacy, whatever) is not actually doing something.
- nsmartt 13y ago
  Commenting on internet forums and engaging in debate is at least better than clicking "like". In terms of conversation, the "like" button is DH3, where comments and debate can potentially be DH4 or higher (http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html http://www.paulgraham.com/disagree.html). If I "like" a support page about marriage equality, I'm not convincing anyone who holds an opposing view. That's not necessarily true of commenting on e.g. HN. Of course, commenting does nothing for many issues, such as those requiring money, but a comment can be marginally better than a "like".
jfb 13y ago
Too late to edit; what I meant to say was not that "Liking" is doing; but rather, that if someone does something real, they're no longer a "slacktivist". Continue to "Like" away and salve those troubled consciences, Youth of Today.

columbo 13y ago

I'm not on facebook, but from what I've seen there doesn't seem to be an easy way to broadcast your donation. I wonder if people would be more inclined to donate if it also broadcasted "columbo gave $2" over "columbo likes this". If it sorted the highest donations to the top it'd even encourage large companies to donate for the free advertising - "Nissan gave $2,500"

camus 13y ago
it's up to them to create a facebook app that will broadcast messages on their page whenever someone donates. And I can help , they can hire me since I can do it ! ;)
- rurounijones 13y ago
  Yep, they could easily add this to their donation system, I am kind of surprised they didn't do this already. Hell, this is one instance where they wouldn't even have to be sneaky about this like some scummier apps. A big "Post this donation on my facebook page" checkbox/link etc would be enough since a good number of people would probably want that feature. It seems we are living in an age of increasing open'ness (dare I say narcissism?). Might as well harness it.
  - waps 13y ago
    Because the vast majority of UNICEF money comes from having friends inside governments and employing the -usually moronic- kids of foreign government officials, to give them salaries exceeding the President's pay. Just like most worthy causes, money comes from relatively few (still hundreds to thousands in the UNICEF case) very big donors. Small donations just transfer money to banks.
- omni 13y ago
  All they would have to do is ask; surely someone would be willing to build something simple like this for them as a contribution.
vbuterin 13y ago

dopamean 13y ago

Maybe there should be a "Like+" button or something. You can fund your facebook account and every time you "Like+" an image the person or entity who posted the image receives a dollar which is deducted from your account. Maybe only certain types of accounts, like UNICEF, should be eligible to receive funds.

efuquen 13y ago
Have you heard of flattr? It operates pretty much in the way you've described: http://flattr.com/ http://flattr.com/
- dopamean 13y ago
  I have not heard of it. Pretty cool, though it doesn't seem to be available for Facebook.

benajnim 13y ago

Bitcoin could play a key role here. In my experience, donating using bitcoin feels clicking a "like" button. After learning about the system and how to use the client, its as easy as logging into facebook to like something.

vbuterin 13y ago
Leaving this here: http://reddit.com/r/bitcointip http://reddit.com/r/bitcointip

bjhoops1 13y ago

I take offense at this. My facebook activity has yielded hundreds of grains of rice for starving children! I also stopped Joseph Kony and brought about marriage equality.

pointernil 13y ago

I'm working on an idea to tackle/nudge slacktivists into become really active ... or at least make visible to them how volatile and in the end meaningless their +1, Likes and Favs really are when true/real world/operative support would be due. If you are interested please stop by at www.sustinion.com as I'm looking for "external" feedback to validate the ideas.

nodata 13y ago

upvoted

paprika 13y ago

All in all, bad darts from Unicef as 'likers' donate as well. Basically they say we don't want likes, just money please. The solution is simple. The platform (in this case Facebook) has enough money to step up and give 0.01$/0.1$/1$ for each like of the photo/page. I am pretty sure it wouldn't be a significant dent for Facebook's finances, actually with proper campaign it could go in their favour via stocks. But then again, Unicef isn't the only charity in the world and supporting one and ignoring the others isn't fair as well.

xiaohanzhang14 13y ago

It's very disappointing to see such a smart community bicker about a topic they clearly know little about and have done even less research to back up their comments. Let's cut the crap about Bitcoin, building esoteric Facebook apps to broadcast message, and A/B testing funding effectiveness to prove a point. An article from Humanosphere (full disclosure, I work with this organization) http://www.humanosphere.org/2013/04/unicef-sweden-wants-your-money-not-your-likes/ http://www.humanosphere.org/2013/04/unicef-sweden-wants-your... actually digs a little deeper into the topic. Regardless of what you think of The Atlantic's article, the UNICEF campaign is fully integrated with press ads, tv spots, radio commercials, digital material, and PR. An integrated campaign on this scale is (unfortunately) relatively unheard of in the development community due to funding issues and uproar whenever any non-profit's seen to be spending excessively on initiatives that don't directly go to the task at hand. I personally think the campaign is effective; UNICEF is going against the grain by calling out the shortcomings of social media when most other non-profits (I've had experience working with a couple) are all using likes, retweets, and pins as KPIs (but clearly don't have a perfect correlation with the bottom line)