Jump to content
aberdeen-music
Sign in to follow this  
Oedo 808

Sponsor a Charity

Recommended Posts

I've been seeing a lot of adverts on TV recently with charities asking people to sponsor one thing or another.

Sponsor a Dog. Sponsor a Cat. Sponsor a Polar Bear, a child in Africa, a Panda, an abused child, sponsor Great Ormond Street Hospital etc etc. (You'd have thought the sole rights from JM Barrie's Peter Pan would put them in a better position than most hospitals, no?)

I dunno if it's just me, but the more of these adverts I see the more I become bothered by it.

I mean, isn't the word "sponsor" just a nice and fluffy way of saying, "We don't want a donation from you, we want your money every single month".

I'm all for charity, but to me charity is an act of kindness at the giver's prerogative. It should be the person dictating how much they give and when, not the charity telling me how much my current generosity bill is.

It all just makes me feel sick, dirty and disgusted with the charities involved and completely erodes my confidence in them. On an instinctual level I just feel that when a charity becomes too much like a business you should start asking questions about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People aren't quick to part with cash therefore charities constantly need new and innovative ways to sustain funding. They don't get money by not asking, not accosting you on the street, not creating dramatic TV commercials...

Moreover, given that they represent the world's poorest and neediest, I can think of many things which make me feel far more 'sick, dirty and disgusted'.

I pretty much disagree with this aswell:

when a charity becomes too much like a business you should start asking questions about it

Successful businesses get the most out from the minimum input. Charities need effective management, dynamic personnel and all the other hallmarks of business, (obviously minus the financial profit).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i agree with the above, but what i think Robert is trying to say is that there are so many of these adverts compared to the past, and since many of the charities have similar aims, it is difficult to know which one(s) to support.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i agree with the above, but what i think Robert is trying to say is that there are so many of these adverts compared to the past, and since many of the charities have similar aims, it is difficult to know which one(s) to support.

I don't think he's torn between supporting animal rights group A or B.

Rather:

I'm all for charity, but to me charity is an act of kindness at the giver's prerogative. It should be the person dictating how much they give and when, not the charity telling me how much my current generosity bill is.

He dislikes the notion that charities ask for money, and in monthly instalments. Obviously the idea of dowdy old women in drab George Street shops attempting to shift 3rd-hand 'hungry hippos' games is far more appealing and correct than the many varied and inspired methods top charities employ to sustain funding and services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree. I think people are fairly quick to part with their cash in the name of a good cause, but asking them to commit to continually donating again and again is different.

Successful businesses get the most out from the minimum input. Charities need effective management, dynamic personnel and all the other hallmarks of business, (obviously minus the financial profit).

Without researching further I would guess that those effective managers you speak of and at least some of those dynamic personnel collect decent wages for their efforts. Again, I don't have a problem with that as such, but it ties into my whole uneasy feeling about the way these organisations are run, how the money is collected and where it is going.

given that they represent the world's poorest and neediest

That's what I wonder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I disagree. I think people are fairly quick to part with their cash in the name of a good cause, but asking them to commit to continually donating again and again is different.

I don't give any money to charities in monthly instalments. However, I think it's perfectly acceptable to ask people to donate a small portion of their monthly wages to a cause (selected by themselves) that they feel deserves it.

Without researching further I would guess that those effective managers you speak of and at least some of those dynamic personnel collect decent wages for their efforts. Again, I don't have a problem with that as such, but it ties into my whole uneasy feeling about the way these organisations are run, how the money is collected and where it is going.

A vague feeling of uneasiness based on no research is probably not the best grounds to base criticism (if you can call it that) on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
the many varied and inspired methods top charities employ to sustain funding and services.

this is very true for the "top" charities, off the top of my head im thinking about the oxjam gigs that are organised for oxfam, which you are right are very inventive, and successful.

but there are hundreds of less well known charities that employ television adverts as seemingly their only means for funding, concerning these charities, one MAY be dubious to where the money is going.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I would guess that those effective managers you speak of and at least some of those dynamic personnel collect decent wages for their efforts.

In my experience this is emphatically not the case. Rather, those running charitable operations tend to be committed, hard-working, experienced and dedicated. It's not something you go into for money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
this is very true for the "top" charities, off the top of my head im thinking about the oxjam gigs that are organised for oxfam, which you are right are very inventive, and successful.

but there are hundreds of less well known charities that employ television adverts as seemingly their only means for funding, concerning these charities, one MAY be dubious to where the money is going.

Yes, Oxfam's 'Gift Aid' also springs to mind.

Regarding your second point: Yes, 'MAY', the important word. I don't really think this is Robert's point either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think Robert is trying to say is that there are so many of these adverts compared to the past, and since many of the charities have similar aims, it is difficult to know which one(s) to support.

I think that's a slightly different issue, although important. For instance, I have noticed that some of the charities advertising don't operate in Scotland but neglect to make that clear in their advertising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hail team fudge.

I don't mind donating but if it's to pay a wage..... I'm not interested.

Absolutely. I'd be interested to know how much of the money chuggers get from people on the high street actually goes to any form of charitable work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't mind donating but if it's to pay a wage..... I'm not interested.

A lot of people seem to be of this mindset. Oxfam offer you the chance to determine where your money goes when you donate. You can buy goats, textbooks, seeds for farmers or educate a teacher if you really want.

I personally wouldn't require this level of determination over where my money goes, preferring to believe that charities understand the situations they're dealing with better than me and therefore know how to spend the money better than I do.

The whole idea that 'wages' = bad is just a little bit strange. Do you object to the idea that people should be paid to support the less fortunate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you object to the idea that people should be paid to support the less fortunate?

I think it's more a suspicion of misrepresentation.

If you sign up with one of the manically grinning dancers on the high street and agree to give, say, 5 a month to Charity X, how much of that is going to the charity and how much is paying for the guy/girl who just accosted you on the high street? I never, ever sign up with chuggers and prefer to keep my charitable donations private and on my own terms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it's more a suspicion of misrepresentation.

If you sign up with one of the manically grinning dancers on the high street and agree to give, say, 5 a month to Charity X, how much of that is going to the charity and how much is paying for the guy/girl who just accosted you on the high street? I never, ever sign up with chuggers and prefer to keep my charitable donations private and on my own terms.

I've been told by reliable sources that this 'chugging' you speak off involves long hours in all weather for minimum wage. Sure, no-one likes being accosted on the street, but surely they deserve to get paid for standing around all day fundraising. And grinning? Oh the audacity! Give me a dour face and a mumble any day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tam o' Shantie

actually it aint minimum wage by a long shot. it is a shitty job though. my mate did it briefly in glasgow, he compared it to working at space kitchens (an educated comparison). however, i think he made 7/8 an hour or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, better hourly than I get. Interesting considering I work with disabled/autistic/dyslexic kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hail team fudge.

I don't mind donating but if it's to pay a wage..... I'm not interested.

Unfortunately if you take this view I don't think you'll ever be donating to a charity. It's a nice idea to think that all charities can get by entirely with voluntary support but in the real world it's not usually possible.

A better stance is to try to look at what percentage of the money they raise actually gets through to the cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×