Coordinating Maritime Affairs and Investment Minister Luhut Binsar Pandjaitan is calling on public transportation providers to not reduce the frequency and capacity of their services despite the government’s appeal for people to work and study at home.Luhut said during a live online press conference on Monday that he had talked with all state-owned and city-owned transportation providers about them resuming normal services.“There will be no reduction in public transportation services. Rather, if needed we will add [to them],” said Luhut. “We do not want the MRT to be crammed because crammed public transportation is one of the mediums for the coronavirus spreading,” he added. Topics : On Monday, a restriction on the operational hours of public transportation imposed by Jakarta Governor Anies Baswedan in a bid to contain the spread of COVID-19 appears to have backfired, with large crowds and long lines building up at Transjakarta and MRT Jakarta stations across the capital.Transportation Ministry Land Director General Budi Setyadi called on the Jakarta administration and the city Transportation Agency to reevaluate the restrictions. He called for the city administration to consult with the Transportation Ministry first before making policy about public transportation. After a chaotic Monday caused by the limited transportation services, Anies Baswedan on Monday evening said in a press conference that MRT Jakarta, Transjakarta and LRT Jakarta would get back to normal on Tuesday without any operational restrictions. However, the administration said it would limit the number of passengers in each train car and bus.”In line with the president’s [Joko Widodo’s] instructions regarding public transportation operations, we hereby will return the operations to normal with high frequencies and we will carry out social discipline,” said Anies.The Jakarta governor also asked schools in Jakarta to close and teachers to arrange online learning methods for their students. Many government and private offices have also asked their employees to work remotely at home.”This means that there will be a limitation on the number of passengers per bus and per car in every mode of public transportation operating under the Jakarta provincial government. There will also be restrictions on the number of people queuing at the bus stops and stations,” said Anies.
A new fire has been lit underneath the No.12 USC women’s volleyball team during the offseason, and that excitement and energy is allowing the team to perform above the expectations of many, including head coach Mick Haley.“The performance differences between this summer and previous seasons are like night and day,” Haley said. “Our gym culture is truly exceptional with these girls and the energy this season is exciting. It’s what we like to see at the beginning of the season.”Leading the charge · Senior Jessica Gysin looks to guide USC along with co-captain Alli Hilgren. – Eric Wolfe | Daily TrojanUSC’s women’s volleyball team has been a major force in the Trojan Athletic Department for many years, spending most of the recent years in top-5 rankings, but a mix of injuries and the loss of senior leadership caused the team to slip down to a No.12 preseason ranking.The team captains this season have taken the responsibility of getting back that senior leadership and are taking that role to heart by dedicating themselves to bonding the team as a family and cohesive unit. Seniors Jessica Gysin, an All-American outside hitter, and Libero Alli Hillgren have focused on their personal game as well as the team game and have really excelled in their offseason practice.“The seniors are doing a great job getting the team together,” Haley said. “Gysin and Hillgren have brought a maturity and skill to the rest of the team, and they are really bonded as a group.”Along with the two team captains, the team has one remaining senior: Emilie Stewart, a middle blocker and outside hitter who transferred from Fordham last season.With such a young team, Haley has said that the sophomores needed to step up to have a successful season, and after their time off, he feels like they have done that and more.“Alex Jupiter has shown a huge improvement in her precision,” Haley said about the sophomore. “We’ve had a lot of left-side hitters step up to the challenge after a few injuries have left a hole.”Jupiter led the team in kills and points last season as a freshman, which, Haley said, gave him confidence that she is ready to step up this season.Junior Geena Urango’s high jump is also showing potential as a weapon for the Women of Troy, which has her in the pack of prospects for an outside hitter position, along with freshman Katie Fuller, junior Kimmee Roleder and Jupiter.Something unexpectedalso happened during the offseason to improve the team’s depth: the freshmen came in ready to compete.“This preseason the freshmen made a huge impact on the team,” Haley said. “And that never happens right when freshmen come out to play. They all came in with the energy and responsibility to compete with the team, and it changed the way the team worked together.”The biggest change to the initial roster was the switch of setter this season.Senior Taylor Carico announced at the end of last season that she planned to transfer to the University of Minnesota for her final season. Her explanation was that she was looking for a change of scenery and new experiences, though rumors circulated that she might have been unhappy with the Trojan program.Whatever the reason, Carico’s departure left a void in the roster that has been filled by sophomore Kendall Bateman. Bateman played for the US Junior National team this summer and increased her speed and leadership capabilities, leaving Haley feeling confident in her ability to guide the team to some wins.The team is hoping to start the season with some of those much sought-after wins as they head to East Lansing, Mich. for the Michigan State University showcase. This Friday they will play host Michigan State at 3:30 p.m., and will continue the tournament on Saturday by playing North Carolina at 9:30 p.m. and finally Albany at 2:30 p.m.“Each team [in the tournament] is going to present us with a different challenge,” Haley said. “This tournament will show us what we need to work on the rest of the season. We have a chance to be really good, and I am excited to see what this group of players can do with the skills.”
Crescent City >> Jaden Gorge gave up nine hits and struck out three in a complete-game effort as the Arcata Tigers outlasted the Del Norte Warriors 9-5 in Big 5 Conference baseball action Tuesday afternoon at Del Norte High School.“They (Del Norte) got us in the championship game of the tournament in Redding last weekend, so it was good to get this win,” Arcata coach Troy Ghisetti said.The Tigers (9-4 overall, 3-1 Big 5) quickly took advantage of what was a porous defensive showing behind …
A news item in Science1 entitled “Academia as a ‘One Party’ System” will probably attract the attention of conservative talk show hosts:Universities in the United States are very keen on fostering “diversity” as long as it’s not ideological diversity, according to the National Association of Scholars (NAS), a conservative group of academics. Last year NAS surveyed members of scholarly societies in six fields in the social sciences, asking which political party they identified with. About 30% of the 5486 people polled responded; of these, 80% were Democrats. Economist Daniel B. Klein of Santa Clara University in California and Charlotta Stern of the Institute for Social Research in Stockholm, Sweden, conclude that because the prevalence of Democrats was even higher among younger academics, it appears that “lopsidedness has become more extreme over the past decades, and … unless we believe that current professors occasionally mature into Republicans, it will become even more extreme in the future.” “The ‘one-party campus’ is a problem irrespective of what one’s own views happen to be,” the authors warn. (Klein says Stern is a liberal and he himself is a libertarian.) They suggest that measures could be taken–such as “proportional voting on curriculum and hiring decisions”–to enable political minority voices to be heard.The ratios of Democrats to Republicans varied from 3 to 1 in Economics to 30 to 1 in Anthropology, with Political Science, History, Philosophy and Sociology scaling in between.2 Surprising as it may seem (sarcasm intended), it appears that Republicans are an endangered species on college campuses. This announcement motivated us to check the National Association of Scholars website to see if there were similar statistics for science faculty, and sure enough, there were. Klein and Andrew Western have a working paper from their survey of Stanford and Berkeley.3 The Democratic-Republican (D:R) ratios for the hard sciences track those for the social sciences: Biology 21:0 (Berkeley) and 29:2 (Stanford); Chemistry 32:4 (Berkeley) and 10:5 (Stanford); Mathematics 23:6 (Berkeley) and 12:3 (Stanford); Neurology/Neurobiology 55:4 (Berkeley) and 13:2 (Stanford); Physics 28:2 (Berkeley) and 14:3 (Stanford). Though not as pronounced, the trend held up in the Engineering departments: Civil Engineering 14:4 (Berkeley) and 10:3 (Stanford); Electrical Engineering 22:7 (Berkeley) and 18:6 (Stanford). There was not a single subject area where Republican faculty members had representation even close to parity with Democrats. Several had zero or one Republican, like Anthropology (12:0 Berkeley and 6:0 Stanford), Psychology (28:1 Berkeley and 24:0 Stanford), Sociology (17:0 Berkeley and 10:0 Stanford), English (29:1 Berkeley and 22:1 Stanford), French/Italian (12:0 Berkeley and 1:0 Stanford), History (31:1 Berkeley and 22:0 Stanford), Linguistics (7:1 Berkeley and 6:0 Stanford), Music (13:1 Berkeley and 4:0 Stanford), Philosophy (9:1 Berkeley and 10:1 Stanford), Journalism (4:0 Berkeley). Even Religious Studies was dominated by Democrats (2:1 Berkeley and 7:0 Stanford). The overall ratio of Democrats to Republicans for the Hard Sciences and Math categories at these two prestigious universities was 237:31, nearly eight to one. For the Social Sciences categories, it was 177:13, almost 14 to one. For the Humanities, it was 175:8, almost 22 to one. The overall score in all 23 departments was 720 Democrats and 81 Republicans, nearly nine to one. The authors make their conclusions clear and forceful:A ratio of even 2 to 1 is deadly to the minority. A ratio of 5 to 1 means marginalization. Someone of a minority viewpoint is dependent frequently on the cooperation of her departmental colleagues for many small considerations. Lopsidedness means that dissenters are avoided or expelled, and that any who survive are very unlikely to be vocal critics of the dominant viewpoints. These facts are inherently important. Academia is a major part of the political culture; it profoundly influences how tens of millions of Americans will understand social affairs and, indeed, their own personal selfhood. The next step, then, is full awareness. All interested parties—students, parents, taxpayers, and the faculty themselves—should become aware of the facts.1Random Samples, “Academia As a ‘One-Party’ System,” Science, Volume 306, Number 5702, Issue of 03 December 2004.2“Surveys on Political Diversity in American Higher Education,” National Association of Scholars.3Daniel B. Klein and Andrew Western, “No. 54: How Many Democrats per Republican at UC-Berkeley and Stanford? Voter Registration Data Across 23 Academic Departments,” Scandinavian Working Papers in Economics. See also the Students for Academic Freedom website.Here is our long-sought data to corroborate what we declared was intuitively obvious back on 09/22/2003: the Darwin Party is virtually synonymous with the Democratic Party. In academia, many of them are liberals, secularists and socialists. So connect the dots. Who are the ones writing all those Darwinian just-so stories in the science journals? Are they the neutral, objective, unbiased scientists in lab coats? Do they represent a cross-section of American political spectrum, such that it could be claimed the evidence supports evolution to any unbiased observer? Do these professors reflect a cross-section of American culture, values, and ideals? No. They are the same ones protesting the war against terrorism, voting for same-sex marriage, standing silent as courts trump the will of the people, and loathing the military. Since Republicans are more likely to hold conservative family values, attend church, believe in God and oppose abortion, this should make the light finally go on about the connection between Darwinism and secular liberalism, and make educated people question whether Darwinian evolution is strictly a scientific issue. It’s alarming to note also the rise in anti-Semitism on college campuses. Palestinian terrorists are routinely given a pass as “freedom fighters” while Israeli actions in their own defense are painted in the vilest terms. Notice also how the liberal academics tend to see the U.N. as the solution to all problems, and castigate the Republican administration for not taking action on global warming (which, we all know, is caused by evolved aliens—see 12/27/2003 editorial). Are these mere coincidences? Does it appear that certain political and scientific views have a common ancestor? Do you begin to suspect that, on some issues, political ideologues are co-opting the sacred cow of “science” to rationalize their political ideology and world view? Is it not for good reason we label the evolution propagandists the Darwin Party? We’d like to hear Ken and Eugenie explain away these statistics. Whatever the cause, and whatever it means, the political situation on American campuses is severely broken and needs “affirmative action” in the best sense of the term. How ironic that the party that parades its values of inclusiveness, diversity and tolerance should have such a radically one-sided political slant in the very institution that is supposed to represent the open marketplace of ideas. These statistics should alarm Democrats as well as Republicans. They should alarm parents who consider sending their impressionable high school grads to learn under these professors. Would they expect their sons and daughters to learn good political science at the Democratic National Convention? Imagine Congress with ratios like these, and the laws one side could pass to perpetuate its dominance and suppress dissent. No one should stand for this kind of inequity in academia. We suspect that if parity is ever achieved, the Darwin Party will lose its hubris and be forced to get off the sofa (see 12/22/2003 commentary) and do real science. If that happens, and Republican PhD biologists and anthropologists with “God bless America” bumper stickers get a hearing, Darwinists will be forced to defend their position in open debate about the evidence rather than taking evolution for granted and ignoring their critics. When that happens, Darwinism is doomed.(Visited 37 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0
Match.58 percent$59 Standalone.31 percent$55 When it comes to online fundraising, there is no “one size fits all” magic formula to inspire list members to give. However, some tactics do work better than others.In an attempt to find out which strategies work best and when, we reviewed more than 180 fundraising appeals sent out over the course of the 2006 calendar year by nine prominent national non-profit organizations (see Study Participants for a full list). We explored everything from “double your money” matching gift opportunities to deadline-driven campaigns to goal-oriented asks. For the purposes of our analysis, we grouped the appeals we reviewed into one or more of the following four tactic categories:Multiple Appeal Series. Messages sent as part of a cohesive, multiple appeal campaign over the course of three weeks were compared to stand alone appeals that were not part of a larger series.Deadline-Driven. Stand alone or multiple appeal series that used a deadline to drive giving were compared to those without a deadline.Matching Gift. Stand alone or multiple appeal fundraising series that included a matching gift offer were compared to those without a matching gift element.Dollar Goal. Stand alone or multiple appeal series that focused on reaching a monetary goal were compared to those that did not make use of a dollar goal.However, many of the messages we reviewed fell into more than one of these categories — for example, a three-appeal matching gift series with a deadline of June 2nd and a goal of raising $25,000 would fall into all four categories. Because there are substantial variations in response rate, average gift, etc., among the organizations, we chose to evaluate these four tactics within each organization rather than compare the messages to each other. This led to a fairly small sample size, making it harder to draw definitive conclusions; however, our results did trend toward statistical significance in three of the four tactic categories.Multiple Appeal SeriesPerhaps the most striking finding was the difference between multiple appeal series (a fundraising campaign made up of two or more appeals) and single or “stand-alone” fundraising appeals. We found that the multiple fundraising appeal series tended to outperform one-time appeals, resulting in both a higher response rate and a higher average gift. Deadline Versus No Deadline Average Response RateAverage Gift Karen Matheson is the Manager of Quantitative Research and Analysis for M+R Strategic Services.Eve Fox is a vice president of the eCampaigns division of M+R Strategic Services.Copyright © 2007 M+R Strategic Services. All Rights Reserved. Series1.32 percent$99 No Match.34 percent$39 For more information on study methodology and statistical significance of results, please see Study Methodology, below. Multi-Appeal Versus Standalone No Deadline$60 Matching GiftsDespite the fact that our small sample size prevents us from drawing any firm conclusions, the results of the analysis did trend towards significance. It appears that the idea of making a donation that will be doubled by another donor (or group of donors) is motivational to many online donors. A matching gift campaign also provides the perfect rationale to introduce a deadline and to send out multiple appeals, both good ways to boost returns. Matching Gift Versus No Matching Gift Average Response RateAverage Gift Dollar GoalsUnfortunately, the jury is still out on the effectiveness of including a dollar goal in a fundraising appeal. The results of our analysis were not large enough (again, possibly because of the small sample size) to be considered statistically significant. However, setting a dollar goal for a fundraising campaign does provide a solid rationale for setting a deadline to reach the goal and for sending multiple appeals leading up to the deadline — both tactics which are likely to increase response rates overall.ConclusionNo matter what your current fundraising strategies or goals are, we recommend that you continue to test different messaging hooks and tactics to find out which ones work best for your audience. A carefully crafted multiple appeal series could be used in conjunction with standalone messages, and might just increase your response rates and overall donations. Deadlines, matching gifts, and dollar goals are creative (and often effective) ways of raising money and engaging your email list members. Every organization has unique and specific needs, but the strategies described above are a useful place to start testing new approaches.Study ParticipantsDonorsChooseLeague of Conservation VotersNational Parks Conservation AssociationOxfam AmericaPlanned Parenthood Federation of AmericaPhil Angelides’ Campaign for Governor of CaliforniaPublic CampaignSave Darfur CoalitionThe Wilderness SocietyStudy MethodologyWe reviewed more than 180 fundraising appeals sent out by the nine national nonprofit organizations listed above between January and December of 2006. We examined appeals in four categories: appeal versus series, deadline-driven versus no deadline, matching gift versus no match, and dollar goal versus no goal. As explained above, every fundraising appeal was categorized by whether it was a member of each appeal category; this allowed for messages to belong to none of these categories or all of these categories.Because differences among the organizations’ message tone and donor databases were difficult to control for, we compared messages by fundraising tactic within organizations. One downside to using this “paired samples” data was that it kept our sample size small, which reduced our ability to generalize the results to all organizations.Given that the sample size was so small, it is encouraging to see some statistically significant (at the .05 level) results in the data we presented. Our results did trend toward statistical significance in three of the four tactics investigated. “Statistical significance” means that the differences we found within the paired samples were unlikely to be the result of chance variations. For more information about statistical significance, check see Statsoft’s article Elementary Concepts in Statistics.About the Authors: Deadline-Driven Appeals and SeriesThe results of our analysis showed that appeals and series that included a deadline by which gifts must be made tended to be more effective than open-ended appeals without specific deadlines. Although the difference between average gifts was significant, the difference between the response rates was not statistically significant (so we have not included it here).Although further analysis (ideally with a larger sample size) is warranted, it appears that deadlines, whether tiered to some real-life event or introduced without explanation, do tend to boost the returns on a fundraising appeal or campaign. Deadline$93 Average Gift
I interviewed Tuesday Gutierrez from SaveGuimaras over at blogher. What I didn’t include was the in-depth conversation we had about how she has explored and used social networking tools. SaveGuimaras is a group of individuals who are dedicated to raising awareness on the recent oil-spill tragedy in Guimaras, Philippines. Because the international community and media have failed to respond to this environmental disaster, they are bringing the campaign to the Social Web. Their goal is to mobilize grassroots participation by using online networking tools and their blog.If you check out their blog, you will notice that the group has a presence on myspace, friendster, YouTube, and few other communities. Tuesday shared some of her learnings with me about using these tools. She has been the most successful when the tool matched her audience and outcomes. And, she had to go through a bit of experimentation to learn that!1. How have social networking tools helped spread the word about your cause? Friendster is a very popular social network in the Philippines. Almost everyone I know has a Friendster account and its very easy to find people, influential or otherwise in Friendster. When I opened a saveguimaras account, in less than two weeks, we had 200 people who signed up. What´s good about Friendster is that everytime a “member” of your group posts a new entry on your blog, you receive it on your email/ and you see it right away on your Friendster page. This led me to stumble upon Roy Alberto/Joseph Alberto who was a co-founder of 1 fish entertainment who was promoting a rock gig for Guimaras and that was how our relationship started.MySpace hasn´t taken off like Friendster because the Filipinos I am targeting there are based in the US. To invite people in Myspace is also painstakingly difficult unlike Friendster that you just click a button and invite. Myspace avoids spamming so the members usually blocks people from adding them directly unless you know them personally or their email. So what I have been doing is sending out mails one by one!YouTube is also good in finding videos about Guimaras. Its pure luck too. Project sunrise, the provincial government led organization (supported by Canadian Urban institute) happened to post their videos and I was given permission to post them in the blog. The IFCP (Independent Filmmakers Coop) in the Philippines just had their Guimaras Short Film project which was shown on television and some moviehouses in Manila. Unfortunately, there were some short films that were censored by the Movie Television Board (which I want to say is one of the most conservative board of censors in the world! and is really stifling Pinoy creativity) and some directors uploaded some movies on Guimaras (some will upload more videos soon.) YouTube would have been more helpful for my cause if people in the Philippines have home videocameras and if they have a fast broadbandwidth. Unfortunately, the journalists on the field are still using pen and paper technology which explains why there are not a lot of videos about Guimaras. Because regional flights are more expensive, people from Manila who are supposed to be more technologically equipped do not come to Guimaras to shoot videos/photos which also explains why there is a lack of photos uploaded in Guimaras at Flickr. I rely on photos sent to me by the filmmakers and some journalists on the field.Mobile technology is more popular in the Philippines and we are looking into how we could use this platform. The only difficulty I find here is that SaveGuimaras is not a non-profit org and is simply running as a webblog therefore, mobile networks might not trust us enough to collaborate with us.Care2.com has been helpful in a way that other social networks have not been. Although it is difficult to find people or connect with care2.com members, what’s good about their system is that you can send out letters to ten members each and for me its much better to send out ten letters once than sending out letters one by one. And yes, I’ve painstakingly sent out letters to care2.members ten at a time.I’m only discoveriing about Flickr. Personally I think Flickr is useful if you are two or three in a group but if you’re only one person like me running a blog for a social cause, you need something faster.2. How has your blog connected you with people to help with your cause? Through this blog we´ve met so many wonderful people who all have the passion and the drive to help the victims of Guimaras. Some have their own projects already in place before they´ve contacted us but we´ve also managed to link people with the same agenda and get them to collaborate with each other. Some organizations have also written expressing their willingness to collaborate with SaveGuimaras and its partners.For example, Chromatic Experiment, a Filipino band contacted us thru our blog. They are willing to play for free for future rock gigs planned by the team of Joseph, Sazi and Laura (There are more people involved behind this team, but for the sake of brevity we will only mention these three). 3. This is the bonus question and please do not take offense. I’ve noticed that a lot of folks from Phillipines are really into social networking apps and lots of wonderful communities in places like YouTube, Flickr, etc. Why do you think that is?Filipinos are very warm people and like to belong always in a group. Thats why these social networks are working for us. Add to this the fact that Filipinos are the no. 1 labor export of the country and there is a diaspora phenomena happening with us so we really need these networks to make us keep in touch with our families. We hate being alone and despise isolation which usually happens when youre living outside the country. A lot of Filipinos wouldn’t want to leave if only the government is doing its job but the future of the Philippines is very bleak.BTW, we are the no. 1 text messaging capital aside from the fact that sending out text messages is always cheaper than making an actual call.Source: http://beth.typepad.com/beths_blog/2006/11/meet_tuesday_fr.html
Your Nonprofit’s Name Alone Isn’t EnoughYou’ve got to explain in a few words what your nonprofit does, and why it’s valuable. That’s the job of the tagline.Many organizations expect their names to broadcast what it is they do. Trouble is-it just doesn’t happen that way very often. One reason why is that many nonprofit names are indistinguishable from each other. Another is that audiences frequently confuse the work of organizations focused on the same issues – think Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International.Where Your Tagline Fits InThe tagline is one of the four vital components of your branding portfolio, along with your nonprofit’s logo, overall graphic look and feel, and positioning statement.Remember that the tagline should be such a natural outgrowth of your organization’s positioning statement (the one or two sentences you’d use to reply to someone asking what the organization does) so that the two are inextricably linked. A great tagline differentiates you from your competitors while expressing your organization’s personality and adding consistency to your marketing and communications.The bonus? Your tagline will help to align internal understanding of your organization’s direction and goals.But beware; the absence of a tagline – or the use of an ineffective one – will put your nonprofit at a competitive disadvantage in funding, building your staff and volunteer base, and increasing use of your programs and products.Some Great Nonprofit ExamplesHere are a couple of high-impact nonprofit taglines:“Change Your Life for Good”– City University of New YorkThis tagline promises that you’ll transform your life, and luck, through enrolling at CUNY. Who wouldn’t want to know more?“Finding the ways that work”– Environmental DefenseEnvironmental Defense’s name couldn’t be any clearer. So they crafted a tagline that conveys what’s unique about how they do it – innovation and persistence.“Helping families in need get better nutrition on a budget”– Share Our StrengthBingo! This tagline works so well because it’s clear, accessible, brief and specific. It shows what is unique about their approach to hunger and demonstrates a positive impact.Does your tagline (organizational or for a particular program) fit these criteria? If not, consider reworking it today. Few words have more power.Taglines that Don’t WorkYou can also learn a lot from taglines that fall flat:“Defending Human Rights Worldwide”– Human Rights WatchDon’t waste your tagline text repeating what’s in your name (figuratively or literally, as in this example). Unfortunately, this tagline tells us nothing more than the name does.Remember…your tagline is a terrible thing to waste.Six Keys to a Powerful TaglineExamine other organizations’ (especially your competitors’) taglines to see what makes them work. Then apply that learning to the creation of your tagline.Your tagline must be simple, concise, clear, understandable and convey your marketing message.Make sure your tagline can be understood by a multi-cultural or international audience, if you have one. Cultural differences are critical here.Include words or phrases that connect with your logo, if possible. Example: Own a piece of the rock for Prudential Insurance, which has a rock logo.Use active verbs. As always, they’ll engage your audiences.Hold your course. Once you create a tagline, stick with it. Don’t change it just because you’re tired of it. Some of the most well known taglines have been used for years. Sources: http://www.gettingattention.org/my_weblog/2007/04/clear_pithy_tag.html and http://www.nancyschwartz.com/nonprofit_tagline.htmlAbout the AuthorNancy E. Schwartz helps nonprofits succeed through effective marketing and communications. As President of Nancy Schwartz & Company (http://www.nancyschwartz.com/), Nancy and her team provide marketing planning and implementation services to organizations as varied as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Center for Asian American Media, and Wake County (NC) Health Services.Subscribe to her free e-newsletter “Getting Attention”, (http://www.nancyschwartz.com/getting_attention.html) and read her blog at http://www.gettingattention.org/ for more insights, ideas and great tips on attracting the attention your organization deserves.NOTE: You’re welcome to “reprint” this article online as long as it remains complete and unaltered (including the copyright and “about the author” info at the end), and you send a copy of your reprint.
Paragraph 3: The nut graph. Leave your reader on a strong note. Don’t take a “kitchen sink” approach. Be concise; not every detail has to be thrown in. Including a few well-placed and powerful anecdotes or quotes is much more effective than cramming it all in. Pick and choose what best conveys your message and the emotion of the story. Be clear and specific about your results. How much money have you raised? How many people/animals/etc., have you helped? How much have you been able to improve a certain situation? TIP: Keep your statistics updated and handy. Paragraph 5: The kicker. Return to the anecdote: How did the situation turn out?Or go more global and end with an over-arching statement about how your nonprofit is having an impact, along the lines of “we’re changing the world” or “we’re making life better for fill-in-the-blank.” Tell your readers why they should care. To effectively resonate, a reader has to become emotionally invested in a story and its subjects. How does what you are writing about affect them and the world around them? There are as many different ways to tell stories as there are stories to tell. But how can you squeeze the emotional anecdotes, the news peg, facts, and figures into a short story that is a quick and easy read? If you are not breaking news, here’s one sure-fire formula to help get you started. This is where you put the news peg and a reference to your organization, if it’s not mentioned already. Why are you telling this story? Why now? What’s the context? What are the key statistics that add oomph and/or urgency to your story? Be clear and specific about your goals. Be sure the listener or reader knows why there is a need for what you do. TIP: Put yourself in the shoes of readers or TV viewers and ask the question: Why should I care? Clearly identify what is unique about your organization and what you are doing. Details you might want to include: age of the group, what you do, is it a model for programs in other parts of the country? State? Your community? TIP: If you can’t claim a superlative, try to put what you are doing into perspective. Does your organization or efforts fit into any kind of trend? This is where you get your reader hooked into the story. Start with a short anecdote that’s no longer than two paragraphs that shows (vs. tells) the point of your story. An anecdote could be about someone you helped, an amazing volunteer or employee, the nonprofit’s involvement in a newsy event (such as assisting with wildfires in California, or helping steer wayward whales out to sea), or — particularly for newer nonprofits — the “aha!” moment that led to the birth of the organization. Paragraph 4: The descriptor: Who are you? Don’t try to get fancy with your writing. Doing so can make it difficult for people to read your story and can even hide the message you are trying to get across. Use clear, straightforward language, and tell your story from beginning to end . If you are writing something technical, find a way to translate it into more accessible language. How would you explain it to your mother? Your son? Direct readers to explore your website or ask questions of the group if they want more detailed information. Paragraphs 1-2: The lede.(Lede: Noun. lead, lead-in, the introductory section of a story) As with the lede, wrapping up with a powerful quote is a good, concise way to end the story. Proofread. Better yet, have someone else proofread your story for you before sending it out or posting it to your website. Make sure to catch all spelling and grammatical errors while checking to make sure the story makes sense. Does it have a clear beginning, middle and end? Are the facts correct? Does it answer the questions that it raises? Is any information missing?
Oh, email! For many individuals and organizations, email has transformed both the quantity and quality of human communication. Simultaneously intimate and public, email is a daily symbol of the potential and danger that technology promises. To some, email is a simple and sublime medium to communicate in the modern world. To others – and often the same people- it is a reviled and bottomless pit of unwanted spam that infuriates and frustrates.Nonprofit organizations of all sizes and budgets are exploring how to integrate email into a comprehensive communications and fundraising strategy. Some are far along the road of doing so; others are just starting out. This article provides an overview of why and how to use email in your fundraising program.The Benefits of EmailEmail is a flexible and easy-to-use medium for both the sender and the receiver. Email is important precisely because it’s regular, constant, and often the way most people engage with the Internet. It’s fast, cheap, easy to use, and informal. There’s also that quality of its being “viral” – that is, email is content that’s easy for your readers to pass on by forwarding. As many organizations can attest, this can exponentially expand your network and reach.Email brings immediate response, allowing us to gauge how well we’re reaching our constituencies. The benefits of that immediacy go both ways: now your community can have more access to you and provide the gold of any good relationship: a dynamic feedback loop.Email can also provide content in its own right. The voice, style, presentation and format are all critical to your success. Email is fast, but that doesn’t mean that you can jot off emails without foresight and the help of an editor.On the other hand, the same virtues of email also highlight its limitations. While it’s fast and easy, it’s also rather “disposable,” as it’s easy to delete. The very quality of immediacy can negate its power and impact. When sending email, we are dealing with the dreaded domain of unwanted email or “spam,” a sensitive issue for many email users.That “send” button warrants perhaps more caution and respect before we use it. From a communications point of view, it’s important to be sensitive to when it’s appropriate to use email, and when the phone or regular post mail is better.Email is about Cultivating RelationshipsUsing email for fundraising is much more than literally soliciting for support. It’s about cultivating relationships, keeping the feedback loops intact, and thereby ensuring a stronger base of support. Email is a versatile tool that can be leveraged to greatly enhance – and complement – all aspects of donor and member relations.The range of how email can be linked to your overall fundraising efforts is wonderfully broad: from collecting email addresses on your website to a carefully executed online fundraising campaign that uses email as its central vehicle. As a core component of a broad stakeholder communications strategy, email can be the glue to hold your donor relations together and create traction in your communications to yield wonderful results.Finally, email is not intended to be a substitute for “live” relationships – meeting with your donors and other supporters, whether one-on-one or in group settings. What email does is add another method to be in touch with people. So be careful not to start depending solely on email as an all-purpose fundraising communication vehicle.This article was originally published in the Jan/Feb 2004 edition of the Grassroots Fundraising Journal.Source: Groundspring ITS Topic 12