The original story that I commented on raised a very simple issue…that so much of the world is in dire need and there are so many people who do nothing at all to provide assistance. My comments were in direct response to that issue. In your response to me you’ve wrapped in vegetarianism, politics, societal attitudes, homelessness and even race. None of these were intended to be addressed in my comments.
I could list for you my marketing CV or the organizations I’ve supported over the years but I am certain it would mean very little. My point in responding, was to speak to the fact that too may non-profit agencies that seek to compel the public to support the causes that they represent, focus almost exclusively on describing the need. The public as become inured to this approach. Organization after organization, campaign after campaign, all focused on describing the depth and severity of the need. If that message has stopped resonating then why is it still the only message used?
People and orgs doing the good work in our society need to find new ways to reach new people. To deliver messages and value that are resonant, meaningful and attractive. Casting a wider net with new approaches and new messages, all focused on increasing the rolls of supporters and the benefit to those in need. This sounds a lot like a marketing problem to me.
As for the rest of it…all the other societal issues and attitudes…that’s above my pay grade.