Now I've heard everything. An article in Nonprofit Quarterly has expanded the definition of the P-words -- Poverty Porn.
According to Truth or Charity? The Lure of Poverty Porn for Nonprofits, poverty porn is "using false or exaggerated images in donor appeals as a fundraising tactic."
The article cites the same study about images of homelessness that I posted about last week. That study found that most people think the typical homeless person is an older man who sleeps outside. That's the image that typically works best in fundraising, which is no surprise, as it goes straight to the issue of the donor's giving, rather than first needing to persuade donors that typical homeless people may not look the way you think.
Do you see what's happening here? "Poverty porn" used to mean images that starkly show the impact of poverty on people in a way that really troubles some people. Now poverty porn includes two more things:
- Images that are real, but not the most typical.
- Lies.
By sweeping lies (which no fundraiser should ever do) and donor-aware selection of imagery (which every fundraiser should at least consider doing), they've made every argument against "poverty porn" into a slam-dunk.
Truth is, poverty porn is a pretty contemptible concept. It allows fundraisers (or, often, armchair fundraisers who aren't actually responsible for raising funds) to blame ineffective fundraising results on donors' character flaws.
Serious fundraisers don't play games like that. They tell the truths that reach donors. When they fail, they take the blame themselves and adjust.
Fundraising is a real-world activity. We can't impose our tastes or politically correct theories on donors. They control the conversation, not us. Success comes from playing by their rules. Insisting that they must play by our rules always fails.
