SYNTHESIS MATRIX

How do nonprofit organizations utilize the internet and social media to illustrate their purpose, promote education, and receive donations?

Nonprofit organizations should utilize the internet and social media to illustrate their purpose, promote education, and communicate with the public because…

       Name of Authors the internet is a useful tool for nonprofit organizations and can benefit their needs social media allows opportunities for nonprofit organizations to communicate with the general public and spread their cause personal websites can share vital information and provide a way for nonprofit organizations to receive donations they can create social change at a faster rate and recruit more volunteers and followers
Reddick, Christopher – charities can reach out to millions of people through the use of online tools

– build and enhance relationships with the public

– most people use the internet to receive information

– the more an individual is associated with or shows interest in a nonprofit organization, the more likely they will make an online donation

– organizations must  target the right audience for internet fundraising

– easy way for people to donate

 

– organizations must take action publicly to gain respect from individuals and promote a greater audience

– greater civic involvement with nonprofit organizations is associated with greater social capital for nonprofits

Miller, David – breaks down national and international barriers that keep smaller organizations from educating large groups of people – an effective way for them to educate the public, receive donations, recruit volunteers, and provide opportunities

– can expand their supporters and audience to not only a specific location, but worldwide

– allows organizations to connect with different people from different parts of the world

– organizations have to successfully express their purpose online so they can be profitable through online donors – the internet and social media is an easy way for nonprofits to recruit volunteers

– the more followers they have, the more individuals will be educated about their cause

Kenix, Linda – nonprofits have to have an ethical and logical approach to details

– they have to compete with critics and provide support of their cause

– personal websites are a way for nonprofits to advertise their purpose

– communication and fundraising tool

– the internet is an advantage for promoting social change

– charities have to provide vital information that will promote social change

– if an organization represents itself justly, then the internet can extend the potential for social change

Pollach, Irene – the web provides for many capabilities

– a refined website can benefit nonprofit organizations

– creates a portal for individuals and nonprofit organizations to connect

– provide information about their cause and interact with the public

– the motive for individuals to donate is because of the human need to help others

– various relationships… such as individuals and online donating, nonprofits and the internet, and donors and nonprofit organizations

– the way organizations promote their cause must be respectable and appeal to individuals in order to receive donations

– people who follow a specific organization are more likely to contribute to that organization

– how nonprofits carry themselves can gain followers and create change

– a goal for every organization is to recruit volunteers

Sharma, Ritu – the utilization of the web is a way for nonprofit organizations to announce fundraisers and public events, try to receive donations, and share articles or information about issues correlated with their cause – used as a social network for announcements and sharing information

– 97% of nonprofits are on Facebook

– allows organizations to create their own page with links for pictures, articles, etc.

– social media is used as an engagement tool to receive donations

– tweets or comments are helpful for resulting in financial support, which still typically happens through a donate page

– in order to receive followers and educate the people, nonprofits have to respond to controversies that they face through online means
McManus, Brian – study conducted to analyze consumers’ purchases from an online store of a large nonprofit organization

– funds from products purchased from an organization’s online store goes to the organization’s cause

– the offering of pledges promotes a greater chance that individuals will donate to that charity

Prakash, Aseem – nonprofit organizations have to be careful as to what information they share and how they share it

– the web can benefit nonprofits and their cause as long as they use appropriate actions

– information problems and leaks are due to agency failures and slippages

– social media as a way to reveal reliable information to the public – nonprofits can provide proof and evidence of where donations go

– if individuals can trust an organization, then they will be more willing to donate

– volunteers are able to provide input and shape into organizations’ functioning

– when nonprofits provide necessary and honest information, they gain respect by followers and the potential to recruit more volunteers

Lovejoy, Kristen – three functions for nonprofit organizations:  information, community, and action – microblogging services serves as communicative functions for nonprofit organizations

– allows for better engagement with stakeholders

– has exposed new opportunities for public engagement

– promote interactivity and communication that nonprofits need in order to gain supporters

– social media is the fastest way for organizations to expose their cause

 

– social media is replacing traditional websites

– personal websites are a good tool to inform individuals about the nonprofit’s cause and to sell merchandise and accept donations

– the internet allow organizations to receive useful feedback and build on their cause through followers, petitions, and reports

– social media can accomplish many changes and conveniences for nonprofits

– social media is the fastest way to gain supporters and have information shared throughout the world

 

Reddick, Christopher, and Branco Ponomariov. “The Effect of Individuals’ Organization Affiliation on Their Internet Donations.” Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly 42(6): 1197-1223. SAGE Premier 2009. Web. 6 July 2014.

Miller, David. “Nonprofit Organizations and the Emerging Potential of Social Media and Internet Resources.” SPNHA Review 6: 34-52. Scholar Works. Web. 6 July 2014.

Kenix, Linda. “Nonprofit Organizations’ Perceptions and Uses of the Internet.” Television & New Media 1: 407-428. SAGE Premier 2009. Web. 6 July 2014.

Pollach, Irene, Horst Treiblmaier, and Arne Floh. “Online Fundraising for Environmental Nonprofit Organizations.” IEEE Xplore: 1-9. IEEE Xplore Conferences. Web. 10 July 2014.

Sharma, Ritu. “How Nonprofits Use Social Media to Engage with their Communities.” Nonprofit Quarterly, 13 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 July 2014. <https://nonprofitquarterly.org/management/23837-how-nonprofits-use-social-media-to-engage-with-their-communities.html>.

McManus, Brian, and Richard Bennet. “The Demand for Products Linked to Public Goods: Evidence from an Online Field Experiment.” Journal of Public Economics 95(5): 403-415. Elsevier SD Freedom Collection. Web. 17 July 2014.

Prakash, Aseem, and Mary Kay Gugerty. “Trust But Verify? Voluntary Regulation Programs in the Nonprofit Sector.” Regulation & Governance 4(1): 22-47. Wiley Online Library. Web. 17 July 2014.

Lovejoy, Kristen, and Gregory D. Saxton. “Information, Community, and Action: How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17: 337-353. Wiley Online Library. Web. 17 July 2014.

 

While coming up with my because clauses to support my main claim, I was really confident as to how much my research represented each clause.  However, my source from Brian McManus and Richard Bennet really only supported one claim to my argument, and very little to none at all for my other claims.  But as far as all my other sources, I could find at least one vital piece of information to connect with each claim.  There are a couple gaps from a couple sources in regards to my social media claim, but I don’t think it is enough to not be able to create a valid argument for my inquiry project.  I’m really confident in the sources I chose for this project and think they can provide reliable evidence for an argument and counterargument.

BECAUSE CLAUSES

Step I:

Nonprofit organizations should utilize the internet and social media to illustrate their purpose, promote education, and communicate with the public because…

1. the internet is a useful tool for nonprofit organizations and can benefit their needs.

2. social media allows opportunities for nonprofit organizations to communicate with the general public and spread their cause.

3. personal websites can share vital information and provide a way for nonprofit organizations to receive donations.

4. they can create social change at a faster rate and recruit more volunteers and followers.

 

Step II:

1. Miller claims that the internet breaks down national and international barriers that keep smaller organizations from educating large groups of people about policy issues (37).

2. Ritu Sharma concluded that nonprofits overwhelmingly (88%) said their most important communication tools were email and their websites, even though fully 97% of them are on Facebook.

3. Lovejoy and Saxton argued that the advent of social media has opened up greater possibilities for interpersonal and organizational communication (2).

 

Miller, David. “Nonprofit Organizations and the Emerging Potential of Social Media and Internet Resources.” SPNHA Review 6: 34-52. Scholar Works. Web. 6 July 2014.

Sharma, Ritu. “How Nonprofits Use Social Media to Engage with their Communities.” Nonprofit Quarterly, 13 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 July 2014. <https://nonprofitquarterly.org/management/23837-how-nonprofits-use-social-media-to-engage-with-their-communities.html>.

Lovejoy, Kristen, and Gregory D. Saxton. “Information, Community, and Action: How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17: 337-353. Wiley Online Library. Web. 17 July 2014.

 

RESEARCH NUGGET #4

1. “The Demand for Products Linked to Public Goods: Evidence from an Online Field Experiment” by Brian McManus and Richard Bennet

McManus, Brian, and Richard Bennet. “The Demand for Products Linked to Public Goods: Evidence from an Online Field Experiment.” Journal of Public Economics 95(5): 403-415. Elsevier SD Freedom Collection. Web. 17 July 2014.

Link

Main Claim:
McManus and Bennet constructed this study to analyze data from an online store of a large anonymous nonprofit organization. They observed how the consumers’ purchases were correlated with the nonprofit’s charitable mission. The study also reflects the consumers’ choices in making direct donations to the charity. McManus and Bennet argue that consumers who initially purchased under a donation plan were more likely to return to the store and order more products again or contribute a direct donation. The pledge for this study was that the nonprofit organization would receive $1 or $5 from an anonymous outside group if the consumer purchased at least $10 of merchandise. This pledge generated 20% more revenue from consumers on the online store.

Nuggets:
1. “In order to handle potential consumer confusion about the donation messages, the NPO provided a phone number for customer service. The NPO’s customer service employees were prepared to give callers additional information about the donation pledges, but the NPO reported that no consumers called to request this information. The absence of phone calls provides some evidence that consumer exposure to multiple experimental treatments is not a serious concern.”

Due to the nonprofit organization receiving no calls from consumers, the prices of products and the donation pledge did not raise concerns for individuals. Individuals figure that making these online purchases is not only gaining revenue for the organization, but that the nonprofit was also receiving anonymous donations from outside sources with every $10 purchase. It was a win-win for both parties- consumers received their products, and the organization received revenue and donations. Individuals who purchase from a nonprofit organization online store know that their contributions are going towards the cause, so why wouldn’t they contribute a little more so the organization can receive a little more?

2. “Our study also complements the substantial literature on consumers’ choices in making direct charitable donations. Recent research on donation choices, largely with field experiments, demonstrates that consumers behave in interesting and sometimes
surprising ways, especially with regard to varying information about others’ actions. Eckel and Grossman (2003) find that financially equivalent inducements for donations can bring different results depending on how the inducements are presented, with matching
pledges from other donors out-performing rebates.”

How nonprofit organizations present their pledges often determines whether or not consumers will donate to their cause. Nonprofits have to respectfully influence consumers to dictate their donation choices. If another organization that the consumer is interested in offers more pledges and products, then the consumer will more likely choose that one over the other. People want to get the most out of their buck. This also includes knowing where their money goes and what their donations support.

 

2. “Trust But Verify? Voluntary Regulation Programs in the Nonprofit Sector” by Aseem Prakash and Mary Kay Gugerty

Prakash, Aseem, and Mary Kay Gugerty. “Trust But Verify? Voluntary Regulation Programs in the Nonprofit Sector.” Regulation & Governance 4(1): 22-47. Wiley Online Library. Web. 17 July 2014.

Link

Main Claim:
Prakash and Gugerty wrote this article to argue how false information about nonprofit organizations is leaked. They identify how volunteers for nonprofits are able to provide input and shape into organizations’ functioning and that they typically don’t reveal deceitful information about the organization. Prakash and Gugerty suggest that information problems are due to agency failures and slippages. They also focus on the role of donors as principals and they identify appropriate governance mechanisms for nonprofit organizations.

Nuggets:
1. “Scandals in high profile organizations such as the United Way, The Nature Conservancy, and the Red Cross have focused policy attention on the issue of nonprofit accountability (The Economist 2003; Christensen 2004). A prominent US nonprofit scholar notes “The nonprofit sector’s claims to exist for the public good are no longer being taken on faith, and more people believe they have a stake in the accountability of nonprofits” (Brody 2002, p. 472). A number of surveys document declining public trust in the nonprofit sector across a range of settings (Salamon 2002; Light 2004). A recent global opinion survey found that in some countries the nonprofit sector is now trusted less than government or business (Edelman 2007).”

Nonprofit scandals determine trust issues by donors for all other nonprofit organizations. So how do we know which organizations are telling the truth about their cause and where our donations are going? People have to rely on actions provided by the organization instead of pathos marketing strategies. If a nonprofit can provide proof and evidence of where donations are going or how they serve their purpose, then individuals will be more willing to trust the charitable cause and donate. It is how nonprofit organizations show the information about their cause, instead of only telling it.

2. “Nonprofit donors have incentives to reduce the information deficits they face. Because gathering and processing information is seldom without cost, they may seek informational shortcuts. Alternatively, they may impose stringent reporting requirements on the nonprofits they fund. For nonprofits, these are expensive ways to respond to governance problems. Credible nonprofits may be motivated to bear the cost of information provision themselves, and in the process, differentiate themselves from the less credible organizations.”

It is better for nonprofit organizations to release all of their information, without blocks, to possible donors instead of relying on reduced information. This can only lead to misinterpretations and individuals feeling as if they are receiving half-truths. When nonprofits provide necessary and honest information, they gain respect by followers and the potential to recruit more volunteers and donations. Nonprofit organizations should aim to be nothing less than a credible organization… and in order to do this, they should reveal reliable information to the public.

 

3. “Information, Community, and Action: How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media” by Kristen Lovejoy and Gregory D. Saxton

Lovejoy, Kristen, and Gregory D. Saxton. “Information, Community, and Action: How Nonprofit Organizations Use Social Media.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 17: 337-353. Wiley Online Library. Web. 17 July 2014.

Link

Main Claim:
Microblogging services, such as Twitter, serves as communicative functions for nonprofit organizations. Lovejoy and Saxton argue that the use of microblogging by organizations has replaced traditional websites and allows for a better engagement with stakeholders. They examined the Twitter utilization of 100 largest nonprofit organizations in the United States, and the analysis revealed that there are three functions of microblogging updates- information, community, and action. They found that the utilization of social media by nonprofits has exposed new opportunities for public engagement.

Nuggets:
1. “Prior studies (e.g., Kent, Taylor, & White, 2003; Saxton, Guo, & Brown, 2007) have shown that nonprofit organizations have not been able to use websites as strategic, interactive stakeholder engagement tools. Perhaps this was due to not having the know-how or the staff to create more interactive sites with feedback options and discussion boards. The advent of social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter have taken away this excuse. These sites are free and have built-in interactivity. Any organization big or small can create a site and start building a network of friends and followers with whom they are in almost real-time contact.”

Although personal websites for nonprofit organizations are a good tool to inform individuals about their cause and sell merchandise and accept donations, social media sites promote interactivity and communication that nonprofits need in order to gain supporters. Social media allows for endless opportunities and engagement with all ends of the world for organizations. They can receive useful feedback and build on their cause through followers, petitions, and reports. The utilization of social media can accomplish many changes and conveniences for nonprofit organizations.

2. “The advent of social media has opened up even greater possibilities for interpersonal and organizational communication. At the interpersonal level, scholars have examined the role of Facebook in building social capital (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007). Twitter has also been the focus of a growing body of interpersonal research (e.g., Java, Song, Finin, & Tseng, 2007; Naaman, Boase, & Lai, 2010). While they provide evidence of a connection between individual users’ tweet profiles and community formation (Java et al., 2007), these studies do not so much demonstrate the positive social effects of social media so much as the ability of Twitter to serve as a vehicle for narcissism, opinion-making, and information-sharing. By contrast, studies by Hughes and Palen (2009) and Smith (2010) have shown how Twitter can serve as a valuable communication and information-sharing resource during emergency-relief efforts.”

Many individuals use social media sites, such as Facebook and Twitter, to retrieve information and news. These sites share news from around the world, and people are able to reply and express their opinions about events. If nonprofit organizations want their cause to be exposed, the fastest way for them to do so would be through social media. This will also be the fastest way for them to gain supporters and have their information shared throughout the world. The more followers they have, the more their purpose will be leaked.

 

Synthesis:
My three sources have very little in common. My first article is about a nonprofit organization’s online store and how their pledge generated an increase in sales. My second article is about nonprofits’ information leaks and how volunteers help with the organizations’ functions. My third article focuses on the utilization of social media by nonprofit organizations and their tools for better engagement. Though these three articles differ greatly from one another, they all revolve around the internet and how they express their cause and communicate to individuals. The first source does this through their online store and pledge, the second discusses the role of donors and volunteers, and the third represents the release of information through social media.

Out of all three sources, the third article will be used the most for my inquiry project. It is easy to read and is directly related to one of main claims.

NUGGET #6: PERSONAL DYNAMIC MEDIA

““Devices” which variously store, retrieve, or manipulate information in the form of messages embedded in a medium have been in existence for thousands of years. People use them to communicate ideas and feelings both to others and back to themselves. Although thinking goes on in one’s head, external media serve to materialize thoughts and, through feedback, to augment the actual paths the thinking follows. Methods discovered in one medium provide metaphors which contribute new ways to think about notions in other media.
For most of recorded history, the interactions of humans with their media have been primarily nonconversational and passive in the sense that marks on paper, paint on walls, even “motion” pictures and television, do not change in response to the viewer’s wishes. A mathematical formulation—which may symbolize the essence of an entire universe—once put down on paper, remains static and requires the reader to expand its possibilities.”
– Alan Kay and Adele Goldberg

This article came out in 1977, when the potential of media was still fairly new and open for advances. However, Kay and Goldberg convey the uses of media in this segment, which are still valid as of today. They wrote this article about the Dynabook, which looks a lot like today’s tablets. Kay proposed the idea of this personal computer for children in 1972.  For this nugget, I’m going to use the computer, cellphones, tablets, anything that can store, retrieve, and manipulate information, as examples. They mention how media serves our thoughts and provide feedback; feedback in this case would not be criticism, but more as information and results of a search. We use computers to express our emotions, ideas, and thoughts to the world. They provide us with relief and release of concepts and contributions.

Mobile phones had only been around for a few years before this article was published, and texting most definitely did not exist… leaving the computer as a primary source of forming mediums and research.  Although the internet didn’t really flourish until the 1990’s, people still referred to their computer as an expansion of possibilities.  Kay and Goldberg enhanced this concept to produce something that would have benefited children and advanced media during that time.

internet animated GIF

3d animated GIF

REFLECTIVE WRITING FOR CONCEPT EXPERIENCE #5

Part I:
I thought this concept experience was really fun because it allowed me to add in my personal touch to the article and it was about a topic that interested me. The article itself was easy to follow and included an amusing study. I was able to make this experience interactive and incorporate additional information in the assignment that went beyond the topic itself.

My five most important decisions were:
1. the link to the actual paper, “Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks
– gives further information and support to William Hughes’ study

2. the video by Tech Lab
– gives summary of the study and the public’s reaction

3. the links to the Facebook Data Use Policy, the bit, and Facebook’s terms of service
– gave researches the right to perform this study and proved they didn’t disregard the policy

4. 
– people tend to forget that it was other people just like them who created this study and facebook itself

5. 
– facebook connects the world and has many attributes

I chose specific links that related to or gave background information about the topic. For example, in the first sentence of the article, I included a link about emotions that gives vivid details and definitions about an individual’s emotional state.  I continued to provide links for various terms throughout the article that would  support or define certain topics.  The images I selected were all Facebook related, but were also narrowly relevant to the passage they were under.  For example, the video is a summary of the study, just like the passage is above it.  I think it was creative how I associated certain terms throughout the article with other websites.  I find that other researchers do this as well in their studies, and it makes for an interesting investigation and trail like Concept Experience #2.

 

Part II:
Between my search for sources and this concept experience, I have a good idea as to how I want to present my inquiry project. I find that adding links to certain terms, that give background information and furthers the reader’s exploration, is often intriguing and stimulating. Links can lead to more links which can lead to more links and so on, to the point that you could be reviewing a completely unrelated topic to the original search… but yet all these links have to somehow be connected, or they would’t have been there. This encourages readers to advance their knowledge and interact with a study. I want to provide entertainment for my audience through visual and intellectual means.

My inquiry project will reside in a WordPress page and include links to interacting pages and compelling information. I want my page to model The Huffington Post main page- with videos, links, appealing photos and graphics, and interesting details. The Huffington Post is a credible website and many individuals go there to gain knowledge, review reports, and receive advice. I hope my inquiry project will be just as engaging to viewers and readers around the world.

 

RESEARCH NUGGET #3

1. “Whale Defenders” by Greenpeace

“Whale Defenders.” Greenpeace, 10 July 2014. Web. 11 July 2014. <http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/en/campaigns/oceans/whale-defenders/>.

Link

Main Claim:
This website is primarily about how and why the nonprofit organization Greenpeace protect whales against whaling and harm in general. Their argument focuses on the obstacles that whales face while trying to survive, and Greenpeace’s fight to end the slaughtering. This website is helpful for my inquiry project because the nonprofit organization, Greenpeace, is utilizing the internet through their website to educate individuals about their purpose.

Nuggets:
1. “Greenpeace will continue our efforts to protect whales until this shameful and unnecessary slaughter has been stopped and whales can once again roam the seas in freedom. In the lead up to this year’s International Whaling Commission meeting, Greenpeace will be working with other organizations to ensure that the Obama administration uses their diplomatic leverage to close the loopholes and end all commercial whaling—including whaling that Japan pretends is for research purposes. With your help, together we will end whaling for good.”

I chose this nugget because it not only describes Greenpeace’s mission to aid whales, but also because Greenpeace used links in this segment to allow further education for individuals. The first link, “International Whaling Commission,” forwards the reader to background information that Greenpeace wrote about the International Whaling Commission. The last sentence of this nugget connects to Greenpeace’s petition to Obama to save the whales. This makes for an easy access to encourage advocates to read and sign their petition and help create change. Links added into a nonprofit organization’s website can only benefit themselves and individuals of the public. These help to educate the people… and the more educated people are, the more likely they will contribute to the cause.

2. “Want to learn more about tax-deductible giving, donating stock and estate planning? Visit Greenpeace Fund, a nonprofit, 501(c)(3) charitable entity created to increase public awareness and understanding of environmental issues through research, the media and educational programs.”

Greenpeace added this little portion to the bottom of their website. It also includes a link, “Greenpeace Fund,” that leads the reader to Greenpeace’s information about their donations and then to another link for online donating. However, this segment is important because it gives a brief description of what kind of organization Greenpeace is and how they receive their income. Also, and possibly the most vital information from this nugget, is how Greenpeace mentions the ways they publicly aware individuals about environmental issues- through research, the media, and educational programs. They use new media in extraordinary ways to get their message across and promote education and change.

 

2. “Greenpeace Fund” by Greenpeace

“Greenpeace Fund.” Greenpeace, 10 July 2014. Web. 11 July 2014. <http://www.greenpeacefund.org/>.

Link

Main Claim:
This website is separate from the actual Greenpeace website because it, although is part of Greenpeace, is strictly for online donations while the Greenpeace website primarily provides information about environmental issues and their purpose and cause. However, Greenpeace does mention a couple environmental controversies and give a little background information about their nonprofit organization. They also provide insight about why they’re a nonprofit organization. But their argument on this site is how the people can help make a difference. The website presents a link that leads to where an individual can put in their information to donate online. They encourage individuals to donate and support their cause.

Nuggets:
1. “Greenpeace is a force for hope and you can help us shine that light much brighter. We are independent and non-partisan. We do not solicit donations from corporations or governments and rely on individuals to make our work possible. Greenpeace Fund supports work here in the United States and also provides financial support to Greenpeace offices around the world through financial grants to Greenpeace International, an umbrella organization located in Amsterdam. This allows Greenpeace to work in countries around the world to challenge environmental threats and promote change on issues that transcend national borders. It is how we are making a difference and, with your help and support, how we will continue to transform this world we all share.”

This segment is an important and tactful example for all nonprofit organizations to follow on their own donation site. Greenpeace uses ethos and pathos in persuading individuals to donate. Nonprofits should make it known to the people of what kind of organization they are, where they get their income from, and where the donations go. Also, appealing to individuals on an emotional level can easily persuade them to donate and support the cause due to the human need to help others.

2. “Greenpeace Fund is a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization set up to continue the vital work of Greenpeace by increasing public awareness and understanding of environmental issues through research, the media, and other educational programs. Greenpeace Fund also provides grants to support Greenpeace’s work around the world for activities that are consistent with its mission.”

This nugget came right after the first nugget, but it again illustrates as an adequate example for all nonprofit organizations to include in their website. It increases Greenpeace’s credibility due to their purpose, education, and validity. They inform donors as to what their donations support and how they use these and their research to create change. People are more likely to donate online if they have the satisfying information as to how their money is being used.

 

3. “How Your Nonprofit Can Accept Donations Online Right Now” by Wired Impact

“How Your Nonprofit Can Accept Donations Online Right Now.” Wired Impact, 3 Jan. 2014. Web. 11 July 2014. <http://wiredimpact.com/library/accept-donations-online-right-now/>.

Link

Main Claim:
This article is almost a how-to guide for how nonprofit organizations create an online donation page. However, the difference is that it doesn’t give step-by-step instructions as to how to establish the page, but more so what to include. Their argument is about what appeals most to individuals when going through the online donation process, and what tools nonprofits should use while constructing the donation page. They list pros and cons about each information segment- like what information they should require the donor to give, how to get recurring donations, and the easiest setup and installation on the website. This article lays it all out for how nonprofit organizations can utilize the internet for receiving donations.

Nuggets:
1. “As shown in the Online Gift Donor Profile put together by Blackbaud, younger individuals are much more likely to donate online. Given that over 55% of their online donor sample was under the age of 46, an opportunity exists for organizations to start building a giving relationship with a typically difficult market segment. While the younger demographics’ online donations may be relatively small, getting their contact information, sending them updates and thanking them for a donation can lead to larger future gifts and stronger advocates.”

This nugget is important information to nonprofit organizations while generating their online donation page. Not only is there a link included, but they also give a brief background as to what the link is about. Because of this study, nonprofits have to serve a more appealing page to younger individuals who provide the majority of donations. They also have to follow up with donors and thank them for their help in order to receive recurring contributions from those individuals.

2. “Donating online is easy and quick. Donors don’t need to write a check, put anything in the mail or follow up to make sure you received their donation. Due to the simplicity and speed, you are more likely to capture impulse donors who were moved by your organization from the content on your website. You’re also more likely to capture people who want to support your organization, but just don’t have, or think they don’t have, the time to go through a long donation process.”

The reasons for online donating are provided in this segment. Online donations are convenient for individuals of the public and nonprofit organizations. More and more people have access to the internet and use it for research about any and every topic ever explored. If they come across a certain nonprofit organization and show interest, then whether or not a potential will donate determines on how the donation page is structured. The content on the nonprofits website and the organization of the donation page are the deal breakers.

 

Synthesis:
All three of my sources have a lot in common with one another. Both my first and second are from the nonprofit organization Greenpeace, and provide examples as to what information should be included in a nonprofit’s website and donations page.  They include what and how they relay their message and where their donations go.  They also incorporate links into their website, along with the third source.

The second source is an example of what my third source suggests as to how to create a donations page.  The third encourages online donating due to the speed and accuracy, and the second source illustrates that ability.  All three sources promote and benefit from the use of new media.

CONCEPT EXPERIENCE #5: TEXT TO MULTIMEDIA

Facebook tinkered with users’ feeds for a massive psychology experiment

Scientists at Facebook have published a paper showing that they manipulated the content seen by more than 600,000 users in an attempt to determine whether this would affect their emotional state. The paper, “Experimental evidence of massive-scale emotional contagion through social networks,” was published in The Proceedings Of The National Academy Of Sciences. It shows how Facebook data scientists tweaked the algorithm that determines which posts appear on users’ news feeds—specifically, researchers skewed the number of positive or negative terms seen by randomly selected users. Facebook then analyzed the future postings of those users over the course of a week to see if people responded with increased positivity or negativity of their own, thus answering the question of whether emotional states can be transmitted across a social network. Result: They can! Which is great news for Facebook data scientists hoping to prove a point about modern psychology. It’s less great for the people having their emotions secretly manipulated.
In order to sign up for Facebook, users must click a box saying they agree to the Facebook Data Use Policy, giving the company the right to access and use the information posted on the site. The policy lists a variety of potential uses for your data, most of them related to advertising, but there’s also a bit about “internal operations, including troubleshooting, data analysis, testing, research and service improvement.” In the study, the authors point out that they stayed within the data policy’s liberal constraints by using machine analysis to pick out positive and negative posts, meaning no user data containing personal information was actually viewed by human researchers. And there was no need to ask study “participants” for consent, as they’d already given it by agreeing to Facebook’s terms of service in the first place.
facebook peoples panel
people who saw this Facebook
Facebook data scientist Adam Kramer is listed as the study’s lead author. In an interview the company released a few years ago, Kramer is quoted as saying he joined Facebook because “Facebook data constitutes the largest field study in the history of the world.” It’s a charming reminder that Facebook isn’t just the place you go to see pictures of your friends’ kids or your racist uncle’s latest rant against the government—it’s also an exciting research lab, with all of us as potential test subjects.

RESEARCH NUGGET #2

1. “Online Fundraising for Environmental Nonprofit Organizations” by Irene Pollach, Horst Treiblmaier, and Arne Floh

Pollach, Irene, Horst Treiblmaier, and Arne Floh. “Online Fundraising for Environmental Nonprofit Organizations.” IEEE Xplore: 1-9. IEEE Xplore Conferences. Web. 10 July 2014.

Link

Main Claim:
Pollach, Treiblmaier, and Floh created this study to research how individuals and nonprofit organizations connect. They examine the relationships between individuals and online donating, nonprofits and the internet, and donors and nonprofit organizations. They argue that the motive for individuals to donate to organizations is because of the human need to help others. Pollach et al. also search to identify factors that lead people to use the internet for financial transactions, such as online donating, and how nonprofit organizations could benefit from the capabilities of the web.

Nuggets:
1. “The most effective activator of this intrinsic motivation is thus an appeal to this need to help others. For nonprofit organizations this means that donors must perceive the organization’s cause as worthy of help, in which case their motivation translates into behavior, i.e. a monetary donation. Andreasen and Kotler [5] argue that all donors give because they expect tangible or intangible benefits in return. Benefits people may enjoy as a result of their donations may include public recognition, self-esteem, satisfaction of expressing gratitude for one’s own wellbeing, or relief from feelings of guilt [3, 11]. Brady et al. [7] found that people also donate because they perceive a sense of obligation or a need, because they are attached to the organization, or because they have an innate or acquired philanthropic disposition.”

Individuals cherish the feeling of something well done. Donating to a good cause stimulates that sensation, which ultimately motivates an individual to continue. However, the nonprofit organization has to have a purpose that connects to people and are trustworthy and admirable. People who are following a specific organization are more likely to contribute continual donations than those who don’t look into the organization. To gain followers, how nonprofits carry themselves and promote their cause must be respectable and appeal to individuals in order to receive donations and create change.

2. “The three basic functions of nonprofit Web sites are information, interaction, and fundraising [33]. Previous research on Web sites of nonprofits has focused on how nonprofits harness the power of the World Wide Web and e-mail [27, 40, 44, 45], how the Internet may provide them with a strategic competitive advantage [36], and how nonprofits engage audiences in two-way communication on their Web sites [48]. In general, Web sites of environmental nonprofits have been paid little attention to, apart from one study in the UK [52], which has identified a need for environmental nonprofit organizations to set up more professional Web sites with more sophisticated features.”

Nonprofit organizations lack the time and expenses into putting together a sophisticated website.  These charities receive donations from individuals who are interested in the cause, so many small nonprofits rather use the aid towards their objective than their website.  However, to receive more online donations, the nonprofit’s site needs to be appealing in order to have repeated visits from users. This can turn a small, local nonprofit organization into a worldwide charity. There are free features provided by third parties to polish and enhance the functions on nonprofit organizations’ websites.  The goal for every nonprofit is to provide information about their cause and interact with the public to receive donations and recruit volunteers.  A refined website can do all this and ultimately benefit these organizations.

 

2. “Save the Whales? Save the Rainforest? Save the Data!” by Andrew S. Pullin and Nick Salafsky

Pullin, Andrew, and Nick Salafsky. “Save the Whales? Save the Rainforest? Save the Data!.” Conservation Biology 24: 915-917. Wiley Online Library. Web. 10 July 2014.

Link

Main Claim:
Pullin and Salafsky wrote this article to inform individuals about the unavailability of data for conservation actions. They argue that this failure to develop a shared evidence base for conservation is due to the missing or inaccessible raw data in conservation research and practice. They state that the public’s interest in conservation has been accompanied by growth in research, which is generating more primary data and scientific articles. Despite this, iconic conservation targets such as “Save the Whales” and “Save the Rainforest” have neither been achieved.

Nuggets:
1. “The development of a data-sharing culture, like any large-scale shift in human behavior, requires practitioners and researchers to have the necessary infrastructure,
awareness, and incentives. Although data from conservation projects are often more complex and heterogeneous than genome sequences, conservation professionals are starting to develop the tools necessary to facilitate sharing of data from both conservation practice and academic research. For example, a standard nomenclature is being developed for both the specific threats that conservation projects face and the conservation actions that these projects are using to counter these threats (Salafsky et al. 2008).”

Researchers and scientists have to receive the accurate information and incentives from conservation projects in order to distribute their efforts through shared data. Conservation projects are complex and require a lot of effort in delivering their purpose to others. Data from conservation actions are often misunderstood or even inaccessible, making it difficult for the cause to administer their intentions.

2. “Academic researchers (and more importantly their assessors) focus on outputs in the form of peer-reviewed papers, which often do not present any raw data or at
best present raw data from a perspective limited to the hypothesis being tested. There is currently little or no institutional incentive for researchers to make raw data
available for future use. Thus, it is commonly not feasible to “recycle” data, reexamine interpretations, correct faulty analyses (Ionnadis 2005), or use these data to inform different research questions. Outside academia the situation is no different. Practitioners typically receive little encouragement to document their findings and thus rarely do so; at best they produce reports and assessments that are not subjected to peer review, lack raw data, and potentially include a relatively high number of errors in methods and interpretation.”

Peer-review articles are derived from previous articles, which are derived from previous articles, and so on. Hypotheses arise from other’s products and scholarly articles about previous research. If there is all this modern research from present and past scientists that link together, why would future analysts construct a completely raw report of their own? Scientists don’t do this because they trust other scientist’s work and feed off of those to build their own data. In regards to conversationalist, this is a disadvantage to their purpose because there is little effort in creating a complete raw data report for their projects and research.

 

3. “How Nonprofits Use Social Media to Engage with their Communities” by Ritu Sharma

Sharma, Ritu. “How Nonprofits Use Social Media to Engage with their Communities.” Nonprofit Quarterly, 13 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 July 2014. <https://nonprofitquarterly.org/management/23837-how-nonprofits-use-social-media-to-engage-with-their-communities.html>.

Link

Main Claim:
Sharma examined and surveyed 500 nonprofit professionals to better understand how nonprofit organizations integrate social media and online communications into their strategies. The informal survey was created to help advance how nonprofits use social media to engage communities and reveal their online methodologies and practices. The results argue that the majority of nonprofits use online media as a social network for announcements and sharing information. At the end of the article, Sharma discusses how individuals of the public can learn from nonprofit organizations and what they can do to help.

Nuggets:
1. “Nonprofits overwhelmingly (88%) said their most important communication tools were email and their websites, even though fully 97% of them are on Facebook. This may have to do with the fact that in their mind, the pinnacle of engagement is a donation (47%). Clearly, simply getting folks to retweet or comment (18% each) is helpful only to the extent it culminates in financial support, which still typically happens through a donate page.”

Email is the original online communication tool and is still used by almost every person who has access to the internet. However, Facebook and websites are good for nonprofit organizations because it allows them to create their own page with links for pictures, articles, etc. Websites and Facebook can be made into something personal for nonprofits and their cause. They can support their purpose and provide information through external links. Most charities also maintain their donations through their personal website, so everything is presented in one site.

2. “When asked how nonprofits engage their communities with social media, most (74%) use social networks as a megaphone, announcing events and activities and sharing organization-centric info. Only 53% actually follow the best practice of posting issue-centric content to establish thought leadership in their nonprofit’s area(s) of focus. Clearly, the sector still has a long way to go on this front.”

Nonprofit organizations utilize social media to announce fundraisers and public events, and try to receive donations. They provide information about the organization and what their purpose is. However, many nonprofits don’t share articles or information about issues that correlate with their cause. In order to receive more donations and followers, and also to educate the people, nonprofits have to respond to controversies that the organization faces through online means.

 

Synthesis:
For my first and third articles, they have a lot of segments in common and explain similar factors. They both argue about how nonprofit organizations utilize the web and communicate to the public. How nonprofits use and benefit from their personal website is an important element in both of these articles. They also discuss followers and how organizations receive their donations online.

My second article doesn’t have much in common with either my first or third article. However, the second article discusses mostly about how data of nonprofit organizations is shared and how much is accessible. Both my first and third articles examine social media and personal websites of nonprofits, which are public forums. These public forums allows what information (or data) can be shared and accessed by individuals. These three articles can link together about how data and information of nonprofit organizations can be shared to the public.