A counterexample is Causes on Facebook, a for-profit entity which utilizes social pressure to drive donations to nonprofits and has its own successful "tip" system. http://www.facebook.com/causes
My post was about using this model to support blogs and podcasts. Not bona fide charitable organizations. I actually have experience in doing successful online fundraising for those kinds of groups.
Agreed, I thought it would be interesting to mention the tipping strategy that the for-profit entity Causes uses at the same time they are helping out nonprofits.
There are a lot of things in this article I disagree with. 1) Wikipedia doesn't have 5 billion unique visitors (there are only 1.6 billion internet users in the world). And they only put up banners asking for money when they need it, not all the time. So both variables in coming up with the "$.00124/visitor" estimate are incorrect. 2) Tax deduction does not make something cost-free. For most people, a donation saves…
With #1 the point is that although tons of people use Wikipedia, only a microfraction of em donate. I, for example, have gotten tons of value out of it yet have never given them anything. I think that they should petition universities for sponsorships. I just donated $5 because I realized how ridiculous my lack of patronage is.
Don't feel bad about not giving them money—they need to be free to read to sustain the level of net-positive impulse-edits they get (similar to how chewing gum needs to be at the checkouts of grocery stores to sustain its level of purchase.) Encouraging Wikipedia's free use, as a side-effect, makes more people likely to edit it, and thus makes it more valuable.
Incidentally, higher tipping rates, and more honest behavior appears even in the presence of PICTURES of faces. Sure a live human is much more effective at applying social pressure, but that doesn't mean that the internet is helpless on this front (hell use an animated gif).
Using the NPR model is pretty despicable if you're getting funding through more traditional means too.
For instance, Jesse Thorn (who's background is in public radio), asked for and got $15k in public donations to fund the first season of his web series: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1136753854/put-this-on-s... — the problem is that his show is itself advertising — NPR does pledge drives to avoid ads, and here he is using the same mechanism to fund the production of commercials!
There are a lot of things in this article I disagree with. 1) Wikipedia doesn't have 5 billion unique visitors (there are only 1.6 billion internet users in the world). And they only put up banners asking for money when they need it, not all the time. So both variables in coming up with the "$.00124/visitor" estimate are incorrect. 2) Tax deduction does not make something cost-free. For most people, a donation saves…
With #1 the point is that although tons of people use Wikipedia, only a microfraction of em donate. I, for example, have gotten tons of value out of it yet have never given them anything. I think that they should petition universities for sponsorships. I just donated $5 because I realized how ridiculous my lack of patronage is.
There are a lot of things in this article I disagree with. 1) Wikipedia doesn't have 5 billion unique visitors (there are only 1.6 billion internet users in the world). And they only put up banners asking for money when they need it, not all the time. So both variables in coming up with the "$.00124/visitor" estimate are incorrect. 2) Tax deduction does not make something cost-free. For most people, a donation saves…
With #1 the point is that although tons of people use Wikipedia, only a microfraction of em donate. I, for example, have gotten tons of value out of it yet have never given them anything. I think that they should petition universities for sponsorships. I just donated $5 because I realized how ridiculous my lack of patronage is.
Monetary donations are only one way of helping a site like Wikipedia. Another valuable (even critical) form of help is editing, voting, and otherwise participating on the site.
I've donated a ton of my time to improving Wikipedia, so don't feel the least bit of guilt about not giving them money. If anything, they should be paying me!
There are a lot of things in this article I disagree with. 1) Wikipedia doesn't have 5 billion unique visitors (there are only 1.6 billion internet users in the world). And they only put up banners asking for money when they need it, not all the time. So both variables in coming up with the "$.00124/visitor" estimate are incorrect. 2) Tax deduction does not make something cost-free. For most people, a donation saves…
Thank you for your notes. 1.) I didn't say Wikipedia has 5 billion uniques. I said it gets 5 billion visitors . In ad sales a visitor is different than a unique. I changed it to "visits" so avoid the confusion. 2.) Tax deduction makes the perception of something's cost free. 3.) If you can still get a product without paying for something (i.e. tipping) the price is either what you ask for ($5) or nothing. That's the…
In ad sales a visitor is different than a unique.
Source? I was under impression that a visitor means a visitor and a visit means a visit. Surprised to see it being used the other way.
Tax deduction makes the perception of something's cost free.
That's just a baseless statement. I can find you any number of people who don't perceive that way. Who are the people that bear the perception? What is their percentage among the populace? How do you know the answer?
Incidentally, higher tipping rates, and more honest behavior appears even in the presence of PICTURES of faces. Sure a live human is much more effective at applying social pressure, but that doesn't mean that the internet is helpless on this front (hell use an animated gif).
Good point. They've done studies where just eyes draw on a tip jar get more donations.
Thank you for your notes. 1.) I didn't say Wikipedia has 5 billion uniques. I said it gets 5 billion visitors . In ad sales a visitor is different than a unique. I changed it to "visits" so avoid the confusion. 2.) Tax deduction makes the perception of something's cost free. 3.) If you can still get a product without paying for something (i.e. tipping) the price is either what you ask for ($5) or nothing. That's the…
In ad sales a visitor is different than a unique. Source? I was under impression that a visitor means a visitor and a visit means a visit. Surprised to see it being used the other way. Tax deduction makes the perception of something's cost free. That's just a baseless statement. I can find you any number of people who don't perceive that way. Who are the people that bear the perception? What is their percentage among…