Charities: Take Your On-Line Engagement Seriously

Whilst much has been made of the potential for charities using social media, little has been said about the possibilities for charities to be harmed by their on-line associations.

Behind every charity is a deep political issue – like the funding of healthcare, or the political situations that create poverty, or the political factors creating environmental problems, displacement or people sleeping on the streets.

In many cases, charities are dealing with symptoms rather than cures: politics is considered uncharitable activity. Therein lies the first ‘risk’: when politics come to the fore the resulting debate can become a furore, off-putting to potential donors.

Controlling passionate, well-meaning supporters can present a real challenge.

The requirement for great openness similarly presents a ‘threat’ to reputation.  Any kind of mud slinging is amplified in an on-line arena.

I am a long-time supporter of Oxfam, but their Twitter communications this week have stopped me engaging with their subsidiary, Oxjam,  on-line.

I became one of the early followers of ‘CoolToBeKind’, @C2BK2009 on Twitter. This Oxfam inspired music event is full of potential.  I responded to something they had put out, earning myself a ‘follow’ from one Ashima Aziz (@ashimaziz). This individual (and another faceless Twitterer who may, of course be the same person) claimed that someone within Oxjam had perpetrated some illegal activity in Australia and fled to the UK to hide behind a charitable front.

Naturally I advised Oxjam – via Twitter. They didn’t follow back and asked for information.

I nudged them to follow, but had I simply chosen to tweet them, the allegation would have been repeated, publicly and searchably.

Their response?

“Please take this up with the charity. I am just a volunteer”

“I don’t know a thing about any of this but to be honest, it seems nasty that people would want to foul up a charity event.”

This is the charity’s Twitter account.  The voice of the charity on Twitter.  Volunteers have the same responsibility as staff in many ways. So I asked the person on the Twitter account to let the charity know what was happening.  There was something obviously not right. This person was following a number of people who had tweeted the charity for some reason, with varying reactions.  And then deleting their tweets.

The response?

“have done. they have acccess  [sic] to this account anyway.”

(I would hope so – this account is being run in their name.)

“chatted to client and he is allegedly wanted by police for doing this. And all those profiles are fake!”

I rarely seek to point fault with fellow PR people in the on-line space.  It’s too easy to make mistakes, and there but for the grace of God go all of us, as the saying runs. And I’ve seen it used as a pretty shabby way of winning new business (criticise the work of your predecessor).

However, in this instance this is presumably a PR person/company running this charity’s account in an irresponsible fashion. Instead of a robust investigation (or appearance of doing so) and reassuring denial from the charity, I now have two allegations of illegality, one from each side, and a lingering doubt about a senior figure within Oxjam. (I find it highly unlikely that the police will be after someone for a couple of tweets. It’s hard enough to get them out to deal with burglaries.)

Insult to injury? Whilst I’m being bombarded by this nonsense from various quarters about the charity’s senior staff, (s)he is tweeting:

“hilariously under attack by fake profiles!”

Glad to know that you’re taking this seriously then. Next time I may just blindly repeat the allegations rather than go back to the charity and warn them. Whatever the relationship between Oxfam, Oxjam and CTBK, all have been marred by this engagement.

I have cut off my Twitter communications with all parties (although I was then approached on the same matter by a Twitter account in a new name). How many others repeated the allegations or simply blocked communications without at least trying to establish the truth?

Every lost supporter is one lesson person helped, one less life saved or enriched. The on-line environment amplifies both good and bad. Do it properly, or don’t do it at all.

2 Comments

• 

  By JD, October 12, 2009 @ 1:35 pm

  Would be interesting to know if this exchange was made publicly on twitter or as direct messages. Interesting article though.

• 

  By admin, October 12, 2009 @ 2:18 pm

  The allegations were made publicly, presumably in the hopes that I would retweet them.

  Incidentally, I don’t want to believe for one minute that Oxjam’s leadership is guilty of any wrongdoing beyond not taking the fact that their Twitter ‘followers’ are being bombarded with nasty allegations seriously.

Other Links to this Post

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

*Name

*Email (not published)

Website