Stop, you can’t do that; is something I’ve heard some charities have been told by the agency that does their annual fundraising.
Stop doing what? Simple, all they were doing was working to get some media exposure for their cause, for the work they do in the community and the people that benefit from their services.
But for some unknown reason their agency has said it isn’t to happen, that it would confuse people and that the work they do would get them the same, if not more exposure.
What’s better for the charity, to establish their own PR campaign or some agency who may not have the same media knowledge or contacts as the charity? I would say the charity should be doing all they can to help the campaign.
I know of at least one agency that hasn’t had any media exposure (positive) for over 3 years, and are of the mind that they don’t need it, that the numbers of people they contact is PR enough. I’d call that rubbish.
You would have to wonder why an agency would be putting blocks in the road preventing the very people they’re trying to help do something of a positive nature that could help the campaign.
Is it that some agencies are running scared – media shy in the event that questions are asked about funding sources and percentages retained? I’d say so.
If a charity is able to use stories, show examples of what they are doing in the community why stop them from doing so when it is likely to have the potential to increase support for them – why prevent they do all they can to help their campaign?
Is it short sightedness on the part of the agency? Can’t they see beyond any fears they may have? Or are they simply trying to usurp pressure on the charity – you want us to get you funding, then you play by our rules. It’s our way, or it’s the highway!
As a charity what would your response be? Have you had any agency tell you to stop any activity during a funding campaign – if so how did you respond and handle the ‘request’?