Fundraising Copywriter George Crankovic

Category: donor psychology

  • What’s the right envelope strategy for direct mail fundraising?

    People in the direct mail fundraising world are often surprisingly unanimous about one thing.

    The blank envelope is the way to go if you want increased open rates and response. Far better than any envelope with teaser copy and possibly graphics.

    “I’ve tested it!” they exclaim. Well maybe. The fact is that an A/B test is a snapshot in time, not a pronouncement from the oracle.

    And they never tell you what the teaser was that lost in the test. Maybe it was just bad teaser copy.

    But never mind about test results and data. You can see for yourself how you personally would react to two different envelope treatments. Is this a scientific test? Nope. But it does show how people might react, and you’re certainly a person. So let’s take a look at a brief thought experiment.

    You’re sorting through your morning mail. You see a stark, plain, blank envelope. Is it a bill? An overdue notice? A letter from the IRS? Could be any of those things or none of them. You don’t know. And that, say the blank-envelope proponents, is the point. You have to find out.

    Fair enough. What IS inside, which you don’t know at this point, is a letter from an organization wanting to sue President Trump. Let’s not get caught up in the politics here. This is about envelope teasers, remember.

    So you open the envelope, read the letter, and possibly donate. But you have to open the envelope, not knowing what to expect, and then decide whether to read it or not. There’s a disconnect there, between what the envelope conveys and what the message of the letter is.

    One of John Caples’s principles of copywriting is that the headline should directly and telegraphically lead into the body copy. Here we have no headline – or for our purposes, no teaser — so telegraphing isn’t possible.

    Which leads us to the counter example. You’re sorting through your mail again, and you see an envelope with this teaser, and it’s personalized: “John, we’re suing Donald Trump.”

    That’s it. No photo, no graphic. This teaser does what no blank envelope could ever accomplish. It primes the reader for what’s to come in the letter enclosed. Even more to the point, if you’re the target audience for this appeal, you’re already halfway toward donating simply by reading that teaser, even before you see the appeal letter.

    Instead of being hesitant to see what’s inside, as you might be with a blank envelope, in this case you’re eager to see the letter because you’re already in agreement with what the letter will presumably talk about. The envelope and the letter are working together. They’re direct and telegraphic.

    If you’re the nonprofit sending out this appeal, you’ve primed the donor with the envelope teaser, and when you follow through in the appeal letter, you’re well on your way to winning a donation.

    To see a lot more on this, go to https://tinyurl.com/44ystvan

  • Is AI simply another ‘shiny new object’?

    Is AI copywriting nothing more than the next ‘shiny new object’ that’s grabbing everyone’s attention?

    To find out, let’s take a look at a couple of shiny new objects in the past from commercial marketing.

    For the first one, we need to go back in time to the early 2000s or so. That was the beginning of the SEO craze. Search engine optimization.

    SEO was everything. If you didn’t do it, you wouldn’t be able to market any product to anyone. And if you wanted to be a copywriter, well, you absolutely had to take one of the many certification courses on SEO copywriting that were springing up.

    Because if you didn’t know SEO, your so-called career as a copywriter was going nowhere. You’d be left behind, drowning in the wake of advancing technology.

    Looking back on those days, things seem quite a bit different today. You don’t hear much about SEO copywriting anymore. And if you bothered to get one of those SEO Copywriter certifications, it’s probably just collecting dust.

    That’s because it gradually became apparent that simply loading up advertising and marketing content with keywords produced a very predicable result.

    Copywriting that sounded like it was produced by a robot spitting out keywords. And not only keywords. The same handful of keywords over and over again.

    To anyone actually reading this copy, it seemed like the content was there for the sole purpose of delivering keywords to the search engines. Which was exactly the case. Customers recognized this too, of course. They became less and less enthralled.

    Needless to say, even though it seemed like a good idea at the time, SEO copywriting kind of fizzled out.

    Another shiny new object was the whole ‘article marketing’ craze that happened somewhere around the same time.

    The experts promised that you could market and sell anything just by publishing articles about it on sites like ezinearticles.com – which by the way doesn’t exist anymore.

    With all the initial hoopla about article marketing, ask yourself if you’ve heard much about it lately. You haven’t, for a few reasons.

    First of all, the content was mostly crap. That’s because, again, the content was seen as simply a way to deliver keywords to the search engines. And that was the problem. After you’d read a few of these articles, why would you waste time ever reading another one?

    Second, the algorithms changed. If you were an avid article marketer, your articles suddenly stopped showing up on search results, because Google changed the rules on you.

    Third, too much content! With everyone pumping out articles as fast as possible, it’s obvious that we’d reach a saturation point. How much of that stuff could people actually read?

    Which brings us to AI. And to copywriting.

    If you’re a marketing or fundraising copywriter today, you’re being told that you have one of two choices: adapt or die.

    Either you use one of the AI writing tools available – and ideally more than one – to write better and faster, or you gradually succumb to a rapidly changing climate, watching fellow copywriters die off like Wooly Mammoths, once great creatures that just couldn’t keep up.

    But there’s another problem. Let’s say you stand up and announce, “I choose to adapt!” With your hand over your heart, you pledge to use the amazing new AI copywriting tools.

    The only thing is, the nonprofits or businesses that might hire you to write copy don’t need you. They can just plug a prompt into AI, and the copy appears.

    In the nonprofit world, even tiny nonprofits with no communications department can produce donor communications by the bushelful. Appeals for direct mail, appeals for email, donor newsletters, case statements, donor acknowledgements, whatever. You can pump out content like crazy.

    And you can direct that fire hose of content at your donors, and blast them with it. Then they’ll have no choice but to give. Because you’re communicating with donors, right? Well, yes and no.

    Pumping out content isn’t necessarily communicating. Especially if your content sounds like everyone else who’s using AI.

    And especially if you’re bombarding your donors with content in the same way that the other charities they support are also bombarding them with content.

    Remember SEO marketing? Remember article marketing? Aren’t we going to reach a saturation point in fundraising with AI-generated communications?

    Sure, in the beginning, everyone is smitten with AI copywriting, just like everyone was smitten with SEO copywriting and article marketing.

    But will we end up a few years from now looking back and wondering why we didn’t realize that computer-generated fundraising appeals weren’t really the great idea that they seemed to be?

    And will we wonder why we didn’t realize that human beings don’t really love computer-generated fundraising, even though it’s cheap for the nonprofit to produce?

    The shortcomings of SEO copywriting and article marketing seem obvious now. Shouldn’t the shortcomings of AI copywriting and fundraising be just as obvious?

  • AI has gutted nonprofit telemarketing. Will it do the same to donor communications?

    If you give to nonprofits, in addition to mail and email appeals, you probably receive phone calls thanking you for your last gift and asking you to give again. In the before times, before AI, the person on the other end of the phone was a person.

    Not anymore. Now the person on the other end is an AI robot. Here’s how it goes. Your phone rings. You answer. First thing you hear is muffled voices and commotion in the background, as if the call is coming from the command center of a very busy organization. That’s all fake, of course. There’s no command center. There’s no organization. There’s not even a call center where people work. They’ve all been replaced by AI.

    Then, you hear this: “Hi this is Mike, I’m calling you about [charity name].” He launches into his spiel. “We’re a national organization working on behalf of police officers who get injured on the job.”

    You immediately think that this is of course important work. “Mike” goes on to explain that policing is dangerous, and officers are getting injured at a much higher rate than at any other time.

    All the while “Mike” is talking, he sounds conversational and even friendly. He doesn’t sound like a robot, and yet he doesn’t really sound like a human being either. Something just seems slightly off, but you can’t really put your finger on it.

    “Mike” finishes his pitch, then says, “Can I count of you for a pledge of $20?”

    You might give, but you’re thinking about it. So you ask “Mike” what the name of the charity is again. He tells you. You ask how long they’ve been running. He tells you.

    Then you ask, “Mike, what will my donation do?” Long pause. “Mike” is glitching. He tells you that the charity helps injured police officers.

    You say, “Yes, I know, but what will my donation accomplish?” Another pause. “I think it’d be helpful to look at our website at www[URL].”

    You realize that something is up with “Mike.” So you say, “Mike, are you a robot?”

    He answers that question the same way that all the “Mikes” answer. He says with a chuckle, “Why do I sound that bad today?”

    Yes, Mike, you do. After you’ve talked with a few “Mikes,” are you ever going to take a call from that nonprofit again and actually talk with them about past and future gifts? No, you won’t.

    Because the interaction with “Mike” is impersonal. Because it’s deceptive. He’s passing himself off as a human being. Because it’s devoid of any real human feeling. And above all else, because “Mike” is an AI robot and you’re a person.

    Something very similar is the case with AI-generated appeals that donors might get in the mail and in email. They’re impersonal. They’re deceptive. They’re passing themselves off as written by a human. They’re devoid of real feeling. And they’re computer generated while you’re not.

    Even worse, they’re boring. The only thing that AI can do when writing fundraising copy is provide a facsimile of all the fundraising copy it has aggregated. That means what AI is spitting out is the average, the status quo, the expected. It’s templated language.

    It’s not going to provide something new and unexpected. It’s not going to give you a breakthrough idea. It’s not going to really engage donors.

    Not only that, because it only produces what it has aggregated, the output all tends to sound pretty much the same. Which means that your nonprofit starts sounding like all the other nonprofits that are using AI.

    Sure, nonprofits can pump out lots of appeals with AI. Even small nonprofits can do that. But is it a good idea?

    Think of it from your donors’ perspective. You’re on the receiving end. Once you’ve had a few phone calls with “Mike,” you’re simply going to stop picking up the phone. Because why would you bother?

    And once you’ve read a few soul-less, Mike-like, AI-generated appeal letters, are you going to keep opening up the appeal letters and emails from that nonprofit? Why would you bother?

    Yes, AI is a new and disruptive technology. But before we get carried away with creating appeals easier, faster, and cheaper just because we can, let’s give a thought to the donors we’re creating the appeals for. And let’s ask, “How would I like it if I were the one getting fake phone calls and letters from ‘Mike’? Would that make me more likely to give or less likely?”

  • Less pleading, more giving

    A fundraising appeal, by definition, is an impassioned plea. But in too many fundraising appeals, there’s just too much pleading, too much begging for a gift.

    There’s another way to go. And that’s to emphasize the benefit to the donor when he or she gives.

    Benefits? In fundraising letters? Absolutely. While copywriters tend to think of benefits only in business-to-business or consumer promotions, the fact is that benefits motivate donors to give.

    For fundraising, benefits range from simply feeling good about giving, to thinking of oneself as a compassionate person, to helping make the world a better place, to fulfilling a religious obligation, to saving a life, to sending food, and much more. These are personal reasons for giving. They’re what the donor gets out of giving. They’re donor benefits.

    And think about your nonprofit. How is it making an impact? How is it making a difference in people’s lives, local communities, the world? These are larger-scale benefits that donors realize by being a part of your mission, and they can be powerful reasons to give.

  • Should a fundraising appeal be a polemic raging against poverty, animal abuse, or whatever the cause is?

    Not necessarily.

    A fundraising letter is, first and foremost, a letter. Sure, there are times when the right tone is outrage. But even then, your letter still should read like a letter from one person to another. Not an essay. Not a philosophical treatise. Not a journalistic think piece.

    Direct mail is the most immediate and personal medium. You should make use of that fact. You want your reader to feel that the signer of the letter is a real and concerned person, not a faceless corporate entity. Think about the signer. What kind of person is he or she? Think about your
    charity’s brand. What are its characteristics? Try to incorporate some of these qualities into your letter.

    Overall, you want to strive for an informal, warm, conversational tone, because that’s what most people respond to. Use contractions. Use italics for emphasis. Vary your sentence length. Begin sentences with “and,” “but,” “so” and “or.” No, it’s not grammatically incorrect. Use fragments. (They are grammatically incorrect, but who cares? They’re conversational.) When you’re done writing, go back and reread it again. Does it sound like a letter written by a human being in the 21st century to another human being? When you can answer yes, you’re good to go.

    You’re in fundraising and development. What do you think? Are your appeals working the way you want right now? Comment, or get in touch to compare notes.

  • How to get donors to really lean into a fundraising appeal

    To engage your readers, you want to pull your ideas down from the ether and express them through the things of the world. Copy that’s abstract won’t grab donors. Verbal images will.

    A verbal image is different from a story. Fundraising stories are narratives — this happens, then that happens and so on. A verbal image, even though it may have some narrative elements, is essentially a snapshot — a succinct, sharply focused picture that readers immediately get. And that’s where it draws its power.

    A verbal image is concrete. You can write in your appeal, for example, that your charity has 1,000 pounds of medical supplies to distribute. But that’s abstract. It’s unlikely to have much of an impact, because your donor can’t envision 1,000 pounds. Instead, you can write that your charity has boxes and boxes of antibiotics, bandages, vaccines, stethoscopes and crutches, stacked from the floor to the ceiling, filling up the entire warehouse, just waiting to be shipped. That’s concrete. It’s something your donors can see in their mind’s eye.

    You can use verbal images to make just about every part of your offer and your appeal more compelling for donors, keeping in mind that the images should be based in fact and not just made-up.

    Just as you use photos and other visual images, you can make your appeals more compelling and more effective with verbal images. To pull donors in, don’t just say it. Show it with verbal imagery.

  • Why you DON’T want your donors to be readers of your fundraising appeals

    You see it in a lot of fundraising appeals. The first few sentences of the letter force the donor into the position of being a passive reader as opposed to being a participant.

    The appeal might open with a discussion of a topic. It might present the donor with facts, figures, and opinions. It might cite statistics. The donor is a reader, going through what sounds very much like a corporate memo, instead of a personal letter.

    So what’s the right approach when you want your donors to be participants instead of just passive readers? Of course there are many different approaches. But in most cases, an involving letter opening will have “you” and “I” references. It will bring the donor into the action. And it will try to be emotionally engaging.

    A letter lead like this makes the donor a reader:

    “Food is a basic human right. Yet every year, 45 million children under the age of 5 suffer from malnutrition, and more than 3 million die from hunger-related causes…”

    A letter like this makes the donor more of a participant:

    “You might not see it. It doesn’t always make the news. But I can tell you, it’s heartbreaking. Innocent children, frail from malnutrition, starving to death. It’s a crisis, a tsunami of suffering, all around the world. I think about my own children…”

    A strong, involving opening is like a promise to donors that whatever follows will be just as interesting. And when that happens, you’re far more likely to be on the way to winning their support as well as their loyalty.  

    You’re in fundraising and development. What do you think? Are your appeals working the way you want right now? Comment, or get in touch to compare notes.

  • Are your appeals up in the air or down to earth?

    Specifics sell. It’s true in commercial marketing, and it’s certainly true in direct response fundraising.

    You see a lot of abstract concepts in fundraising appeals like ‘stand with us,’ ‘make a difference,’ and ‘send hope.’ What do those vague notions mean? Not much, really. They’re abstractions, concepts that are up in the clouds, not definite thoughts and things down here on earth.

    Bottom line, these generalized abstractions aren’t motivating. They distract and create doubts in your donor’s mind. So, be specific.

    Instead of ‘stand with us against homelessness,’ say, ‘Your gift of $5 provides a hot meal, a clean bed, and a night of safe shelter.’ That’s going to seem a lot more real and a lot more useful to your donors. It builds donor relationships too, because donors will see your nonprofit as the one that’s doing real things to solve real problems.

    You’re in fundraising and development. What do you think? Are your appeals working the way you want right now? Comment, or get in touch to compare notes.

  • How to harness the power of good to make your fundraising appeals better

    Many nonprofits aren’t giving donors what they want.

    And then those same nonprofits wonder why donors aren’t giving them what THEY want – donations.

    Donors want a whole range of things in exchange for their gifts. One of those things surely is the intangible benefit of thinking of oneself as a good person.

    And why not? Why shouldn’t donors think of themselves this way? Donors ARE good people for giving.

    But many nonprofits fail to tap into this in their fundraising appeals. Maybe they think it’s too sentimental or too melodramatic. Nonsense.

    You want to connect with your donors on a practical level (I’m sending food for starving people), but you also want to connect with donors on an emotional level (I’m doing something good that I can be proud of, something that shows I’m a good person.).

    So how do you communicate this important intangible benefit to donors?

    There’s the tried-and-true donor appreciation certificate with the donor’s name on it, saying how wonderful they are. That says, “you’re a good person for giving.”

    There are special awards, like a Good Neighbor Award, that send the good-person message.

    There are impact reports saying, “you made this good work possible,” which the donor understands as “I’m a good person for doing this.”

    There are memberships in giving groups, like president’s clubs, where donors can see themselves as good people in the company of other good people

    There’s messaging. You can suggest, you can imply, you can even come right out and say, “You’re a good person!” in donor communications.

    There are many more ways to convey to donors that they’re good people. And when you give donors what they want, they’re more likely to return the favor. See the whole story at https://tinyurl.com/28e4pkjp

  • When not to use a freemium in direct mail fundraising

    Why would a nonprofit tout their stewardship of donors’ money in an appeal and then throw in a bunch of free stuff?

    Not sure.

    But that’s what this one did. The appeal is from an international aid and relief charity. The letter begins:

    “Trust, impact, and value are critical when you’re making decisions about giving to a charity.” No argument there. Most donors would probably accept that premise. It continues:

    “You want to know that your hard-earned money is being put to the best use.” This is where it gets weird. This mailing includes a freemium, and that freemium is five full-size, full-color, single-fold greeting cards with five envelopes.

    Now, is that the most extravagant freemium ever? Not by a long shot. Some nonprofits throw in address labels, calendars, note pads, and much more all into one mailing. But this particular freemium isn’t exactly the cheapest either. It’s not a simple bookmark, for example.

    The point is, if you’re throwing in free stuff, is that the appeal where you want to get on your high horse about putting donors’ hard-earned money to the best use? We all know that most donors will just throw away all those greeting cards. Donors themselves probably realize that too. So from the donor’s perspective, how is that the best use of donors’ money?

    There could be a time and place for messaging that talks about trust, value, and so on. But that messaging seems at odds with adding a bunch of freemiums.

    Especially when those freemiums don’t relate directly to the offer of the appeal. True, these greeting cards show images of various countries and include small blurbs about the charity’s work. But still, they’re just greeting cards.

    Some extras to include in an appeal that might be a little more on point would be an infographic card, a map, a fact sheet, an impact report, photos of aid recipients, handwritten notes from a field worker or a beneficiary, and others. Things like these might be more relevant to donors and would relate more directly to what the nonprofit does and what the donor’s impact would be.

    Otherwise, it could look like you’re using free stuff to guilt donors into giving. And even if you’re doing that, and some nonprofits do (no judgement), you probably shouldn’t make the theme of the appeal how good you are with donors’ money. Because the free stuff makes that seem less believable.