Fundraising Copywriter George Crankovic

Category: fundraising

  • 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?”

  • Why your fundraising needs a strong offer

    In fundraising, a strong offer is a clear statement about what your donor will do and what she’ll receive in return.

    It’s the deal, the transaction, the quid pro quo. But it’s something more, too. Your offer is the emotional link between your donor and your nonprofit’s mission. It’s an expression of your donor’s aspirations about being a good person and the validation of those aspirations, all put into action through the work your nonprofit does.

    To be effective, your offer should do a number of things. It should present donors with a specific opportunity to do good. It should convey donor benefits, which can be tangible (like a premium) and intangible (like making a difference). It should tell your donor what to do and why. It should convey some sense of urgency, either implied or explicit (like a specific deadline to respond). And it should show your donor that she’s getting a good deal.

    You want to incorporate as many of these “shoulds” as you can when crafting your offer. That might seem like a tall order at first. But once you get into it, you see that the strongest offers are often the simplest, such as, “Your gift of $25 will save the life of a starving child in Africa,” “Your gift will double in impact to send lifesaving medicine into poverty zones in Tajikistan,” or “Just $1.75 will provide a Thanksgiving dinner for someone who’s homeless.”

    Granted, getting to this level of simplicity isn’t always easy, but it’s worth the effort. You naturally want your offer to be as donor-focused as possible. So take the time to think about the most enticing opportunity you can present to your donors that allows them to fulfill their need to be good people making a difference in the world.

  • The wrong kind of fundraising storytelling

    Yes, you want the stories in your fundraising appeals to spark emotion in donors.

    But no, you can’t go crazy with it.

    If you overuse adjectives and metaphors, you risk ending up with drivel like this: “The awesome burden of Sasha’s unending poverty fell like a heavy weight upon her small shoulders, and as she struggled to provide for herself and her kids and considered the hopelessness of her plight, the tears streamed down her face like rain on a windowpane.”

    Wow — what drama! The problem is, the drama is so phony that it upstages credibility. And it sounds like AI nonsense.

    Save the florid writing for your 1940s-era detective novel. The best stories and descriptions for fundraising are ones that tell themselves without embellishment. Think Hemingway. Be direct. That’s how to pull readers in.

    Go back and reread your stories and descriptions with an eye toward eliminating unneeded adjectives and adverbs. Instead, focus on strong verbs. That’s where the power is, because verbs are action, and people lock onto writing that has action. Your copy will move readers. It will have the ring of truth.

    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 you giving donors what they want?

    Donors want action.

    Unfortunately, they might not be getting it from the appeals they receive.

    Donors see vague, abstract messaging like “give hope,” “stand with us,” “join our movement,” “make a difference” and other ambiguities.

    This vagueness is too common in fundraising appeals of all kinds. It denies donors the ability to take action, which is one of the main things they want. It fails to connect with donors on the level of personal values. And it makes the nonprofit seem like it’s being very careful not to say anything specific (Will my donation actually do anything, or does it just go into a general-fund black hole?). Donors start to feel like they’re reading one long disclaimer instead of a fundraising letter.

    That’s why when a donor gets an appeal from a nonprofit asking her to give to help build a sustainable energy infrastructure, she’ll probably toss it. But if the appeal promises a specific action – like shutting down the fracking in her town – and asks for her help, she’s more likely to give.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • How two nonprofits are reacting in the Trump era

    Lately, many nonprofits are finding that they have to worry about something they never even considered before.

    Sure, they had the usual worries about donor attrition, revenue, acquisition, retention, and so on.

    But now, on top of all that, they have to worry that the federal government might be coming after them.

    “The Trump administration is mounting a sweeping offensive on America’s nonprofit sector, deploying a blend of funding cuts, the elimination of tax benefits, bureaucratic paralysis and even installing a small DOGE team to target organizations that challenge the president’s agenda,” according to Politico (4/18/2025).

    At least two nonprofits are reacting in the best way there is – with direct mail.

    Take the Environmental Defense Fund. The Trump administration has canceled or interrupted hundreds of EPA grants, shut down more than 100 climate studies, and ended National Science Foundation grants for projects related to climate change. These cuts directly affect the EDF.

    So they’re firing up their donors.

    EPSON MFP image

    Amnesty International is another example. The Trump administration stopped U.S. foreign aid, halting programs for health care, food security, shelter, and humanitarian support. And ended  funding for programs supporting survivors of sexual violence, refugees, and marginalized communities.

    Amnesty International has said that these cuts will leave millions without essential services.

    So they’re firing up their donors too.

    EPSON MFP image

    Both of these appeals are following a bold, in-your-face strategy to get noticed, get the appeal opened, and move donors.

    There’s the oversize outer envelope (11” x 5” for one and 11-1/2” x 5 for the other).

    There’s the simple, powerful messaging on the outer envelope: “Fight Back!”

    There’s the bold graphic approach, with huge fonts and attention-grabbing reds and yellows.

    And there’s the invitation to take action. The Amnesty International carrier touts an “activist tool kit inside.” And the Environmental Defense Fund envelope announces, “Petitions Inside!”

    Inside, the letters continue the “take action” theme, urging donors to donate and to get involved.

    You can see the strategy in both of these outer envelopes. They’re all about demanding attention, increasing the open rate, and getting donors motivated. When you see an appeal envelope like this in your mailbox, you know it’s something important. Your interest has been piqued. Your ire has been roused. And your means for fighting back are right at hand, inside the envelope.

    These are tactics and strategies that virtually all nonprofits could use in their appeals, especially now when there’s so much chaos and uncertainty.

    That’s why, as this turmoil continues and as the economy inches closer toward recession, nonprofits will have to grab donors’ attention and motivate them like never before. And that means direct mail tactics likes these will become necessary not only for success but also for survival.

    See the whole story at https://www.nonprofitpro.com/post/how-2-nonprofits-are-using-direct-mail-to-get-donors-fired-up-to-take-action/

  • Could this be write for fundraising?

    Emotion – not logic – is what moves donors to give, right? Then why do you see appeals based on logical arguments all the time?

    It’s probably because that’s how we were all taught to write. With deductive reasoning. You start with a general premise, followed by the minor premise, then the conclusion.

    It’s the way we were taught to write a paragraph. There’s the topic sentence, then supporting arguments, and then the conclusion.

    Problem is, this might be how you get a good grade on a term paper, but it doesn’t work for fundraising.   

    Here’s an example of an appeal from a nonprofit advocating for criminal justice reform:

    Dear [Firstname],

    One mistake or bad decision shouldn’t define someone’s life or value.

    But for 78 million people with an old arrest or conviction record, a mistake can mean a lifetime of barriers to getting a job or accessing safe housing.

    That’s why at [nonprofit], we and our more than 400,000 members are advocating for law changes that will expand access to stability and economic opportunity for the millions of Americans locked out of opportunity due to an old record. But we can’t do it without your help.

    You can see the format. There’s the general premise: “One mistake or bad decision shouldn’t define someone’s life or value.”

    There’s the minor premise: “But for 78 million people with an old arrest or conviction record, a mistake can mean a lifetime of barriers to getting a job or accessing safe housing.”

    Then, the conclusion, which, for fundraising, is essentially, “Therefore, donate.” Here’s the conclusion: “That’s why at [nonprofit], we and our more than 400,000 members are advocating for law changes that will expand access to stability and economic opportunity for the millions of Americans locked out of opportunity due to an old record. But we can’t do it without your help.”

    It probably seems to many nonprofits that this is how fundraising appeals should be written, because after all that’s how you write. That’s how the people in the nonprofit’s marketing department wrote their term papers.

    But fundraising copy is nothing like a term paper. A fundraising appeal is a personal letter from one concerned individual to another. It’s about emotion, empathy, humanity, values, morals and more.

    Not logic. People don’t make decisions based on logic. They made decisions based on emotion. You can’t argue or debate someone into donating. 

    If you try, as in the example above, you get fundraising copy that’s cold, unempathetic, and unmotivating. 

    This doesn’t mean you never use logic. A reason to give could be a logical point like, “Eliminating barriers to employment for people with criminal convictions means they become tax-paying residents.”

    But arguments like these wouldn’t be the basis of the appeal. It’s far better to find the emotional core of the cause you’re raising funds for, and present that to donors. Then you’re reaching donors on the basis of empathy and shared values. And that’s where connection, compassion, and persuasion happen.

    See the whole article at https://www.nonprofitpro.com/post/the-way-we-learn-to-write-is-all-wrong-for-fundraising/