Can we stop posting videos of our bretheren dying?

[AsherO]

I politely disagree. In was not considered acceptable to post pictures of levayas etc. as news items until relatively recently, but now it certainly is.

A really jarring funeral picture was posted/circulated recently to help raise money for the family in a crowdfunding campaign, and while I can’t judge anyone involved in choosing to circulate that picture, it was a major trigger to me, and probably to others as well.

When someone forwarded the Charidy campaign and that picture camp up as the image for the link, I lashed out at the person who shared it in a WhatsApp group we’re both in. I shouldn’t shoot the messenger, but now that we’re saturated with crowdfunding campaigns, it leads to things like this as means to get people to open their wallets and people get hurt in the process.

[WonderingYid]

A really jarring funeral picture was posted/circulated recently to help raise money for the family in a crowdfunding campaign, and while I can’t judge anyone involved in choosing to circulate that picture, it was a major trigger to me, and probably to others as well.

When someone forwarded the Charidy campaign and that picture camp up as the image for the link, I lashed out at the person who shared it in a WhatsApp group we’re both in. I shouldn’t shoot the messenger, but now that we’re saturated with crowdfunding campaigns, it leads to things like this as means to get people to open their wallets and people get hurt in the process.

Let's not forget about the (big) slice that charidy takes.

[JlmBoi]

Let's not forget about the (big) slice that charidy takes.

Bigger than what most career fundraisers take?

[WonderingYid]

Bigger than what most career fundraisers take?

Not bigger then where I give me masser to, where everything except for the, when donating by cc (under 3)% cc prossesing fee goes to the needy. 

[JoeyShmoe]

Not bigger then where I give me masser to, where everything except for the, when donating by cc (under 3)% cc prossesing fee goes to the needy.

There's a reason why campaigns choose to pay the Charidy price, you see organizations of all types raising numbers we've never heard of. It's a simple business decision, go old school and x amount or with a professional team of marketers at your exposal and make 10x that much while paying a percentage - however large it may be - to Charidy. I don't work for Charidy, but I've been involved in more than one campaign, I haven't heard anyone that paid for their work and wasn't happy.

[WonderingYid]

There's a reason why campaigns choose to pay the Charidy price, you see organizations of all types raising numbers we've never heard of. It's a simple business decision, go old school and x amount or with a professional team of marketers at your exposal and make 10x that much while paying a percentage - however large it may be - to Charidy. I don't work for Charidy, but I've been involved in more than one campaign, I haven't heard anyone that paid for their work and wasn't happy.

Not arguing that the organization doesn't/does walk out with more after 10s of WhatsApp ads. I mentioning how much $$ never makes it to the needy. Not to mention all the pictures sent around of Almonos etc.

On a side notes: Tzedakah ABC Purim campaign "we will beat any advertised prize for collecting", meaning they want less $$ to go to the needy...

[JoeyShmoe]

I disagree with 2 out of 3 of your statements.

Not arguing that the organization doesn't/does walk out with more after 10s of WhatsApp ads. I mentioning how much $$ never makes it to the needy.

If an organization would make $100k on a fundraiser, and they use Charidy and make $1m but have to pay Charidy $500k (it's obviously nowhere near 50%, but for the sake of argument), they're still coming out with $400k more to give to the needy, I don't think the anyone will mind that 50% of the funds were spent in order to be able to raise 400% more than previous years.

Same goes for

On a side notes: Tzedakah ABC Purim campaign "we will beat any advertised prize for collecting", meaning they want less $$ to go to the needy...

If it pushes more children to bring in more money then it's a net positive, who cares how much goes to spending, is their bank account significantly bigger when all is said and done?

As for

Not to mention all the pictures sent around of Almonos etc.

I agree with that, those are just plain wrong IMO

[Yehudaa]

I disagree with 2 out of 3 of your statements.
If an organization would make $100k on a fundraiser, and they use Charidy and make $1m but have to pay Charidy $500k (it's obviously nowhere near 50%, but for the sake of argument), they're still coming out with $400k more to give to the needy, I don't think the anyone will mind that 50% of the funds were spent in order to be able to raise 400% more than previous years.

Same goes forIf it pushes more children to bring in more money then it's a net positive, who cares how much goes to spending, is their bank account significantly bigger when all is said and done?

Might be a valid strategy from the organization's perspective, but from any donor's perspective if you knew that one organization was spending a much larger percentage of your donation on overhead which would you give to?

(Definitely give lots of tzedaka and I wouldn't discourage anyone from giving anywhere, but if you're deciding where to give large amounts to I would think it's worth giving to the one with the lower overhead.)

[JoeyShmoe]

Might be a valid strategy from the organization's perspective, but from any donor's perspective if you knew that one organization was spending a much larger percentage of your donation on overhead which would you give to?

(Definitely give lots of tzedaka and I wouldn't discourage anyone from giving anywhere, but if you're deciding where to give large amounts to I would think it's worth giving to the one with the lower overhead.)

הרוצה שיתן ולא יתנו אחרים...

As a donor I want the organization to be able to help as many needy people as possible, if that means that more of my money goes towards overhead and in turn they'll be able to reach much more people which will result in significantly more Tzedakah given to those who ned it, then I'm perfectly fine with it. I really don't get the argument.

[4yourinfo]

Might be a valid strategy from the organization's perspective, but from any donor's perspective if you knew that one organization was spending a much larger percentage of your donation on overhead which would you give to?

(Definitely give lots of tzedaka and I wouldn't discourage anyone from giving anywhere, but if you're deciding where to give large amounts to I would think it's worth giving to the one with the lower overhead.)

+1 It may be a great deal for the organization but it's terrible deal for the donor.. however, you can look at it from a different angle - At the end of the day you want what is best for the org. and if this the way it needs to be done then you are very happy to have your donation"watered down" cause in the big picture it's much better..

[TimT]

+1 It may be a great deal for the organization but it's terrible deal for the donor!

Any donor who’s not happy with the status quo can give directly to the poor, sick, or widows. Everyone knows somebody who’s needy.

[ushdadude]

There are several tzedakas that market themselves as having low overhead. so obviously there is appeal to that

[4yourinfo]

There are several tzedakas that market themselves as having low overhead. so obviously there is appeal to that

Any donor who’s not happy with the status quo can give directly to the poor, sick, or widows. Everyone knows somebody who’s needy.

So a "Wise" donor stays clear from these campaigns/orgs? Or maybe not as supporting these campaigns will help bring in more money in the long run..

[TimT]

The fact is many donors consider it an honor to host some of the well known fundraisers & give a lot more than if they were giving directly. There’s a reason the good ones charge top dollar.

[ushdadude]

Any donor who’s not happy with the status quo can give directly to the poor, sick, or widows. Everyone knows somebody who’s needy.

That's not the highest form of tzedaka according to the Ramabam.

[TimT]

That's not the highest form of tzedaka according to the Ramabam.

Whats not the highest form ?

[ushdadude]

Whats not the highest form ?

giving directly to the person.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/45907/jewish/Eight-Levels-of-Charity.htm

[TimT]

giving directly to the person.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/45907/jewish/Eight-Levels-of-Charity.htm

So give it anonymously or hire him.

[ushdadude]

So give it anonymously or hire him.

That's level 3.
Level 2 would be to have a middleman.....like an organization that collects funds and distributes them.

[TimT]

That's level 3.
Level 2 would be to have a middleman.....like an organization that collects funds and distributes them.

So give it to his Rav to give it over. Point is there’s other ways besides for big organizations.