Only 27% of donations get to research with ICE Bucket.

[Greg]

Yeah quite a difficult one.
I'm not sure I agree with those ads at tea time begging for money and playing on people's emotions.

I often wonder if the celebs for want of a better word who front these adverts or TV appeals actually contribute any of there significant wealth to the cause or do they see their time as more valuable than there hard cash.
I also wonder if said celebrities get paid for their valuable time, it is valuable after all.

Am I coming across a little cynical

[snow]

Aug 30, 2014 11:40:48 GMT Greg said:

Yeah quite a difficult one.
I'm not sure I agree with those ads at tea time begging for money and playing on people's emotions.

I often wonder if the celebs for want of a better word who front these adverts or TV appeals actually contribute any of there significant wealth to the cause or do they see their time as more valuable than there hard cash.
I also wonder if said celebrities get paid for their valuable time, it is valuable after all.

Am I coming across a little cynical

Can only speak for myself and my experiences with the charities I am involved with (or have been involved with) we are very grateful for any "name" who will come along and support us whether they give us any money directly or not, often times having a celeb especially a local celeb is a huge bonus for us. If it does nothing more than raise our profile thats a big big deal in the charity sector which is sadly becoming more and more competitive as money gets harder and harder to raise. Lord knows I loathe the competition thats creeping in I'm a huge believer in "co-pro" which is the latest buzz word phrase for partnership working or just old fashioned cooperation, but all charities these days are vieing for a share of a rapidly shrinking pot of money available and anything that can give "your cause" an edge is a hugely valuable thing. That being said speaking for some of the celebs I've met and worked with or know of through my contacts etc. an awful lot of them do an awful lot for their chosen charity quietly, without fanfare and completely without payment most are very well aware that their name recognition does in fact have a "value" and if thats the only way they can help then thats what they give.

I could put on an event next month, spend countless hours organising, promoting trying to persuade the local paper to publicise it etc. etc. spend hard earned donations on the admin side of it and despite it being a wonderful cause it'll still be those either directly affected right now or who have been affected in the past or had friends or family affected etc. who will turn up on the day and a handful of new faces, but if I said that Beyonce was going to be there, or even Bingo Bob The Wonder Dog from XYZ Factor if he's the latest Daily Mail headliner they'd be queuing round the block to get in and the newspapers would be ringing my phone off the hook desperate to cover it. Heck I get an Assembly member to an event and thats a photo and a few paragraphs in the local paper and suddenly people know who we are and what we do - and thats worth a lot to any charity. Is not just about raising money but raising awareness theres loads of people out there who maybe don't know of a service or help available to them free publicity reaches many more people than we could possibly hope to do any other way.  

[stewarty]

Aug 30, 2014 5:25:34 GMT BrenD said:

Please don't donate to Macmillan. I have in the past and have a lot of respect for their work, but they won't see another penny of my money after such appalling behavior.

Spending a small fortune on Google and Facebook ads in order to cheat a much smaller charity with less to spend on promo out of money shouldn't be acceptable in anyone's book. Google the challenge or look on Facebook and you see Macmillan and not MNDA. Perhaps MNDA should start to rival Macmillan's coffee mornings? Or just run them under exactly the same name and see how they like it?

Utterly, utterly despicable.

I tell a lie, the only way I'll ever donate to Macmillan again is if they pay every single penny they have earned from hijacking the challenge to MNDA, throw in a sizable donation on top and apologise for being such douches. But it's safe to say that won't happen.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using proboards

I just hope that you or no one close to you contracts this hellish disease and needs the help and support of the McMillan nurses because with that blinkered attitude there will be less and less support to go round.

I have lost both family and close friends to cancer and the support and advice given by McMillan has in my opinion been invaluable .... I gladly took on my ice bucket challenge and donated to McMillan because I support the work they do ... Would I have donated to ALS probably not as I had never heard of them and would rather donate to UK charities so in fact with your attitude ALS would get nothing and so would McMillan which is lose lose for them both.

In the spirit of the challenge round my way if you are nominated to do it it is up to the person getting soaked to nominate the charity of their choice whatever that may be from cancer research to the local dogs home ... In my book any money going to any good cause is no bad thing cause lets be honest here there is a lot more chance of people actually donating to a charity of choice than stumping up for one you have never heard of in another country.

A bit more research would show that this has been doing the rounds for years for various charities worldwide and as such was also 'Highjacked' by ALS as the original challenge has been used many times before to raise funds for cancer, churches, sick children etc, ALS only came to the fore because golfer Chris Kennedy picked it as HIS nominated charity and that is where the association with ALS came from not an original idea

www.bustle.com/articles/36363-how-did-the-ice-bucket-challenge-start-it-didnt-always-involve-ice

Finally there is absolutely nothing stopping ALS or MNDA or any other charity on the planet organising coffee mornings etc if they have enough people willing to give their time and effort to promote and organise it .... If I am going to have 3 buckets of freezing cold water poured over my head and run out the crack of my ar*e it will be ME who decides where my money goes no one else !!!!

RANT OVER

[Deleted]

Aug 30, 2014 11:40:46 GMT @johanino said:

guys I have something that may blow your vape into the stratosphere

You don't have to do the ice bucket challenge or anything weird to donate to charity - you can just donate!

I know this might be a shock to some people but check it out!

I have reasons for not donating to ALS on moral grounds (aborted foetuses/embryos whatever. Don't agree with stem cell research on them as I am pro life) but I do donate to other charities on a pretty regular basis and I don't have to boast about it or anything or even say how much I give or who to.

Tis just what I do.

Case closed

I am 100% behind you in regards to this charity with their policies on vivisection. I will not donate 1 penny to any charity that uses vivisection for their research. I do not have much money to give away but i always give when i can afford but i always research first before i give.

[thatguy]

snow very good point made about the necessity of professional staff. The problem I have with certain charities is the inefficient advertising and immense greed of certain individuals who are at the head of some charities. It is of course a requirement to offer a good salary to attract good staff, but sometimes certain senior management figures are paid ridiculous sums. A better man/woman to have at the top is someone who genuinely believes in the cause and will accept a more reasonable wage, and will also give their all to the cause. A few of people in these positions see it as a job and a career, not fighting for a worthy cause. And much of the advertising in wasteful. Paying more than required for less than optimal income.

The most successfully managed charity I have seen is the St Andrews hospice in Airdrie. They have regular income from many bodies including schools who fundraise for them, they have two shops in the town and minus unavoidable expenses like rates they hand all proceeds over for the care of residents in the hospice.

99% of paid staff at charities are dedicated and should be admired, but there are still those who sadly look at their own pockets above all else.

@johanino , have a listen to this. A song about your objections, and for once, one that is unbiased. I use it at school every year to introduce pupils to the social effects of progress and technology.

[mrlimbo]

Im sorry but charity's in this country are just corporate capitalist charity's , there main concern is big wages for those at the top , nearly always based in London (the most expensive place) and use tactics to close small business's that pay full tax etc , the amount that actually goes to the charity is a very small percentage.

[Greg]

Aug 30, 2014 12:20:15 GMT snow said:

Aug 30, 2014 11:40:48 GMT Greg said:

Yeah quite a difficult one.
I'm not sure I agree with those ads at tea time begging for money and playing on people's emotions.

I often wonder if the celebs for want of a better word who front these adverts or TV appeals actually contribute any of there significant wealth to the cause or do they see their time as more valuable than there hard cash.
I also wonder if said celebrities get paid for their valuable time, it is valuable after all.

Am I coming across a little cynical

Can only speak for myself and my experiences with the charities I am involved with (or have been involved with) we are very grateful for any "name" who will come along and support us whether they give us any money directly or not, often times having a celeb especially a local celeb is a huge bonus for us. If it does nothing more than raise our profile thats a big big deal in the charity sector which is sadly becoming more and more competitive as money gets harder and harder to raise. Lord knows I loathe the competition thats creeping in I'm a huge believer in "co-pro" which is the latest buzz word phrase for partnership working or just old fashioned cooperation, but all charities these days are vieing for a share of a rapidly shrinking pot of money available and anything that can give "your cause" an edge is a hugely valuable thing. That being said speaking for some of the celebs I've met and worked with or know of through my contacts etc. an awful lot of them do an awful lot for their chosen charity quietly, without fanfare and completely without payment most are very well aware that their name recognition does in fact have a "value" and if thats the only way they can help then thats what they give.

I could put on an event next month, spend countless hours organising, promoting trying to persuade the local paper to publicise it etc. etc. spend hard earned donations on the admin side of it and despite it being a wonderful cause it'll still be those either directly affected right now or who have been affected in the past or had friends or family affected etc. who will turn up on the day and a handful of new faces, but if I said that Beyonce was going to be there, or even Bingo Bob The Wonder Dog from XYZ Factor if he's the latest Daily Mail headliner they'd be queuing round the block to get in and the newspapers would be ringing my phone off the hook desperate to cover it. Heck I get an Assembly member to an event and thats a photo and a few paragraphs in the local paper and suddenly people know who we are and what we do - and thats worth a lot to any charity. Is not just about raising money but raising awareness theres loads of people out there who maybe don't know of a service or help available to them free publicity reaches many more people than we could possibly hope to do any other way.  

snow I see your very well made point regarding celebs. My point is I think if they do it for free at there expense and donate a little themselves then all is good, if not then it stinks. I'm not just speaking of small charities like yours either. As an example Ken Stott does the VoiceOver for a big national TV charity campaign, does he do this for free or is he paid for his services. If the former then top kiddy, if the latter then appalling morals. I'm not singling out Mr Stott you understand just using him as an example 

I see absolutely no justification in a celebrity making money from a charity to coerce me to donate, why should I contribute to celebrities coffers ?