The CNN Effect
Posted on March 16, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Right now there is something happening that we call “The CNN Effect.” This refers to the impact that media has over public donations to disasters or other crises. Essentially this is how it works, people are far more likey to donate to events that are:
- Rapid onset – A landslide, earthquake, tsunami – rather than disasters that are much slower such as prolonged draught, desertification, or rising sea levels.
- Vivid images – Scenes that the media can play over and over again that pull at donors heart strings – disasters that are far from the public eye or in areas with very limited coverage may not get as many donations. Think of the flooding in Pakistan last year as an example.
- Perceived “innocence” – Part of how much we give appears to be related to whether or not we think that people are somehow responsible for the disaster. This is often civil conflict, but interestingly enough also the Gulf oil spill. Organizations reportedly had a hard time raising funds because people didn’t want to pay to clean up a disaster caused by the oil companies.
The effect of this is that there can be too much money donated for some disasters and too little money given for others. We call these the “Forgotten Disasters” or “Neglected Crises.” Cynan goes into more detail on this in his post the asterisk is everything.
Currently in Japan, the government and civil societies are working together to meet most of the needs in the recovery efforts. According to this latest situation update, only 13 nonprofits have been given roles in the recover efforts and aside from the Japanese Red Cross, these are very targeted and limited roles. How much assistance will be needed in rebuilding is yet to be seen.
The public is clamoring to donate and do more for Japan, to do something to help. But currently there is a limited need for assistance. Yet other disasters or crises go under funded. This is one of the reasons it’s so critical not to earmark your donations. Don’t give to a specific project or country, instead donate to the general fund. This way, if it turns out it’s not really needed in Japan, they can use it to help with some of the forgotten disasters. Donating to the general fund allows nonprofits to use the money where it’s most needed and do the greatest good with your donation.
—–
Related Posts
the asterisk is everything – la vidaid loca
Why Waiting to Give to Japan is a Good Idea
The Dos and Don’ts of Disaster Donations
« Why waiting to give to Japan is a good idea • 4,500 new charities for Japan »
So many examples. While Queensland, Australia floods and cyclone damage were beamed around the world, flood damage in Port Moresby, nearby in Papua New Guinea displaced many and received no coverage at all, and news of cyclone related damage in remoter parts took days to filter out. Similarly, the Japan tsunami wrecked the hospital in Wewak, but no coverage of that. Swamped by graphic footage from Japan.
Thanks for those additional examples.
[...] The CNN Effect [...]
Good points, Sandra. I think most people are aware that Japan is not really in a position that they need general donations – and the public clamour is related to a feeling of impotence. The whole thing feels on the edge with the additional questions of nuclear safety on top of mass devastation.
I’m also wondering whether there is a level of ‘they’re in our team’ thinking going on. I suspect that culturally, the Japanese feel quite alien to most of us, yet being technologically advanced it feels like they’re more one of us that (say) the Papua New Guineans. We feel that it could easily have been us. And maybe that means that we feel that their economic future is much more tied to ours than the one-way traffic we usually associate with disasters.
[...] relevant to mission work such as Bible translation and language development. I was struck by the latest post which talks about what motivates people to give to disaster relief: Essentially this is how it [...]
[...] need to be aware that post large-scale disasters are prime fundraising times. The easy money can cause charities to start projects even though they don’t have the [...]
[...] The CNN Effect [...]
[...] catastrofe fanno sentire milioni di persone in dovere di aiutare qualcun altro. E si rischia il “CNN effect”: in pratica ci sono paesi o luoghi che ricevono troppo denaro che non sanno come spendere e paesi [...]
[...] donations are the greatest in the first few weeks after a disaster, while it’s still making news headlines. Nonprofits know this and so many of them immediately issue appeals and create advertisements for [...]
I appreciate the extra examples as well. This is just a great blog to show how the media gets on one story and stays on it. I completely agree that people are going to donate more to these organizations because of what the media says and shows. I think that if you “jump on the band wagon” and are giving simply because of what you see is for the wrong idea. You should give because you want to help and should give to organizations that help multiple disasters, not just one in Japan and understand where your money is going. We need to acknowledge that there are many disasters going on every day. Even though they are not as devestating as Japan, people are still struggling and need help
[...] Here’s how it works: Charitable donations are the greatest in the first few weeks after a disaster, while it’s still making news headlines. [...]
[...] and all of a sudden there is a mad rush to donate and help; a situation some have called, “The CNN Effect.” As blogger Cynan at La VidAid Loca, writes,”Media attention on an emergency is a [...]