Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

NSPCC TELEVISION ADVERT

75 replies

GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 10:14

in thinking that the NSPCC has an awful lot of money to spend on advertising.

I hate the nationwide tv advert they run frequently, and fail to see how my giving £2 is going to stop the scum of the earth from beathing their kids to death. Also DD2 finds it very, very sad and doesn't like to see the child actors portraying these pitiful situations.

I'm sure that if giving £2 was to stop these evil bastards, nigh on everybody would give that and more!

OP posts:
MackerelOfFact · 07/02/2011 10:17

YANBU. I would never give money to a charity that clearly spends so much on advertising, that includes junk mail, chuggers, freebies etc. I know charities have overheads and a certain amount of expenditure is required to raise money in the first place, but these mega-charities operate more like businesses, and that makes me uncomfortable.

chickencrisps · 07/02/2011 10:20

how would they raise awareness without advertising?

mutznutz · 07/02/2011 10:23

The money doesn't just go on 'stopping the scum of the earth from beathing their kids to death' though does it?

LyingWitchInTheWardrobe2726 · 07/02/2011 10:25

GorgeousX... absolutely! I'd never support the NSPCC with their current ethos but would happily pay them every month to get 'hit squads' to sort out the so-called parents. Hmm

I actually feel quite sorry for the social workers who are quite often the scapegoats for a situation gone wrong. I know from the high turnover of social workers in many areas that they are completely defeated by the red tape and the pressing need for 'proof positive' before moving an inch. Why are the social workers (who are answerable to Directors) always the ones to be fired and censured in Court...? Bizarre!

It's the Government who needs to tackle the legislation and guidelines because what is currently in place is just not working.

bruffin · 07/02/2011 10:25

They may have fundraised specifically for this money and in that case are not allowed to spend it on anything else.
Advertising companies may have donated their time, they may get a cheap rate because they are charity.

penelopestitsdropped · 07/02/2011 10:33

they are audited by the charities commision.

Much of their advertising is subsidised by companies.

Each advertising campaign raises far more in donations than was spent on the ad.

no £2 wont stop the scum of the earth. But it does go towards projects that DO investigate child abuse, that DO help children who have been abused, that WILL help children who are at risk of emotional abuse.

Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 10:39

Penelope You've made a far better case than their advert. If they'd stated it in that way, I suspect they'd get more money.

OP posts:
porcamiseria · 07/02/2011 10:39

I feel the same it really annoys me, same for that breast cancer one

I really resent it
but but I suppose they can justify the outlay

Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 10:42

I'm also not sure how heavily subsidised these ads. are. They are on as much/almost as much as 'Go Compare' . Surely the ads. must still cost a lot of money.

OP posts:
reddaisy · 07/02/2011 10:48

If the advertising didn't raise valuable money for charity then surely they wouldn't do it?

I read an article about the work of the NSPCC recently and it told the story of a toddler who was rescued from junkie parents who would smoke crack and blow it into their child's mouth and the child was removed from the parents and later adopted thanks to the work of the NSPCC and it's helplines, social workers and projects it funds.

I think they need to publicise the work they do more so people actually understand what the cash is spent on. So YABU but I understand why you feel like that.

And they do Childline now as well which is a lifeline for youngsters who need someone to talk to.

Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 10:50

reddaisy I wasn't aware of that - their advert doesn't do them any favours IMO.

OP posts:
senua · 07/02/2011 10:56

I hate the NSPCC adverts, with their unstated assumption that we are all potential abusers - and, yes, that includes you

I am not going to give my money to an institution that promotes paranoia.

reddaisy · 07/02/2011 10:58

Gorgeousx - That is why they need to publicise what they actually do and use case studies more to give people a reason to donate. The emotive adverts imo turn people off, I preferred their last batch which were happier.

I also hate feeling manipulated into donating, but if it was explained exactly what they fund - which is undoubtedly excellent work - then I am sure more people would give freely. Although I suppose their adverts do reflect the reality of a lot of unfortunate children they come across.

Since I have become a mum the thought of a toddler like mine being trapped in a house where they aren't cared for breaks my heart as they are so defenceless so I donate every month.

IShallWearMidnight · 07/02/2011 11:02

I refuse to have anything to do with the NSPCC since they said that home educators were more likely to abuse their children, and have never apologised for lying.

reddaisy · 07/02/2011 11:03

The adverts do not accuse anyone Senua, they just show that abuse is very common and sadly it is. And yes there will be abusers on mumsnet and women who stand by and let their children get ill-treated, you would be naive to think otherwise.

We were all at school with a smelly child who came in in dirty clothes and never had lunch or even a coat in winter and that is just the tip of the iceberg of the neglect so many children face.

The NSPCC is not perfect but I dread to think what would happen to those children it helps if people stopped donating.

reddaisy · 07/02/2011 11:04

Link please IShallWearMidnight

mamadiva · 07/02/2011 11:12

Apology

I don't have an issue with them as such BUT it does annoy me that they advertise so much in Scotland when they don't actually do any work here!

Obviously I am not saying that children from other parts of the UK are not worthy but I do think it's wrong when the Scottish equivelant (Children 1st) have minimal advertisment.

Same with RSPCA and the SSPCA it should be area targetted.

Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 11:26

Ishallwearmidnight I would have thought people who took the time to home educate would be the least likely.... did they mean children who are not allowed to attend school so that bruises etc. don't show,and so in effect are not being educated at all!

OP posts:
fishie · 07/02/2011 11:33

I am deeply suspiscious of the nspcc. 'raising awareness' is one of their stated charitable objectives, so all their fundraising and advertising can be written off as direct charitable expenditure, won't appear as a fundraising cost.

This is both misleading wrt to them and also makes other charities appear expensive in comparison. I struggle to see what they spend their millions on other than advertising, one doesn't hear much about their actual doings.

Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 11:34

reddaisy do they fund social workers then? Are you saying these children wouldn't be removed from the home if people didn't donate to the NSPCC?

OP posts:
reddaisy · 07/02/2011 11:36

Thanks for the link MamaDiva and clearly they did apologise. It looks like some people who are classed as "home educating" their children may be using it as a ruse to hide abuse. Hopefully they are in the minority.

Statistics do effectively show that children from homes where the mother has been a victim of domestic violence are more likely to be a victim of abuse and children with parents who have been in prison etc, etc but it does not mean all parents who have been in prison will go onto abuse their children of course.

And MamaDiva, Scottish students don't have to pay tuition fees but we do down here so maybe it all works out in the end!

Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 11:37

fishie I totally agree; and also wish my DD2 didn't have to 'be aware' of such evil at the tender age of 10.

OP posts:
Original poster
GORGEOUSX · 07/02/2011 11:39

Can we add free prescriptions to the Scottish list, or do they have to pay now?

OP posts:
reddaisy · 07/02/2011 11:41

I don't know to be honest GorgeousX, I only know what I have read and they fund lots and lots of specialist teams and I believe it includes social workers.

Of course I am not saying they wouldn' be removed from their homes if it wasn't for the NSPCC but we all know from cases such as Baby P that the Government avenues fail time and time again so the work of the NSPCC, in my opinion is invaluable.

They have some kind of adult helpline for people to report suspicions or concerns they have and it goes from there.

One of my mum's friends is a ChildLine counsellor and said the set-up is impressive.

Again, I think they need to make it clearer to the public what exactly they do rather than just being the leading national children's charity.

And from any donation you make to any charity, some of the money will be used on advertising/admin etc etc but as long as there isn't excessive waste and the good work gets done then I am personally prepared to keep donating. I am not in a position to help children suffering from abuse, they are on my behalf.

DurhamDurham · 07/02/2011 11:45

The NSPPC spend a huge amount of money on advertising, I think all large Nationwide charities do.
I signed up to give £3 a month several years ago. Within one month I was sent 6 pieces of mail from them. Two were asking me to consider giving more. I upped it to £5 a month and witihn a few weeks I had more mail, one asking me to consider giving more. It was just annoying in the end and I cancelled my direct debit.
Now I give to local charities that can make a huge difference on a local level. I work for a small charity myslf and our advertising budget is v small. We raise our profile by getting out into the community.