Did anyone else get that v. upsetting 'baby names book' from the NSPCC this morning?

[tigertum]

This morning I got a mailer from the NSPCC asking for monthly contributions. Enclosed was a leaflet designed to look like a baby names book and under each letter was a childs name and underneath a brief desciption of how this child (mostly under two, one at only 9 weeks old) had died of abuse. Many of the deaths were horribly violent and had been at the hands of parents. I read it, and it had me in tears. Just thinking about it makes me want to cry again.

I already contibute to Oxfam every month and DP and I have agreed on this amount and we cant change it. The letter enclosed began with something like 'as a new mum', so I was probabbly targeted as a mother, possibly who is on record of being a regular contributer to a charity.

Yes, it was very effective in that it made me feel incredibly upset and depressed/angry at he world that this kind of thing can happen. As I sat, blothcy faced, staring at this 'baby names book', I couldn't decide if it's right or not for something that distressing should land on my door step oiut of the blue, especially if I was targetted by this mail because on some database somewhere I am logged as a mum who contributes to charities.

Did anyone else get this mail, what's your opinion?

We always did the notice boards- because we did at direct grants servcie that otherwise nobody knew about,, it turned out to be the only way to get through, BUT it was offering services as opposed to requesting donations. They give grants to anyone with a dx facing financial hardship for things like wedding, new clothes, breaks away, washing machines, parking tickets at hospital. we used to really struggle to get the message across, as the Committees were almost invariably well off (in my area) and were more in tune with the nurses / info service side of things.

Things might have changed anyway- I don't work there any more, been a while, but certainly they were very vociferous on policy at the time. I'd be interested to see the coffee morning stuff too: it used to be if you wanted to help contact us for more info, as opposed to 'here are some horrible stats, if you feel bad enough please give' approach, mainly because cancer affects everybody one way or another at some point. I would be disappointed to see some traumatic amrketing arrive from the, although I guess things move one.

I'm sorry Melrose - obviously my comments were not directed to you personally.

However, from personal experience and media publicity, I am left feeling unsure as to whether the majority of my contribution is finding it's way to the people intended, or in supplying interest free loans to CEO's. Unfortunately - as in any walk in life - one person behaving badly can have a negative effect on that group as a whole. I understand that this must be pretty annoying to those of you who genuinely do care.

Fairyjay, I can assure you that your money is used wisely, but actually it is often the smaller charities where less of you £1 is being spent on the actual cause. Large charities such as ours work at 20-30% cost ratio, depending on the activity, in other words 70-80p in each pound is spent on the cause, with the majority of the rest being spent on raising the money. Often with very small charities it can be as high as 50%. This is simply because of economies of scale really. There seems to be this public perception that charities "waste" money, believe me we don't! Where I work the priority is always to maximise our contribution to the cause by maximising incom eand minimising expenditure. All expenditure is scrutinised very carefully. However, as in all business, you do have to spend some money in order to make it! We do not invest in anything that is not expected to make at least 2x (and in most cases 3x) what is spent on it

and yes I am paid a salary, as are all people within the charity sector. I could earn more in the commercial sector but my salary is still competitive, it has to be or we would have no staff! The same is true of CEO,s. You have to remember that these people are leading multi- million pound businesses, to do that you have to be fairly experienced! To get someone of that calibre you have to pay them a reasonable salary.

we were paid a decent-ish salary too, but it is far cheaper to have one person stay than be constantly recruiting replacements for people who get better money elsewhere.

I also remember the paid thing ahd to do with accountability.... we ahd legions of committees / volunteers in both charities, but at the end of the day you need people in each area accountable for the money, and who are au fait with the various charity laws etc.
(It was always drilled into us that anything with an expenditure rate over 40% of cost was likely to be hauled up by thecharity commission anyway)

I am with Twig on this (am also an ex marketeer).

Got it, thought "Hmmm, this is going to be something disturbing", threw it out unread.

Probably not the response they were looking for when they planned the mailshot.

DS is 19 months so I don't think it's necessarily a "new mums" thing. Or if it is, they're very behind...

Bloody Bounty "packs"
I always knew the were a ruse to get me and my babies on a valuable data base. The Bounty Pack woman who came in to the bathroom and tapped on the shower door for my address hours after I 'd had ds1 kind of gave it away.

It is not just bounty though, every time you fill in a form or swipe your nectar card/ clubcard/ advantage card you are adding to the huge amount of data held about you. The offers you receive are then tailored to you. NOt all charities buy in mailing lists (we don't cold mailings are blanker delivered via royal mail) but the data held about existing donors is fairly extensive and is sometimes profiled against existing lifestyle and demographic data

Bleeding heart strings advertising always turns me off. Makes me determined not to contribute. Also, annoying when you contribute to a charity and they keep emailing asking whether you would like to increase your donation ("Well, no cancer relief, I wouldn't like to increase my contribution. I contribute to other charites, have worked out my finances carefully and you get what I can afford - or rather you did, since this constant harressment has made me cancel my direct debit"). This emotive marketing may get new customers but I bet it loses a fair few too.

Am currently looking around for a good charity to replace cancer research - any suggestions welcome. I have a cousin who works in cancer research who says anything to do with cancer can always raise money so I guess I am looking for a deserving cause which finds it hard to raise funds. Perhaps something to do with the old? I would guess they find it hard to sell themselves compared to eg children?

I'm always curious about those that create these mailshots and TV ads ever stop to think about the effect they have on those of us who were abused as children.

With mail shots I pretty much drop them straight in the recycling without reading them but when you are sitting watching TV in an evening it is not nice to have memories of what you went through dragged up to affect you for days/weeks again after just for money.

tigertum i got this two - i have 1 dd and expecting no. 2 soon.

I too felt very angry and upset by it being sent to me as soon as i realised what it was i didn't even read it. My hand hovered over it for a moment whilst i considered making some sort of complaint - but then i thought whats the point and it found its way to my recycle bin.

I've found the NSPCC apeals becoming more and more shocking, tasteless and offensive tbh.

seashells - sorry if it upsets you. I find your commments equally shocking and very distatseful

I remembered a thread on this very thing and so when my 'plea' came in I put it straight in the bin.

I got the one designed to look like a party invite and it really upset my 7 year old who thought it was a genuine party invite until she read the story of abuse on the front.

I complained to the NSPCC and to advertising standards.

I think it is absolutely unacceptable.

Just read this thread more thoroughly and feel many of you should be ashamed.
this is a real-life issue and i feel the nspcc should make no apology for offending your sensibilities.
Happy to receive all your Bounty mailings but when it comes to the darker side of life that upsets our cosy middle class life.
Some of you need a reality check

i haven't yet but i shy away from supporting the nspcc in general because of what i feel to be their emotional blackmail tactics.

would happily let them know why i don't support them if they ever asked me.

The charity I support (a child sponsorship one) doesn't do any TV/Radio/Magazine/Flyer adverts at all. It does produce leaflets for people to share with other people and it's word of mouth that keep it doing very well.

I'm afraid to say (having looked into this about 1yr or so ago) that it often the bigger charities that pay their senior management 6 figure sums in terms of salaries........and I don't personally find it acceptable. If (as you assure us) all the people working in these charities believe passionately about the charity they wouldn't be demanding such high salaries before considering the post..........

Yeah, the NSPCC adverts annoy me greatly, too.

I suspect refugee charities have a hard time raising funds.

Thanks for the info about HomeStart and Macmillan.

We give to a few charities on a regular basis (standing order) and have successfully told them to leave us bloody well alone now, and we will stop giving them money if they call, send mailshots etc etc. I think it's worked, must check with DH.

as an aside - we used to support several charities with set monthly payments. We had to cut back due to our own finances and it was the ones that kept sending us mailshots asking for more money (without so much as a 'thanks for what you already give" that went first.......)

NAO, it is a real life problem. But how does offending all and sundry with shocking adverts help solve it? I think it just wears people out.

HRHQoQ - Someone elkse made your point about salaries on the older thread and someone else who has a good knowledge of actually working in the charity industry (poss Enid ?) made the excellent point that in order to get the best, most effective Directors/MDs/CEOs they have to pay the going rate.

notanotter you sound young and angry

without defending myself I know enough about the darker side of life to trust my judgement about advertising, thanks very much.

I agree with Notanotter. It's shocking and upsetting because the subject is shocking and upsetting. They are helping these poor children and if they wrote you a nice letter asking politely if you would contribute I'm sure they wouldn't raise half the money they do. That;s money that goes to help children that are really suffering.