<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>philanthropissed &#187; appeal</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.philanthropissed.net/tag/appeal/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.philanthropissed.net</link>
	<description>a love/hate relationship with the nonprofit sector</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Sep 2009 01:02:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Strategic bolding gone awry</title>
		<link>http://www.philanthropissed.net/2009/04/04/strategic-bolding-gone-awry/</link>
		<comments>http://www.philanthropissed.net/2009/04/04/strategic-bolding-gone-awry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:02:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ariel</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Hate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[appeal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[direct mail]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[donor]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fundraising]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[solicitation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trust]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philanthropissed.net/?p=58</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I received a solicitation letter in the mail today that was pretty well done &#8211; well executed, easy to read direct mail format and great storytelling. Except, it way, way overused the italic and bold and underline. Sometimes even bold, italic  and underline at once.
I like what the organization does. I&#8217;ve given to them before [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I received a solicitation letter in the mail today that was pretty well done &#8211; well executed, easy to read direct mail format and great storytelling. Except, it way, way overused the <em>italic</em> and <strong>bold</strong> and <span style="text-decoration: underline;">underline.</span> Sometimes even <em><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><strong>bold, italic  and underline at once.</strong></span></em></p>
<p>I like what the organization does. I&#8217;ve given to them before (in fact I still have a balance on a pledge I&#8217;m supposed to be paying). But when I stepped back from my knowledge of direct mail tactics and shed the fundraiser identity, and just looked at it as a donor &#8211; I felt insulted. Yes, I have limited time, and you want to use bold and italics to call my attention to THE MOST IMPORTANT STUFF in case I decide to skim. I get it.</p>
<p>But the letter made me feel like they didn&#8217;t trust me to read it &#8211; or care. Now, trust is the single most important thing an organization can establish with its donors. But it has to start with the organization &#8211; showing that you&#8217;re trustworthy, but also that you can extend trust right back.</p>
<p>Donors are your investors, not playground kids who you can condescend and trick into giving you money with strategic bolding. We don&#8217;t blithely throw money at you, especially in this economy. So treat us with respect. If I have enough affinity towards your organization that I opened the letter, trust that I will read it and make an informed choice.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.philanthropissed.net/2009/04/04/strategic-bolding-gone-awry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
