Most non-profit organizations embark on capital campaigns with a minimum $1 million dollar goal. 

That is a MINIMUM, what is more common is $10-20 million considering that facilities are involved and a small staff.  For Z to merely ask for $150,000 as a base goal is mind boggling considering what is necessary to not only facilitate such an organization, distribute a subscription magazine, produce dvds, and host a weeklong school..  Let alone... what is necessary for the Left and alternative media more generally.

What also separates Z from the typical organization is that large donors are few and far between.  there is obviously no corporate support, foundation grants, and fancy board members cultivating large donors.  There is also not a development team that spends 10% of Z's revenues merely trying to raise more money.  In fact, most the appeals from other left organizations are ghostwritten by development staff and/or consultants - not the same person building the website, reviewing articles and working on a book at the same time as well.

Feeling burdened by Z's desire to survive and possibly (gasp!) expand is quite absurd.

Hi.

 

You start by saying that your reaction to receiving a funding appeal was negative and the same as for "panhandlers or relatives who get themselves into trouble and come asking for money." Hmmmm. "get themselves into trouble?" Why is that assumed for a panhandler or relative - surely it is only rarely the case if one looks at situations in a broad way. And even it it was the case, in some sense, would you really feel negative toward a person for seeking help? Shouldn't seeking and giving help be, instead, rather positive?

 

If we and other left operations did not fund raise - we would not exist. It is truly that simple. So saying you would rather we all not do it, is saying you would prefer that there be no left media - and certainly no left media that doesn't sell you to corporations (in the form of ads).

 

Your additional reasons on a closer look at the appeal were...

 

• Z has a must have target of $150,00 and a desired target of $500,00.  As an individual, that seems like a lot of money to me.  If I had a fundraising for myself and achieve the lower target, I could wipe out my debt and have a nice buffer in case of emergency or becoming unemployed.

 

Well, in some ways it a large amount as noted in the appeal. But saying it is a lot for you as a person, if you raised it, seems to me a non sequitor. Our budget - what we spend, also likely has no resemblance to your budget. Nor does the number of people we serve. And so on. However, it is of course  a lot compared to anything less. But compared to what left media and organizing ought to have at its disposal - it is peanuts. And for that matter, compared to even what we already do, it is quite a low figure given that it takes the place of advertizing revenues, foundation revenues, and large donor revenues...none of which are remotely plausible for Z and all of which, in any event, would severely compromise its logic.

 

Here is a different way to view it - is a one time or recurring donation that would have nearly no impact at all on your living standard and conditions - that is chosen with that constraint - too much to donate or if you prefer you can think of it as to pay - for what Z provides you, and others, including those who certainly cannot afford to pay anything?

 

• Z is always asking for money  ... well not really, but it has the same fell as the panhandler I see frequently.He will always ask me for money.  I doesn't matter if I gave him some yesterday or told him no.

 

Any non profit, non commercial project, must get funds largely via donations of one sort of another. We actually ask rather infrequently - we do a campaign roughly once every eighteen months... which is rather low. More, of course we ask everyone at once... WE hope those who can afford more will give more, those who can manage only less will give less, and those who can't manage at all - will benefit from others doing so.

 

• Where is the money going? It seems like Z may be spending a lot of money on developing this web site.  Why not use a pre-made CRM tool or have volunteers do the development?

 

You can read where the money goes on the site - check the sub menu under zcom in the main menu. Basically it makes up the overall shortfall for the magazine, video production, school, and sites - that's the subsistence part. The rest, if we raise it, would finance growth.

 

That said, first - suppose volunteers did everything - well, now they are the ones donating - and in a far greater degree than we are asking from you.  Is it really bad to spread the support provision over all the people benefitting, with each determining what they can or can't, and will or won't do? 

 

Second, Z offers far more than can be done in a purely voluntary manner - not only a site, social networking, a school, video production, but a monthly magazine as well. Perhaps you are unaware. But, in truth, even if it was just the web site - approximately 300,000 people regularly benefit from the site, each, I would bet, far more than say, $1 a month. If you look at the situation that way, the problem here - and it isn't just Z's problem but the entire left's problem - is that so few people who want social change and who partake of left media, especially online left media, take the time to support it. This is largely, I suspect, because people are very busy - and because there is a kind of culture of resistance to paying for information - a suicidal culture for the left.

 

And I am not sure why you think volunteerism ought to drive the left. Shouldn't those who work on the left get an income - mustn't we pay our bills, etc.? And mustn't the left operation do so too?

 

• Things are getting worse.  Even with a the Democrats winning congress and the presidency, the US military is being used to bully the rest of the world.  The US economy is not serving most of the population. The government is doing all it can to keep large banks profitable and doing very little for the majority of the population.  There is nothing serious being done to prevent environmental destruction. During the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the government was seemed to be spending most of its effort in running interference for BP and the other companies responsible for the spill.

 

I am not sure why you think this observation is an argument for feeling that a left project seeking funds is a negative thing...doesn't this explain, briefly, the necessity. I wonder what you thought of Chomsky's letter and the many testimonials that accompanied and augmented the appeal. 

 

• The fundraising tactic was pretty negative.

 

I don't know what tactic you have in mind. We explain needs, make an appeal, and in fact try to give something back to those who respond, as best we can do so. What was the negative part?

 

I fear if this message doesn't diminish your bad feeling, it will only get worse in the next few weeks, because the odds are quite high - it would be historically unprecendented, in fact, if it weren't the case that in the next few weeks we will have to multiply our efforts.

As my reaction was completely opposite, as was the case with many others whom with I spoke about the fundraiser, I'd be very keen to hear more about your arguments. Maybe your input can prevent similar negative reactions in the future if you refine your arguments a little? In any case, some questions that came to me, regarding your post:

• Z has a must have target of $150,00 and a desired target of $500,00.  As an individual, that seems like a lot of money to me.  If I had a fundraising for myself and achieve the lower target, I could wipe out my debt and have a nice buffer in case of emergency or becoming unemployed.

>> I think it is a lot of money, but it could help achieve a lot - seriously, a lot. Also, the 150K that is the level required for sustainability, seems actually quite low to me - consider the people working for the site, collecting and analysing materials, consider the website (which is more in depth in scope then any other comparable seriously leftist internet endeavour in the world, in history and so on), consider the magazine (I'm under the impression that the fundraiser helps keep that afloat, which the subscriptions, which are extremely cheap considering the value of the magazine and it's content, aren't sufficient to do; I also think it is an excellent strategy to manage it like this, as it keeps subscriptions prices lower, letting those with less money access the magazine, whilst letting those with more money help Z with donations & by becoming sustainers)

• Z is always asking for money  ... well not really, but it has the same fell as the panhandler I see frequently.He will always ask me for money.  I doesn't matter if I gave him some yesterday or told him no.

I really don't understand this. I could put it this way: what does the panhandler give you? Excellent daily analysis? High quality video productions, for example 5 hrs of interviews with professor Noam Chomsky? Forum for discussing and analysing critical issues around us, from excellent source material, with other seriously committed people from around the world? Asking money isn't the problem in my view, but maybe you are opposed to it in principle? This wasn't clear from your short comment.

• Where is the money going? It seems like Z may be spending a lot of money on developing this web site.  Why not use a pre-made CRM tool or have volunteers do the development?

I think Michael wrote some excellent points, regarding where the money would be going if the 500K goal is reached (which I think is of immense importance right now, partially because of some of your next arguments). Z is also much more then just "this web site", which is a gross understatement on how incredible achievement the current site is. And I also think that people should be paid, moderately, on working full time on a site such as Z, and the Z Magazine and the Z Media Institute. Again, maybe you are opposed to payment in principle? Why should people get paid (meaning at basic levet safety in life, possibilites to affect their lives and so on) for working in capitalist companies, that further capitalist principles and the related, destructive consequences, whilst those working at a participatory workplace, that furthers the values of solidarity, self-management and so on, basic, decent values that are right now seriously threatened everywhere, wouldn't? 

• Things are getting worse.  Even with a the Democrats winning congress and the presidency, the US military is being used to bully the rest of the world.  The US economy is not serving most of the population. The government is doing all it can to keep large banks profitable and doing very little for the majority of the population.  There is nothing serious being done to prevent environmental destruction. During the oil spill disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the government was seemed to be spending most of its effort in running interference for BP and the other companies responsible for the spill.

So you think nothing helps. This explains your response somewhat, but why bother writing here at all then?

• The fundraising tactic was pretty negative.

?

But seriously, hope you can open up some of your points, maybe to reconsider them, maybe to help people at Z to provide some points in the future to persuade more people, not yet helping Z, to lend their support.