The single donation image has a dark-skinned child with a sad face in the open, among ruins. He’s poorly dressed and looking helpless.
The monthly donation image shows a fair-skinned child, indoors, close to a closed window, in cozy clothes and a lit lamp in the background.
I understand that such organisations need funds and must get them, but I feel subconsciously manipulated. Am I exceedingly suspicious? Thoughts please.
typical of these organizations. dare i say these things never change. i think you know what i mean.
the whole world seems to be moving backward in terms of equality and support and love for your fellow beings. just my thoughts not meant to offend anyone.
In 2022 Save the Children supported children in 115 countries. It doesn’t matter whether they are black, white or brown. They are children in need. It’s a wonderful organisation, to which my lovely wife has given generously every month for about 20 years. Life’s too short to be cynical about everything. This thread is creating an issue that doesn’t exist and is wholly unnecessary.
I thought about replying to you Max, with some analysis of that web page. But I decided that the best response was a donation. And, no I didn’t feel manipulated, and I note that the U.K. site for donations looks nothing like the page you posted with its binary presentation of images. Anyhow, thanks for the prompt!
Don’t look a gift horse in the mouth. They’re accepting donations rather than chugging you in the high street.
Don’t make them pay for their web designer/marketer’s innocent unconscious bias.
Do inquire about donating through your employer though. The last four companies I was at all had a donation matching scheme around the end of year to effectively double the donation.
Maybe just suggesting there’s poverty/problems in many countries/regions not just ones which were traditionally associated with some charities in the past.
Perhaps worth a suggestion to the charity that they could maybe rotate images on the page along with others each time someone visits, hardly difficult for the website designer.
I’d possibly be asking myself where these images are from and whether or not the children or their parents/guardians have consented to their use.
If you’re going to get upset and start talking about manipulation there are probably worse things than fundraising for children in need, Don’t you think? Election influence, fake news, war, take your pick…
Regardless of the images used it’s rather sad that as long as I can remember nothing changed, these people still need help. In a world so full of money that so few control it and so many have none.
All charities like them need donations and they will use a variety of methods to encourage them. Even without photos, words are more than capable of being used to manipulate, if you want to call it that.
Whenever money is involved, I would say we’re all being subtly manipulated all the time: from reading the news to looking at a manufacturer’s website. A charity’s website is hardly unique in this respect.
I am not cynic at all, you’re being the same judgmental teacher’s pet you’re always here as soon as
you’re given a chance. And you obviously misread my post, possibly in order to show your generosity.
I have sustained similar organisations myself. I do now and I need no lessons on solidarity.
My regards to your lovely wife, who must also be the most tolerant person on Earth.
I don’t have an issue with the photos; in various ways around the world children of all ethnicities and cultures are in need. In different media charities will use whatever is most effective for their fundraising; one chooses to donate, or not.
Personally, rather than just donating, I find it additionally rewarding getting involved at a local level with my chosen charity, to support and assist in whatever way I can in the work they do.
Election influence, fake news, war, take your pick…