Carrot and stick
21 May 2012
Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....
While Facebook can be a great way of helping charities engage with their supporters, one of the accusations typically thrown at it (and rightly so) is that it’s a walled garden and not very open with its data. You can include lots of information, like your personal details, photos and videos, but it’s usually very hard to get data back out.
One thing that Facebook has introduced to help open up its data is its Open Stream API. This is a way of pulling all the information out of a Facebook news feed or wall and manipulating or displaying it somewhere else in any way you want. You’ll need a good Facebook developer and a decent amount of time to build anything from that, but there is a slightly easier way of connecting your website with Facebook (if not back the other way). It’s called, cunningly, Facebook Connect.
The basic premise is that, when on a website, a user can login to Facebook and share their activities on that site with their Facebook network. So you might be leaving a comment on a blog, and by connecting with Facebook you can share that comment with your network – so they can read it and follow the link to that blog if they are interested. What’s more, the privacy settings set up in Facebook are used in Connect, so people will only share what they’ve previously allowed Facebook to share.
On a deeper level, that could be allowing people to login to a site using their Facebook details instead of creating a new account. But let’s not get too complicated to start with.
The reason I think this is important to charities is that it’s the first time you can get someone’s personal details out of Facebook and use them somewhere else. Thanks to Ross, I found a list of Facebook Connect implementations on the social media blog Mashable which will give you some great examples.
One implementation I thought was particularly good was Frenzied Waters, which uses your details from Facebook to make a quite unsettling video of what would happen if you were attacked by a shark (to promote the Discovery Channel’s Shark Week). Try it out, by clicking on the 'my story' floating jar and see how it makes you feel. Scary, huh.
Also great was the Prototype Experience, a campaign to promote a computer game that pulls in your details from Facebook (photos, name, etc.) to create a hugely personal experience. In my case, the experience was more than a little surreal, as it pulled in photos from a fancy dress party I’d shared on Facebook, but hopefully you get the general idea.
But it’s this personalisation that’s the point I want to make. We all know from DM experience that the more personal a campaign, the better the response rate. And for many people, data doesn’t get much more personal than what they share with their friends on Facebook…
Imagine how you could use that data in a campaign. How could you use someone’s personal photos and make it relevant to your charity’s goals or a story for a new campaign? Or, once someone is donating to you online, could you ask them to connect with Facebook so you could create a personalised thank-you video, including their name and address, showing how their donation has helped?
There is great scope for using this feature to create a rich, interactive experience and greater personalisation. The beauty is that you don’t have to ask people to enter any details, they just log in to Facebook, and you use things they’ve already shared.
Hannah Jewkes
20 Aug 2009
I think you draw some very odd conclusions here! The point of the Frenzied Waters and Prototype campaigns is to scare people. Watching turbulant a shark attack on it's own isn't scary to our desensitized youth - but seeing our own data being flashed before our eyes is terrifying in our paranoid culture.
What we, as fundraisers, are doing when we personalise our communications, is to tell them that we remember who they are and care about them as an individual - but this can be done just by using their name, not by showing their own photos!
I think what Amnesty is doing is cool - it seems to be more about using people's Facebook connections to reach out to them and share what ways they are involved in Amnesty and what they care about, not about using their data.
Jonathan Waddingham
20 Aug 2009
Hi Hannah,
I have to disagree with you on the point of both those campaigns being just to scare people - in the case of the shark attack it was scary, yes, but only to make you think about it. But there wasn't anything scary about the Prototype experience. It was just involving you in the story, so the game revolved around *you*, instead of some generic made-up name. I agree with you on the Amnesty front - there are different degrees of integration you can use FB Connect for, and in the fairly light way they have implemented it, it's a great way to help spread the word and more people should use it.
Having said that, I'm sure that fundraisers can think of more interesting ways to use the data than just bring in the name, and not necessarily go as far as pulling in someone's photos - that will certainly put some people off. There's a lot of data in Facebook, and surely the more personalised, relevant we can be, the more effective our communications will become.
Jonathan Waddingham
18 Aug 2009
Hi Reb, Thanks for the comment, it formed the basis for my subsequent post where I wanted to find out if people share your view of Facebook. Read more here
Reb
14 Aug 2009
As donors cannot actually donate to a charity via Facebook, this just sounds like a waste of time for the charity itself in an era where resources are stretched.
John Carnell
13 Aug 2009
Privacy is a minor issue as a user has to create a trusted connection between their Facebook identity and the external site. The user will already be aware of what this means and knows they can revoke that access at any time via their Facebook settings. External sites also only have limited access to certain types of data and can only send a limited amount of stuff into a users account. So far most Facebook connect features on external sites are limited to messaging (wall post push) and pulling in pictures. The pictures element is an issue that FB need to address as usually photos are marked for friends only via the FB connect it seems the apps can pull those anyway as a trusted connection is assumed for those as well. (could at last code push) John
Jonathan Waddingham
12 Aug 2009
The privacy concerns are good ones - no one wants to be seen to be using data that they shouldn't. Maybe I wasn't clear enough above, but this feature would use the privacy settings someone has already set in Facebook, so it *should* cover that usage elsewhere and the user *should* be aware of that. Of course, whether the Facebook users have understood the nuances of its privacy settings, and how they can be used by services such as FB Connect, is another question...
Anonymous
12 Aug 2009
I'm very conflicted by this. On one hand, I think charities have a duty to their beneficiaries to take up every opportunity to make money from donors.
However, for me, this is a grey area of data protection. If charities are seen to pounce on private information - even if those individuals haven't actually protected that information - then it could do damage to trust in the organisation.
21 May 2012
Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....
14 May 2012
It’s two years since Britain voted in the previously unlikely coalition of the Conservatives and Liberal...
14 May 2012
Philip Spedding invokes an anecdote about the Tate to lambast the government's proposed cap on tax relief...
25 May 2012
Dan Sumners outlines Volunteering England's efforts to turn insurance red tape into a green light for...
21 May 2012
Community isn't led by government, so why wait for it to tell you what to do, protests Robert Ashton....
21 May 2012
How do you solve a problem like a pension deficit? David McHattie tackles the issue.
Anon
24 Aug 2009
I work for a very small charity that now has a national partnership for 2010 as a result of drumming up support soley on Facebook. 3 months agao our organisation has 2 facebook friends and now we have over 400 including celebrities. From Facebook we have been given free national advertising, free venues and gained over 100 volunteer community fundraisers. We are now going to be putting on an event in 2010 as a result of our facebook succsess. How can free communication with over 18% of the population not be worth the time investment? We are set to bring in over £20,000 this qtr as a result of online networking.
[Reply]