UP | uncultured project

I just logged into my Google AdSense account to see I’ll be earning a whopping 3 cents today. This is usually the norm for the income I generate.

In fact, features and traffic surges included, since starting this project I’ve earned well under $2 a day. To put it simply: Technically, I am just as poor (if not poorer) than the people I help.

OMG I'm rich!.... okay maybe not.

With that in mind, I thought now would be a good time to talk about what role I feel ads through my YouTube partnership play in this project and how I hope it will fit into the big picture.

More after the jump…

Continue reading ‘Working For Free Only Works for a While’

Jason Sadler

Inspired by some recent comments on this blog and tweets, I’d like to talk about the direction I feel this project needs to be going. And it starts with the story of Jason Sadler.

Jason Sadler is an entrepreneur who has successfully used social media to generate fame, attention, and wealth for himself through his business called I Wear Your Shirt. Hoping to use his momentum on social media, Jason decided to form his own non-profit organization.

Jason’s non-profit was about providing free clothes to people in Africa. He called his organization “1 Million Shirts” with the goal of getting people to donate 1 million used shirts which he would then ship to needy families in Africa.

A lot of us donate our gently-used clothing to local good-will. And, when I’m overseas, I often find myself parting with some of my favorite shirts because I find people who could benefit from them more than I could. But, on the scale Jason was aiming to do, this could do more harm than good.

Click the jump to read more…

Continue reading ‘This Takes Time’

It’s the first of April, and I’m standing in a dimly lit room with a bright projector light blinding me. In front of me, some high ranking officials who came to hear me speak. This is no April’s Fools joke: this was my presentation to Save the Children USA’s Global HQ.

Save the Children's USA HQ (pic by Madge Canning)

After an hour of Keynote slides, graphs, and videos I was pleased to see that my presentation was well received. Lots of nodding heads. But I needed one more thing. I need to drive the message home. It was time to unleash what I called the secret weapon.

I went to my laptop, loaded up YouTube, and played one last video. This time the video wasn’t filmed in some rural village, it didn’t have fancy editing, and it didn’t have nice background music. It was filmed in the parking lot – just before I stepped into the room.

Yes, I too am mind boggled how my videos could be seen more than any video of her. Do charities need celebrities?

Within the brief time I was giving this presentation, not only did people leave comments – but many people made video responses which I was able to play for staff right then and there. The message of each video was the same: let’s team up and do more projects.

Finally, to hit the last nail, I compared the views of this video to Save the Children’s slickly edited video staring America Ferrera on location in Mali. In less than a couple of hours, this video had more views than America Ferrera had got in over a couple of weeks.

“If this is what I can do for you in your parking lot, imagine what I can do for you in the field”. This, in essence, was my pitch to Save the Children. In fact, it’s my pitch to any charity. It’s not complicated, it’s not bureaucratic, it’s simple. Here are the facts:

• Fact 1: Any charity that uses donations for PR, outreach, or social media needs to justify that it’s spending it wisely for maximum impact.

• Fact 2: To date, all the various branches of Save the Children, are spending millions of dollars (from your donations) and hiring hundreds of staff to raise awareness on YouTube, Twitter, and elsewhere in “social media”.

• Fact 3: Part of these millions of dollars goes to sending videographers, bloggers, and other PR personnel around the world. Including personnel video blogging from the World Cup in South Africa.

• Fact 4: Despite this, the online reach of all those efforts combined is still less than the online reach of this project. This project is the #1 “social media” source about Save the Children.

• Fact 5: For less than the cost of hiring me, Save the Children can team up with me as a “free agent” again and continue to have access to the reach of this project backed by one very awesome community.

Click for full size: A chart I showed at my presentation showing total YouTube views generated. Blue is Save the Children USA efforts (under 200k views) and Red is globally funded efforts (under 1 million views). Orange is me (over 2.1 million views). Identical trends exist on Twitter.

Despite this, in over a year of discussions, there still isn’t a concrete plan to team up with them in the developing world again.

This has been described as “Not Invented Here” syndrome. Beth Kanter might call it a “fortress” mentality. But the end result is that charities like Save the Children overspend on social media and reach far less people than they could by collaborating with free agents.

A big hit on the ground & online for Save the Children. But I had to beg and borrow to get there and film the conclusion.

If you’re familiar with this project, you probably are familiar with the water project I completed with Save the Children. The video of that got over 100,000 views - that’s far more views than any official Save the Children video has ever got online.

Despite that, during the conclusion of that project, I had to find my own funds to go to the village to film it. Save the Children would not even support the creation of that video by letting me hitch a ride with them from the city to the village.

Bonus Fact 1: As more charities become more like “Networked Non-Profits”, charities that are “fortresses” or have “Not Invented Here” syndrome are either going to have to evolve or make way for better charities.

Bonus Fact 2: I wouldn’t be trying so hard if I didn’t think Save the Children was a charity worth supporting. And part of this comes from the fact that I’ve seen how they conduct themselves on the ground.

When I was a student, I would often find scholars who were thinking the same thing I was – but were able to express themselves far more eloquently than I ever could. I’ve recently found someone just like that when it comes to my thoughts on charities. That person is Beth Kanter.

Beth Kanter

I don’t believe the reason extreme poverty exists is because of a lack of charities. In my lifetime, the number of charities fighting global poverty has grown astronomically. Yet, we haven’t seen a proportional decrease in global poverty.

The reason I haven’t formalized, disadvantages aside, is because global poverty won’t be solved with yet another charity. Instead, I believe we need to change the conversation and change how we work to solve this problem.

Before starting this project, I never realized how competitive and insular many charities can become. Some charities won’t even talk to their sister branches in other countries! And many charities expect outsiders like me just to stick to signing petitions and checks.

Whether or not it’s through my project, I want charities to be more about communities – not corporate structure. I want them to collaborate – not compete. I want individuals like me to be able to “plug in” and help.

That’s exactly what Beth Kanter is talking about. Except she does it from a position of a well-respected expert and scholar. Here’s what she has to say about how charities should be conducting themselves in the 21st century:

What I like about Beth is that she completely understands the frustrations I have to deal with. I’m what she calls a “free agent”: someone who does what a charity does, but as an individual. Both Beth & I think free agents should team up with charities – but many charities resist this:

Thanks to Beth and the Red Cross’s Wendy Harman, I’ve been making a lot of progress in teaming up with the Red Cross. In fact, I’ve made more progress in a few weeks with the Red Cross than I have with my year-long talks with Save the Children.

Prior to meeting Beth, I would have raised my arms in frustration at this resistance many charities throw up when it comes to teaming up with free agents. But, Beth has made me realize that I need to imagine organizations complexly. People inside may want change, but the organization itself might be a “fortress”.

And really, in many respects, people like Beth aren’t just talking about what charities should be doing. What Beth is really talking about is what charities must do if they want to exist in the 21st century. It will be interesting to see which ones evolve… and which ones become obsolete.

When it comes to filming & photographing, I always try and learn from the professionals. I recently discovered superstar photographer “Joey L”. Joey’s worked with some big names (The Jonas Brothers, Usher, NBC, FX Network, Warner Music, and the Salvation Army).

Joey also travels to developing countries and photographs and films those living in poverty. Recently, he uploaded a video on his trip to visit the The Mentawai in rural Indonesia (WARNING: NOT SAFE FOR WORK):

The reason this video is not safe for work is because it shows full frontal nudity of children. I’m not trying to hate on Joey. In his defense, this is probably nothing more than you’d find in National Geographic Magazine. I’m sure the intention was documenting – not pornography.

But, this raises a question, what are the ethics of filming and photographing the poor in the nude? Is filming for charitable purposes different than filming for documentary purposes? Are the standards different for those living in the West vs. those living in developing countries?

From what I can tell of Joey’s work, that seems to be the case. In this video, he blurs and blocks out nudity of himself and his assistant as they bathe in a river – but does not do the same for any of the naked locals in the same scene (WARNING: ALSO NOT SAFE FOR WORK):

For me, I come from a very different perspective. Even if families are itching and eager to be on camera – if they are nude, I say no. Or, at the very least, frame it to protect privacy. This helps because when I team up with Save the Children, I’m in line with their policies and practices.

But the fact is, no matter how much care & consideration one takes in filming and photography, there is always going to be someone out there who thinks you’re grossly violating the rights and disrespecting your subjects.

On-the-ground I know that my paranoia of not filming nudity seems to foster respect among those I film & photograph. It also stems from the fact that I share a cultural ancestry with most of the people I try and help.

It’s for that reason, I’m not going to change how I do things. But, I’d love to hear your thoughts on this – especially if there are any professional photographers and filmmakers out there reading this.

Many charities think the best way to raise awareness of their work is to get a celebrity endorsement. Don’t get me wrong: Hollywood celebrities can do a lot for a charity – but not as much as you think.

As I’ve blogged about before, especially on the internet, charities may actually get more mileage by giving regular folks (with online supporters) the same opportunities that charities give celebrities.

I’ve been doing more than just ranting on this blog – here’s six (among many) charities that I’ve talked to about this.

Continue reading ‘Weaning Charities off Celebrities’

I’ve been doing this for over three years now. And, together, we’ve done a lot. As I try and figure out how to sustain this project and continue this journey for the long-term, you might be wondering, why don’t I just register as a (non-profit) organization? Isn’t becoming an “NGO” or “NPO” just a tax status? Here’s five reasons why I disagree & dislike the idea of becoming an organization…

5) Creates Two-Tier Donors: This project was born on the internet. On the internet, everyone is equal. If there was a way I could register as an organization so that every donor – from anywhere in the world – could get a tax write-off, I would. I don’t see the point in giving one country special preference and turning a project – born out of a global online community – into something which is skewed (or becomes more skewed) to one particular country.

4) Requires Working Under the Radar: Most developing countries have different requirements for those visiting as an individual vs those coming to work as part of an organization. Some charities, like World Vision, Save the Children, & the Red Cross, invest millions of dollars to register, form a legal presence, and hire a permanent staff in all the countries they serve in. Many smaller organizations simply fly-in & work under the radar. I don’t have millions of dollars, don’t have a need to hire a permanent staff, and don’t want to disrespect the laws of the countries I visit.

3) Takes the Fun out of Fundraising: As an individual, I don’t have a bottom line and I have relatively low overhead. As an organization, I’d need to raise funds – not just to register – but to sustain the organization itself. You’d be surprised at how expensive it is to run even the smallest organization – and how breaks like pro-bono lawyers are few and far between. I don’t want to create something that requires me to pressure you to donate in order to reach some preset funding requirement.

2) Hinders Community Democracy: I wanted to give 10,000 lbs of food to the LA Food Bank. Whose permission did I ask? Yours. I wasn’t sure if I should build a Pond Sand Filter. Who made the call? You. If I was an organization, that power would be vested in a Board of Directors – not you. The ups and downs of this project have taught me this: I never want anything – or anyone – to have veto power over you guys. There is, of course, one exception: the people we are trying to serve on the ground.

1) Limits Trust-Building on the Ground: The number one question I get in Bangladesh is whether or not I’m an organization. Most rural Bangladeshis have had negative experiences with organizations and have seen NGO corruption first hand. This maybe why they get so excited when I tell them I’m just a guy. Simply not being part of an organization seems to foster trust, approachability, a willingness to brainstorm, and interaction with you guys (who I explain are my friends back home who support my work).

What I’ve learned in Bangladesh is that, as just a guy, I add value to any existing organization. Locals see me as an independent voice – one whom they can approach with their ideas, suggestions, and even complaints (and, yes, I do address and resolve their complaints – albeit not always publicly). Meanwhile, the online community sees me as their direct line to both those they help and the good they have funded.

I don’t have anything against organizations. In fact, why can’t organizations that have already done all the hard work to formalize, reap the benefit from someone like me (as an independent individual)? This is why I try so hard to pitch the idea of teaming up to multi-national organizations. It’s also why I wish foundations & funding sources supporting initiatives like mine wouldn’t brush me off just because I’m not a tax-writeoff.

Because doing good is more than just a tax status.