Journal of Philanthropy and Marketing最新文献

Jimmy ‘MrBeast’ Donaldson is the most watched person on earth. There are undeniably far worse figures who could be commanding such attention, but there remains uncertainty about his methods of philanthropic giving and what Beast Philanthropy ultimately hopes to achieve. Beast Philanthropy claims that, through entertainment-based giving, they are inspiring a new generation of young people to be more civic-minded. However, this jars harshly with the hedonistic indulgence of many MrBeast videos, which delight in spectacular wastefulness and luxury consumerism. Moreover, Beast Philanthropy fosters both passive and romanticized notions of generosity, conditioning viewers to think of their attention as a gift and that giving should be always and endlessly fun. Finally, the insistent anti-politicism of Beast Philanthropy entails a refusal to offer even the slightest of opinions on the underlying causes of suffering and inequality. This deliberately incurious worldview may promote a narrow and stunted perspective on how meaningful social and political change is achieved. However, there are reasons to be optimistic and open-minded, and philanthropic foundations should not outright dismiss the prospects for Beast-style giving.

There is a tendency in the study of philanthropy to see each new innovation or movement as transformative and distinct from what has come before. Before MrBeast there was philanthrocapitalism and before long there will be another shiny new toy for those of us who research or practice philanthropy to study. Happily, Rhodri Davies' analysis of MrBeast's philanthropy avoids falling into the trap of seeing novelty at every turn. Instead, he presents a nuanced and measured analysis of the criticisms of MrBeast and of his philanthropic endeavours, weighing up where the mud sticks and where it does not. This response explores the relative novelty of MrBeast's approach to philanthropy and of the criticisms that have been levied at it.

Numerous studies have sought to understand why philanthropists are not giving more to charity. Two recently published studies identified a lack of faith in charities and an absence of trust as significant barriers to philanthropy. We report on the findings of a qualitative study which sought to examine the extent to which trust, and relationships influence the wealthy to give or withhold funding to charities. We employed in-depth qualitative research methods and semi-structured, conversational-style, interviews as the major form of data collection. We utilised Braun and Clarke's ‘reflexive thematic analysis’ method of thematic analysis which gave rise to 4 key themes and 9 sub-themes. Findings revealed that trust underpins the relationships that philanthropists have with charities and is an important conduit to forging an ongoing relationship. Trust is frequently relied upon as a proxy for evidence and an absence of trust will usually lead a philanthropist to withhold funding.

In recent issues of this journal, Solow, Symes and Webb (2023, 2024) present a new way to structure legacies by creating an intermediate fund which they call a Master Fund. They prove some interesting properties of this approach, comparing it with the traditional approach whereby the whole bequest is transferred to a Charity Fund. Their main mathematical results are obtained under continuous compounding, and numerical results are derived under (a more realistic) annual compounding assumption. In this note, additional practical results are obtained mathematically under the assumption of annual compounding. Specifically, it is shown that using a Master Fund always results in a time after which the annual amount of money a beneficiary organisation receives is greater than that without using the Master Fund. While the foregoing statement might not be true for the net present value, conditions on the annual investment, disbursement and discount rates under which this is the case are also provided.

With a growing emphasis on empowering communities amongst the practices of philanthropic foundations, practitioners recognise the need for giving strategies grounded in communities of practice's contextual and contingent knowledge. This bringing of beneficiaries' lived experiences into grantmaking represents a wider recognition that sees gift-giving as a dialogical process that uses relationships with community beneficiaries as the point of departure for creating progressive forms of philanthropy, broadly referred to as ‘relational philanthropy’. Foundations that declare themselves as relational funders typically take a more trusting approach by offering more unrestricted, longer-term funding, simplifying reporting requirements, and empowering grantees to use the resources provided more flexibly. In this paper, we argue that relational philanthropy expresses a form of ‘relational work’, as it possesses a trust-based character that speaks to the reciprocal power of gift-giving, whereby both benefactors and beneficiaries receive value from the co-created, context-drivengift exchange: beneficiaries receive philanthropic resources (time, treasure, talent, ties) with more control over spending, while the benefactors gain grassroots insights that can inform future funding policies and practices. In this paper, we show that such reciprocity between funders and their beneficiaries is an important step towards empowering communities for three reasons: (1) by strengthening trust in, and sharing power with, their grantees, foundations empower them to engage more thoroughly with their communities; (2) by grantees communicating their community-level lived experiences to foundations, foundations can develop more informed and relevant grantmaking decisions, and; (3) as reciprocal exchanges are built on trust, this relational philanthropy creates social capital that strengthens relationships and solidarity across civil society.

This study examined the intention to claim exemption for zakat and other monetary donations on the annual tax return among US Muslims. We used a survey of 575 Muslims living in the United States to test several exploratory hypotheses. Our statistical results suggest that after controlling for other demographic differences, (1) respondents who identified as non-Sunni (as opposed to Sunni) Muslims, had medium or high (as opposed to low) income, and those who believed that Covid-19 is a Zakat-eligible cause had higher odds of claiming an exemption for their Zakat donations; and (2) permanent residents (as opposed to US citizens), high (as opposed to low) income earners, non-faith-based donors, and those who believed that Covid-19 is a Zakat-eligible cause had higher odds of claiming exemption for their non-Zakat monetary donations. Implications are discussed.

This research explores how charities can harness individuals' desire for self-enhancement in their advertisements to boost volunteerism. Two studies examine the effects of advertising which promote either horizontal differentiation (appeals to uniqueness, existing skills) or vertical differentiation (appeals to status, skill acquisition) and how these interact with consumers' self-theories (incremental—belief in changeable attributes through effort, or entity—belief in unchangeable attributes). Study 1 (n = 183, 56% female) shows entity theorists are more inclined to volunteer following horizontally framed appeals, while incremental theorists respond similarly to both types of appeals. Study 2 (n = 107, 58% female) builds on this, revealing that self-theory influences the type of individuation (horizontal or vertical) sought by individuals, in turn enhancing volunteer intentions. These findings highlight the complex relationship between self-theory and advertising appeals in motivating volunteerism, offering valuable insights for creating effective charitable ads and understanding volunteer motivations.

Across three studies, this research elucidates how message frames—sharing versus donating—can affect consumers' private information disclosure for societal benefits through perceived sacrifice. This effect is moderated by perceived importance of the cause. First, we demonstrate that the sharing (donating) frame can generate more (less) private information disclosure for societal benefits. Second, we examine the mechanism by which the sharing (donating) frame leads to less (more) perceived sacrifice and then more (less) information disclosure. Third, we introduce the perceived importance of the cause and find that for people who perceive the importance of the cause is high, the donating (sharing) frame leads to less (more) perceived sacrifice and stronger (weaker) intention for private information disclosure. This research has implications for marketers, consumers, and society as a whole.

This case study examines the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) efforts over the past 3 years through #StillServing, a movement to highlight the stories and voices of veterans who continue to serve their communities in various ways, provide avenues for communities to coalesce around volunteerism, and attract younger generations for a wider range of engaged veterans. With an overarching goal to amplify the perception of the VFW as a place for dedicated veterans of all stripes to continue their service to country and their communities, the campaign spotlights men and women who exemplify the best of what it means to be a VFW member through storytelling emphasizing diversity, tenacity, and an enduring commitment to serve. Informed by findings from individual interviews conducted with a diverse group of U.S. military veterans, targeted messages with specific calls to action were developed for younger veterans. The association sought to take advantage of the most relevant and effective media to share its message while ultimately encouraging the veteran and military community to share their own stories of continued service through #StillServing. The case shares lessons learned from the campaign's iterative approach and offers creative, tested strategies for other programs seeking to engage younger generations.

This study explores how perceived viewer–streamer interactions elicit various types of social support in charity streaming, based on parasocial interaction (PSI). It further integrates accountability and goal-setting theories to address the question of how the different types of beneficiary focus and levels of donation progress that are usually embedded in charity streaming settings harness PSI's effects to increase donations. Experiment 1 (N = 100) showed that high PSI (vs. low) contributed to higher intentions from viewers to provide emotional and financial support to the streamers. Experiment 2 (N = 241) demonstrated that viewers who experienced high PSI (vs. low) were more likely to purchase product and donate to the charity that benefits human (vs. animal and environment). Experiment 3 (N = 315) found that high PSI (vs. low) and donation progress close (vs. far) to the goal were more likely to evoke donation to the human (vs. environment)-focused charity. Theoretical and practical implications are also discussed.