10 Reason Non-Profits Should Choose YouTube

How should your non-profit share video online? There’s no shortage of options. Brightcove, YouTube, Vimeo, Kewego, SeeToo, Akami, and so on.

Most media websites, like the NYTimes or TV channels, have their own custom video players. This is so they can earn ad revenue, or exclusively show their content in the context of their website. As a NGO, your goals look different. Whether you’re advocating, informing or motivating, the point of your non-profit video is for people to see it, not to make ad revenue. Here’s 10 reasons why I think your org should go with YouTube.

1. Get the most views
Hosting and embedding on YouTube practically guarantee the highest amount of views. YouTube has the best sharing rate and best embedding rate (probably because people are already familiar to the user experience). Additionally:

  • YouTube auto populates embeds links in twitter, Facebook, gmail, and heaps of other social sites.
  • YouTube allows viewers to subscribe to your video uploads, and pushes them notifications.
  • YouTube works on nearly all mobile phones, ipads, web browsers and other platforms.

Think back. When’s the last time someone sent you an email to check out a video that was buried in a site, and hosted on a 3rd party platform?

To be honest, the odds are already against your video “going viral”. If you don’t host via YouTube, your chances become almost laughable.

2. Technology
3d, 4k, HTML5, mobile-ready, social embedding… head spinning yet? You want to choose a video platform that is going to change as quickly as the web technology that delivers it. Brightcove is famously behind, Vimeo is quickly improving, but for implementing the latest technology, my money is on YouTube. And so is Google’s (Google purchased YouTube in 2004).

3. Search
YouTube is the second highest search engine. Not hosting your videos on YouTube is the SEO equivalent of not letting Google index your website. But it’s not just hosting. YouTube/Google give preference in search results to videos with higher view counts. In plain english: it’s not enough to just upload a copy of your video to YouTube and host via something else. You’ll want your video views to be “counted” for on YouTube, thus increasing your search result rankings, thus increasing your views via the worlds second highest search engine…. you get the picture.

4. Search (Part 2) or The United Airlines Effect
If you’re not the number one video result for your brand, someone else is. This is the number one result for United Airlines.

In the non-profit world, your top search result might be a homemade video from a donor. Chances are, it doesn’t pass branding control. Perhaps they’ve misinterpreted your message, or paternalised your recipients, or worse.

…It’s best for you to own your search results (or at least try).

5. In-video clickable giving
Interactive videos! As long as you’re a registered non-profit, you can add giving links, find our more links, and download our Annual Report links from within your videos. You can also link to other videos, like in these “choose your own adventure” style series. Brilliant!

6. Accessibility
To my knowledge, YouTube is the only video site actively pursing accessibility options. They’re working on auto-captioning, but until it’s perfect, CaptionTube syncs with YouTube to manually create subtitles. Plus, with such a large user base, many people are proactively adding their captions and translations. Online video has still has a way to go to establishing standards for accessibility–expect to see YouTube lead the way.

7. Community
The biggest difference between YouTube and other social video platforms (vimeo, metacafe) is the community. Like facebook and twitter, youtube has a community of users, celebrities and voices who are already popular. Recently, some NGO’s have begun tapping into these vloggers to spread the word about their work.

…If you’re an NGO not using YouTube, you probably won’t have much credibility with the “YouTubers”.

8. Video Quality
If you’re still under the impression that YouTube videos are all fuzzy and pixelated, you’re wrong. In 2009 YouTube announced support for full HD 1920×1080, blu-ray quality video. And in 2010, YouTube announced support for 4k resolution–best viewed on a 25 ft screen.

Think you’ll never need high resolution video? It’s an hour before your annual fundraising gala and you left the DVD at home… no problem if you have the video uploaded in high-def. Preload and stream it fullscreen… no need to tell the boss.

For registered non-profits YouTube has added optional “download” functionality. For free. Burning and shipping DVD copies will soon (hopefully) become a thing of the past.

10. Faster International Uploading
When uploading videos from rural Tanzania, it’s important to have fast uploads and resumeable uploads (if you lose your connection for a moment, you don’t have to restart the entire process). Plus, YouTube processes video quicker than any other host I’ve worked with, including the expensive platforms.

…And it’s Free
You’re a non-profit. Hosting and serving up videos is expensive. I’ve yet to hear a compelling argument to spend thousands of dollars on what YouTube provides, better, and for free.

What does all that look like in practise? Check out charity:water’s use of youtube embedding here: http://www.charitywater.org/whywater/

Agree? Disagree? Eager to hear your comments below.

#100kShirts: An open letter to World Vision USA


About a year ago, Jason Sandler decided he wanted to “help Africa” by sending t-shirts to kids. He started a website, made some videos, and got a mention in Mashable. The initiative was going swimmingly until the “aid bloggers” heard about it. The aid bloggers, a loosely defined group of industry professionals often disagreeing type, unanimously agreed how silly/stupid/ill-advised this initiative was and let Jason know. They said t-shirts were not an urgent need in African villages. They said the cost of shipping would waste hundreds of thousands of dollars. They said good development isn’t about handing things out, it’s about finding long-term community based solutions.

And at first, Jason, like anyone who gets criticism for wanting to help, became defensive. The debate grew tense and personal.

My first post on this site was an open letter to Jason. I wrote in a personal capacity about how my understanding of do-gooding has changed. I asked Jason to reconsider his plans, and proposed a few action steps forward. Jason received my letter and kindly replied. In time, Jason abandoned his plans to ship t-shirts and instead, gave non-profits a platform and a voice through his existing business and internet presence.

At the time of my first post I worked for World Vision USA. l’m humbled and thankful for my time there; the experience, knowledge, and especially for friendships with teammates and mentors. We parted on the best of terms and I remain a donor and advocate. Additionally, it should be said, this is not written from an insider perspective; I did not work with the GIK team and have no more knowledge of the process than what is publicly available online. I intend to write not as a former employee, but as a donor and peer to marketing friends at diverse NGOs.

With that history in mind, it’s a bit ironic to join the 1kshirts conversation. I write this in a personal capacity, but in the spirit of disclosure, I’m dating @RichendaG, who, when she’s not spending her romantic valentines days with me, is the social media manager at World Vision Australia. You should check out her blog. I don’t speak on her behalf.

So, my intention is not to attack or offend, and I hold World Vision USA and my former coworkers in the highest regards. WVUSA is a large organization and the product of years of history and thousands of individuals work; I hope this letter contributes to the conversation in a positive way.

Lastly, I appreciate WVUSA’s public statement to bloggers to continue to raise issues and challenge them to do better. It is the beauty of social media: authentic conversations, transparent debates, learning from others mistakes and successes. In that spirit I encourage World Vision to hyperlink to the blog entries and twitter handles you mention in your blogs–it’s proper etiquette in the blogosphere, and will allow readers to more easily follow the conversation.

An open letter to World Vision USA,
cc: @ArnieAdkison

First, thanks for the dialogue. Just as the conversations with Jason, thanks for the response, willingness to listen, and to hopefully continue to answer questions. Cheers too, to Arnie, for the quick response on his blog and for hearing out my question.

My question, which I don’t think has been responded to, is simple: Is handing out shirts and hats good development? and Does it contribute to “alleviating the root causes of poverty”? If so, how?

Or, in the official words, is this a “nuanced conditional strategic use of product in (an) appropriate context“?

I’ll be honest, I’ve never heard from anyone in development say that clothing distributions are an effective or strategic way to help alleviate poverty; never a professor in my International Development classes, nor their guest speakers, nor a country program manager, nor any author writing on development (Bryant Myers, Sen, Easterly, Sachs, Sider, etc).

@TexasinAfrica, assistant professor of political science at Morehouse College writes:

As an organization that claims to be in the business of sustainable development, WV is directly and clearly undermining its own goals, not to mention those of the donors who give in the expectation that their goods will contribute to poverty alleviation.

@MoreAltitude, who talks like a data-driven field worker writes:

Those of us in this industry have been to enough poor countries to know that very few people genuinely lack t-shirts, and even if they do, there are probably a lot more things they d rather you spend your time doing. Like spending the shipping and distribution funds of unwanted t-shirts on improving water and sanitation programs, or vaccinating children against childhood diseases- the sort of thing that actually kills kids.

Is there something folks are misunderstanding? Are this shirts being given out in a context that we don’t understand? In an emergency context perhaps? Without you expounding on why this case is an exception, the only logical understanding is that this initiative is not in line with the best and current understandings of sustainable development.

@ArnieAdkison, a World Vision employee who writes on a personal blog (not as a voice of WVUSA), responds to my question of “what does this teach donors about aid”,

“…Disciplining donors is an ongoing process; no one grows to maturity overnight. Our long-term goal should be to create a situation where donor corporations intentionally generate overruns of items needed in developing nations, as opposed to only giving what they can’t make money off of. But again, getting a donor to that level of maturity takes a process over time.”

This sounds like we’re putting the donors first. Isn’t World Vision’s long term goal to enable communities to a place where they are not depending on things from donor corporations? Furthermore, what, exactly, is World Vision trying to get the NFL to do? Manufacture Super Bowl bednets? It seems that if, after 15 years, World Vision has not been able to discipline the NFL into a partnership that contributes to World Vision’s development model, it’s a partnership that isn’t working.

“We can probably all agree that pre-producing a lot of material like this is in many sense wasteful. However, if the NFL is going to create these shirts, then what is the most redemptive way to respond currently? Is it to say that it’s not a perfect system, so we shouldn’t at all?”

I agree on the wastefulness bit, but I wouldn’t reasonably expect anything differently than for a for-profit corporation to optimize profit. I disagree on your second point, that because there are t-shirts available to World Vision for free, the most redemptive or economically sound decision is to ship them around the world. @Bill_Westerly reminds us that free t-shirts cost money in the receiving, sorting, processing, storing, shipping, taxes and tariffs, fuel for trucking, and staff time and drivers, in the field, to hand out shirts. So is it? Probably not, but I don’t have the numbers. Publishing the cost analysis for this 15 year project could move that specific debate from speculation and into proper evaluation.

To that point, maybe a better thought is: If shirts are in such demand that World Vision is only able to fulfill five percent of all request from communities, AND World Vision sincerely believes that t-shirts are an integral part of alleviating the root causes of poverty and injustice, THEN shouldn’t that World Vision look to in-country initiatives (local t-shirt production) as an answer to the 18 million requested articles of clothing that are part of WV’s mission?

World Vision USA distributed 1 billion dollars of GIK in the last three years. That most likely means World Vision USA is the largest single distributor of donated goods in the world. This conversation, and WVUSA’s understanding of “nuanced conditional strategic use of product” is important not only because of the effects in the contexts you operate but also because the example it sets for other organizations (ie. faith-based organizations http://ahomeinhaiti.org, $1.5 million dollars of consumer grade camping tents sent to Haiti and http://www.soles4souls.org/ shipping shoes around the world)

Lastly, and most personally, Arnie writes:

“I’ve been able to call more attention to WV’s work here in North Texas over the past few days than we generated in the last 12 months. Should that be considered in the redemptive value of this?”

Alas, the branding.

I do appreciate the honesty in both Mr. Adkinson and World Vision’s response to admit that marketing forces are at play in this decision to accept and distribute the articles of clothing.

I do not believe World Vision being highlighted on national television for a shoddy project is redemptive. It’s damaging to our already misinformed society when a respectable organization highlights this as being a worthwhile project to help poor people. Cheap and inauthentic answers don’t inspire to people to call for justice.

  • World Vision, when you push products like TOM’s shoes (of whom WV is a partner and the largest distributor for) you lose credibility a prophetic voice against consumption.
  • When you touts hand outs, you lose credibility as an expert in development. 
  • When you defend bad practices, you call into question those who speak with the same voice.

Development is complex. Many of your donors understand this. Amazon understands this; if you liked “The Hole in our Gospel” you’ll like “When Helping Hurts”. You have the ability to be a clear voice to American’s about what poverty is and how we can best respond. Anything short of that is underestimating your donors.

It’s easy to get trapped in the day-to-day fundraising, and let that affect programs. I recently read an amazing article by World Vision Australia’s Jarrod McKenna (What would MLK Do? Christians and Climate Change) who quotes Martin Luther King:

Martin Luther King was asked by a reporter whether he was going to hurt the budget of his organisation by the stance he had taken on the issue of war: “Aren’t you hurting the civil rights movement and people who once respected you because you are involved in this controversial issue?” As he related to audiences later, Martin Luther King said that he looked at that reporter and, with deep understanding and no bitterness in his heart, said:

“I’m sorry sir, but you don’t know me. I’m not a consensus leader. I don’t determine what is right and wrong looking at the budget of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. Nor do I determine what is right and wrong by taking a Gallup poll of the majority opinion.”

King would go onto say:

“Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher of consensus but a moulder of consensus. On some positions cowardice asks the question, is it safe? Expediency asks the question, is it politic? Vanity asks the question, is it popular? But conscience asks the question, is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but he must take it because conscience tells him it is right.”

World Vision; your community development model is so good, your WASH work is so good, your potential is so great, and (I agree with Kristoff) your delicate balance of faith in the countries you serve is to be commended. On this issue of handouts, I implore you to do better.

The aid community (and donors like me) look forward to your findings and response.

all the best,

(as always, if i’ve misquoted, misrepresented or misunderstood anyones words, please contact me through the form in this site or let me know in the comments below)

For further reading on this debate, check out the 40+ posts and press mentions here, and re-visit the Elephant in the Room, a well thought out follow up to the original t-shirt debate by Linda Raftree.

Saying Goodbye to my Things

Downsizing 24 years of things into two bags (and a bicycle box) is like tearing a bandaid off; slightly painful, liberating when it’s done. This is my anthem for the day:

Plastic Bottles
Imported Water
Cars we drive wherever we want to
Clothes we buy it’s sweatshop labor
Drugs from corporate enablers
We’re not living the Good life
Unless we’re fighting the Good fight
You and Me just trying to get it right

Love can free us from all excess
From our deepest debts
Cause when our hearts are full we need much less

The Submarines; You, Me and The Bourgeoisie.

Brené Brown on authenticity

This morning, Scott Stratten shared this inspiring TED talk from Brené Brown. Brown is as funny as she is self-depreciating as she asks: How do we engage in our lives from a place of authenticity and worthiness? It’s well worth the time, but if you don’t have 20 minutes to borrow from your day, here’s the cliff notes.

People living with a deep senes of wholeheardedness … had, very simply, the courage to be imperfect. They had the compassion to be kind to themselves first and then to others, because, as it turns out, we can’t practice compassion with other people if we can’t treat ourselves kindly. And the last was they had connection, and — this was the hard part — as a result of authenticity, they were willing to let go of who they thought they should be in order to be who they were.

That kind of authenticity is rare in people. That’s my new goal this new year: The courage to be imperfect, the compassion to be kind to myself and others, and to let go of expectations to be truly authentic.

It’s also rare in marketing. Even in “for a good cause” marketing. What would your organization look like if you had the courage to be imperfect? If you didn’t have all the answers?

In other news, read Scott Stratten’s book UnMarketing.

Moving to Melbs

Dear internets: I’m excited to share the news. On January 12th, I’m moving to Melbourne, Australia. For a girl.

Love is a big deal 🙂

We met at work. I was a new hire and she was exotic looking (my polite way of saying smoking hot). She had an Aussie accent so I asked if she was from England. She pretended to be deeply offended, and called me a “cheeky bugger!” … It was flirt at first sight.

I made sure to have a few questions for her every couple of days… and we had meetings… and mostly talked about work 😉 I finally got the courage to ask her out. We had sushi, and danced, and kissed outside on our very first date.

In Seattle, life slowed down when we were together. We wandered the west seattle farmers market and went swimming at the dock. We snuck wine onto the Bainbridge ferry, and watched the sun set from the boat. We went out with friends (her favorite) and stayed in for reading parties (mine). We shared incredible moments of good, struggled through painful moments of bad, and learned how to fight while holding hands. I’m thankful for her grace.


Last January, we spoke about her pursuing a job opportunity in Australia. To me, it couldn’t have been worse timing. We were becoming closer every day and neither of us wanted to be apart, especially 2,000 miles apart. At the time I was reading “A Million Miles in a Thousand Years”. In it, Donald Miller (one of my favorite inspiring authors) writes “fear is a manipulative emotion that can trick us into living a boring life.” I was scared. I kept reading.

“I think this is when most people give up on their stories. They come out of college wanting to change the world, wanting to get married, wanting to have kids and change the way people buy office supplies. But they get into the middle and discover it was harder than they thought. They can’t see the distant shore anymore, and they wonder if their paddling is moving them forward. None of the trees behind them are getting smaller and none of the trees ahead are getting bigger. They take it out on their spouses, and they go looking for an easier story.”

In my most faithful moments I believe the words of Jeremiah 29:11, that the creator of this universe has crafted my story. My birth. My family. My loving and supportive parents and my hilarious siblings. My story–which was becoming Richenda and my story–was finally getting comfortable… and now this. I was angry that doors closed on her that I felt shouldn’t have, and I became angry at life, and I didn’t want her to leave. I didn’t want a new adventure. I simply wanted everything to stay the same and not be difficult or hard or heartbroken so I told God with colorful words.

Miller writes:

“No, life cannot be understood flat on a page. It has to be lived; a person has to get out of his head, has to fall in love, has to memorize poems, has to jump off bridges into rivers, has to stand in an empty desert and whisper sonnets under his breath… We get one story, you and I, and one story alone. God has established the elements, the setting and the climax and resolution. It would be a crime not to venture out, wouldn’t it?

Richenda, one of the most generous things you said was that if it would be too hard for us to do long distance you’d find a job in Seattle–any job would do–and stay here. You’d sacrifice. For me.

Even though ever since you first learned about global poverty, you had wanted to work for World Vision Australia. You started a paper route so you could sponsor a child, when you were still a child yourself.
Even though
 you’d been away from your family and country for six years.
Even though
this was an amazing opportunity that combined your greatest gifts with the world’s need.
Even though this was clearly part of your story, you were willing to sacrifice it for me. And as sweet as that is of you, I hope never again to cause you to hesitate chasing your destiny.

Our story moved forward from the laugher of late night phone calls and skype date nights. We counted days till vacation time, and poured our hearts out on emails. We reminded each other of our feelings on text messages (I didn’t do that so much at first, but we worked some of the communication things out). Friends and co-workers surrounded the two of us with encouragement and cheered us on. And the day came that “sacrificing” what I had here, wasn’t.

So it’s with great excitement that I am moving to be with my best friend. Excitement mixed with the sadness of moving even farther away from my family and friends, but confirmed knowing this is the story I’m supposed to be living.

Cheers to the future!

Dear Jason // The #1millionshirts Debate

Dear Jason (of #1millionshirts),

First, sincerely, I commend you for trying to make a difference. You’ve been the talk of the twittersphere lately, and while I don’t know you personally, I’ve spent hours contemplating the #1millionshirts conversation over the last few days. I envy your marketing and social media saavy, your web design skills (or designer friend), and your can do attitude. Most start-up 501c3’s never get the attention you’ve received in one day. I first heard of you from Mashable. Mashable. Impressive.

Though not as experienced in social media as you, I work one the marketing side of an international non-governmental organization. We’re committed to sustainable long-term development, although admittedly we don’t always get there.

As a way of further introduction, I’ll share a story about me and a t-shirt.

When I was a sophomore in college (circa 2006) I bought a t-shirt as part of a fundraiser for MSF. It had a silhouette of a woman printed on the front, holding her hand out, with a pained look on her face. Next to her was the phrase “STOP GENOCIDE IN SUDAN”.

T-shirt with text "stop genocide in Sudan"

The minimum suggested donation was $10, but to better support the organization one could give more (I gave $10).

Every time I wore the genocide shirt people would ask how I planned to stop the genocide in Sudan. Or who was fighting. Or where Sudan is.

I had no idea.

Now four years later, to be honest, I still can’t explain many of the facets and complexities of the genocide in Sudan. I still have nothing more to offer but prayers and the occasional seemingly insignificant donation. But for the last few years, I’ve been privileged to learn from some pretty incredible people: college professors who challenged me to let go of preconceived and racist ideas, friends who have shared books and guided this stubborn white kid from the suburbs to think more globally (specifically Naomi, Bwalya, Michael, Jeich and Randy. Thank you), and certainly not least the authors (and more recently bloggers) who have opened up a world of experience and knowledge.

Your education came faster. Whereas I simply read Easterly, he responded directly to you (…I’m not saying I envy the attention). Snarky or not, you’re in dialogue with some of the brightest minds in development. It looks like things are evolving from pointed criticism to constructive conversation. Historical moment in NPO history? Perhaps a stretch, but it’s been a great thing to witness.

I have no doubt that #1millionshirts was born from pure motives. Sending a shirt from America to a child in rural Kenya makes me smile: it’s a nice gift. Clearly, It’s not long term sustainable development, and it’s not supposed to be. It’s a gift, and it has the potential to make a child smile. So it’s not a stretch to see how you moved from making one child smile, to wanting to make one million children happy. But when you did that, you’ve introduced a massive logistics puzzle that involves shipping cargo, warehouses, trucks, drivers, and lots of money.

Shipping a bunch of shirts isn’t evil, it’s just not good development. It carries the obvious risk of consuming lots of time from the NGO’s you’ve partnered with, along with a myriad of other problems pointed out by other folks with much more experience than I.

I’m not sure why the 501c3’s didn’t point this out. My guess is they were excited by the possibility of a lot of good press and attention, and thought the cross-promotion could help spur new donors for them. Good development practices sometimes get lost in the excitement.

But I digress. The question you’re wrestling with is what to do now. As Chris from MobileActive writes, there are some pretty positive lessons to take away from all of this. And therein lies a huge opportunity. My hope is that you will put the project on hold and invest that time into learning about development and the aid industry. Read everything you can, meet with experienced thinkers and workers, spend some time in a “less-developed country” (or whatever the accepted term is these days).

And then… Become a voice for good development.  Speaker, blogger, social media persona, ect. The (t-shirt) rags to (best practices) riches story about a guy who wanted to help… and then got beat up by the internet trolls of development. Iron sharpens iron, and we’ll emerge better for it.

I’m serious; development advocates could use your help. There are more people that want to start their own non-profit than ever. “Helping Africa” is trendy, but without a knowledge of good development, there will be more negatives than positives. Good intentions are not enough.

My wonderful, amazing, brilliant girlfriend Richenda recently went to a conference called Ideation. There were many, many people there in the process of establishing non-profits. Hopefully those non-profits will follow the lead of speakers Scott Harrison and Eugene Cho and do great at portraying the people they partner with as… well… people. And hopefully new orgs will follow Charity Water and One Days Wage’s example in leaving the development work to organizations on the ground with indigenous staff, community trust, and goals of long-term sustainability. But many people launching NPOs don’t. They don’t know better. They are passionate, they move quickly, and their impact is minimal. Or none. Or worse.

There’s an African proverb that says “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.”

It’s not so hard to imagine a few years down the road, you, on stage at the Ideation conference, sharing lessons from this experience with a new class of motivated internet marketers who want to make a difference. @meowtree will live tweet, and @bill_easterly will be in the back row smiling.

Anyway, best of luck. If you’re ever in Seattle Melbourne, beers on me.