Boy, if I just had some video games, then for sure this cycle of poverty would end...
So you’re thinking of starting a charity.
Let’s just ask the question: with your new charity, do you want to actually help people, or just feel good about yourself? For example, let’s ask ourselves this as we examine the high-impact strategy of giving away video games to ‘needy kids’, as newly-formed Pixel Equity does. Read about it here. And check out the charity here.
“And if you’re wondering why giving games to needy kids is important [B: yes, actually I was...], they’ve got a neat little section on the benefits of games, which they say expose kids to other cultures, teach communication skills, and get children thinking scientifically.”
You know what might help more? Exposing kids to actual, real-life cultures, and actually communicating with people. Or understanding why some kids can’t afford (or feel they need) gaming in the first place, and trying to deal with those issues.
Many people want to ‘do something to help the world.’ A few even do something about it by starting charities. This is a good impulse, but before you start your own charity and want to move beyond your good intentions, please, please ask yourself three questions:
1) Do I want to actually change things or just make myself feel good?
Yes, you want to actually have some impact? OK, cool, with that acknowledgment and a little humility, you can dive into the complexity of social problems and begin to acquire the tools to address them. It isn’t as simple as giving stuff away. Be someone who actually changes things, not someone who only convinces others that they do. Start with that.
2) What are the root problems?
Forget surface indications, head for the real causes. Let’s try: kids can’t afford video games but want them. Why? Because they have less disposal income. Why? Maybe because they have one parent who works hard for minimum wage. Of their parents have recently become unemployed. Or they happen to be trapped in a socioeconomic poverty cycle. Why? … There are many ways this type of analysis can work, and many branches that can develop. The main point is to continuously as the question of the current situation: Why?
3) Is somebody already doing this better?
There are thousands of non-profits out there. A few really change the status quo. Most just tell the world they do. New non-profits can inject renewed passion and challenge existing approaches. That’s good. But there are organizations who have been doing this for generations, understand the real problems and how to tackle them. Look around and learn. Can you have more impact by joining an existing organization or starting your own?
Let’s run through those questions with our example charity, Pixel Magic. Do they want to actually change things, or just make themselves feel good? Probably they actually want to make a difference, but are pretty much only giving themselves warm fuzzies at this point because they haven’t thought beyond ‘kids can’t afford video games, let’s give them some.’ What are the root problems? If they had any idea, they would have tried something different. Is somebody doing this better? No, nobody is doing it because it’s a stupid waste of time and goodwill.
People: I’m completely supportive of starting initiatives to tackle any of the many challenges our societies face these days. But let’s make sure we’re really tackling those challenges, and not just feeling good about ourselves.
B
(shot: a woman and boy in Tigray, Ethiopia)
![[Post to Twitter]](http://www.cashewman.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-twitter-micro3.png){kind=icon}
![[Post to Delicious]](http://www.cashewman.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-delicious-micro3.png){kind=icon}
![[Post to Digg]](http://www.cashewman.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-digg-micro3.png){kind=icon}
![[Post to StumbleUpon]](http://www.cashewman.com/wp-content/plugins/tweet-this/icons/tt-su-micro3.png){kind=icon}
{ 16 comments… read them below or add one }
This is a great post, but I am afraid you are preaching for the converted: the people who really think of starting Pixel Magic like charities will probably not read it here. This should go out to a wider audience, but of course there is a catch 22: the media that are read by these people will probably not want to feature it because their readers don’t want to hear this sort of sound advice.
Hmmm… I think I am a bit cynical today. But realistic, too, I fear.
[Reply]
Thanks Michael,
I’m not sure. Perhaps you’re right. Where would you suggest? I’m all ears.
Cheers,
B
[Reply]
The first one would be Need Magazine, of course, but I think you have a whelk’s chance in a supernova (thank you kindly, Douglas Adams) to get an article like this published there. Not feel-good enough, and too critical of those who save the world. (Not my words, but taken from their motto: “We are not out to save the world but to tell the stories
of those who are.” I am not kidding you.)
Another one would probably be ODE, which I have seen lying around on the coffee tables of many of my do-gooder friends who I have (thank heavens) been able to dissuade from starting YAC in the aftermath of the tsunami, and Narghis, and every following disaster. No clue how likely you are to get it published there.
Both Need Magazine and ODE like good photography, so that might give you an in.
And then there are the mainstream media, of course.
Good luck — I would love to see this out there!
[Reply]
Thanks Michael,
If I can get the time, I’ll pitch it to them. Maybe a toned down version. This started out as a quick knock at Pixel, and turned into a post I’ve been waiting to write for some time. Maybe a little chippy though!
Cheers,
B
[Reply]
NEED reprinted one of my blog posts - just emailed me out of the blue and asked if they could. I can pass on their info if you like.
[Reply]
I think you are missing the point–Pixel Equity looks more like a missionary organization to me than one addressing poverty issues. They have determined that video games are a good that should be made available to children, and set out to address that. Your criticism misses the mark, because 1) They are not addressing issues covered by existing NGO’s (Penny Arcade’s initiative to get gaming systems into hospitals for sick children aside) and 2) no traditional NGO is likely to take on their project, as they would likely heap upon it the same level of scorn that you have. I also think that your scorn is unmeritedly harsh: Pixel Equity is not going to solve issues of systemic poverty with video games, but then, hundreds of NGOs and bilaterals, with billions of dollars of resources, have essentially made no progress there, either.
[Reply]
Brendan Reply:
June 23rd, 2009 at 7:45 am
Good points Sean. Personally, I don’t care whether you are (self?) classified as a charity, non-profit, missionary or whatever organization. If you’re trying to convince the public you’re actually doing good work, and you’re not, then you deserve the criticism. And you’re right in saying that many large NGOs, funders, agencies and institutions involved in traditional development deserve the same scorn. I completely agree. Scrutiny and criticism of the development system is far more important than taking a shot at Pixel Magic. I am just better at ranting about visible examples…
B
[Reply]
Hi Brenden - I’m the Web Editor for Ode. Just saw your post. I think these are all great questions to ask. Most of us do want to do good and offer a helping hand, but we don’t always know how because most of the issues out there are so complex. Like you said, just giving something away is not going to fix the big issues out there and in the long run might even make the issue worse.
Please feel free to share your thoughts on our website. We invite our readers to share their stories on our Exchange section. I know our readers – the intelligent optimists – will love to dissect this issue :)
[Reply]
Brendan Reply:
June 23rd, 2009 at 7:48 am
Katie - thanks for the reply. If I have a second, I’ll add it to Ode. I may even tone it down! And please understand that I’m not attacking the desire to do good (which I find deeply admirable), but the execution.
Thanks,
B
[Reply]
Here’s a test: if you knew that your good deeds would be totally anonymous, that no one would know what you did, that you (nor your produce) would derive no benefit: would you still do them? Or as Spinoza said it better: blessedness is not the reward of virtue, but virtue itself (often, I guess, paraphrased as ‘virtue is its own reward’.
[Reply]
Brendan Reply:
June 23rd, 2009 at 7:49 am
Doug - Anonymous donations are the highest form of giving, imo.
B
[Reply]
What convoluted grammar in my post! I meant, of course “you and your product would derive no benefit…”
[Reply]
I always ask myself that why people with all the good will are not doing the best…And I hear this so often that the problem is so complex and complicated: for sure it is. But why, then, we don’t sit and think and ask very hard questions? International development is indeed a complex issue, but is it more complicated than understanding how the universe works? is it more complicated than thinking what happened 10^(-15) s after big bang?! is the math or logic in economic and politics harder than math in particle physics or chemistry or what ever? Or may be finding the solution to have a fairer trade system is much harder than designing a giant detector? But i really don’t think so… This is the difference: on one side people focus and spend their entire life asking very very hard questions, trying to understand and solve one tiny problem, come up with a new idea based on so many others’ experiences: they move slowly but more effectively. But on the other hand, one small NGO is working in 100 different countries, and in each country they are working on 100 different sectors!! and of course they know the answer to many questions, they are right at many cases! they never say sorry we were wrong! (I know i am a bit cynical, but you know there are lots of examples…)
It always blows my mind when i think that in 40 years, 5000 people can think and design a machine that can answer the most fundamental and hardest questions, while on the other hand, many more people have spend over 3 trillion dollars and we are not much better off than 40 years ago!
don’t we really need pause of a moment and stop wasting many resources and just ask simple hard questions? Just say we don’t have all the answers…
[Reply]
Rogayeh,
The differences are in this:
1) Coordination - Development is hopelessly uncoordinated, and often conflicting. Nobody needs to be ‘approved’ to be a part, you just need to convince someone to give you money to ‘do good.’
2) Complicated vs. Complex. Tackling age-old physics questions is complicated. The relationships can be determined, as tough as it is to do this. Development is complex. Determining the relationships between the influencing factors is basically impossible, at least in anything resembling entirety.
Good thoughts,
B
[Reply]
I agree with the first comment, Development is indeed uncoordinated, and it makes a complex problem even more complicated!
Complicated vs Complex: Branden, i don’t think that’s the problem, In science also many times you even don’t know what are many unknown parameters… the point is that people really don’t care about feeling good, they want something accurate and spend their entire life focusing on some small things.. and that’s how we developed.
Lack of focus and coordination, wanting to “do good” without understanding the problems, not asking the right questions… are the problems, and not necessarily the complex nature of problem(that’s of course a big issue).
[Reply]
This is an issue whose time has come. I wrote about it in the first posting of my recently debuted blog open for business at my website http://www.deftsolutionsnj.com. I posited that ego can play a destructive role in the creation of superfluous organizations. There are many non-profits who provide quality services that duplicate other agencies providing quality services. Until the government stops handing out 501(c)3s like candy on Halloween, it may not change soon.
[Reply]
Brendan Reply:
June 26th, 2009 at 7:38 am
Interesting point, thanks Gail. But if they’re providing quality services, where is the problem? I have more of an issue with organization who are not, yet telling people that they are.
That said, you hint at an interesting point - accountability. When businesses don’t (eventually) turn a profit, they cease to exist. Non-profits can continue to exist, even prosper, by largely convincing people that they’re saving the world.
[Reply]
Wow. As someone who started a nonprofit hoping to change the world, this sets me back, makes me think, which is good. This is incredibly hard and incredibly hard work. I’ve worked 60 hour weeks for two years without pay, donated over $53,000 of my own money, and worry away many nights. And, yes, there are many moments when it feels really good: when the 2nd grader wearing her big sister’s shoes finishes her drum solo and tosses her sticks into the audience; when I see how diverse our youth orchestras really have become–and know that these kids even socialize outside of rehearsal. I will fully admit that we don’t have all of it right yet. We debate and argue and adjust and revise our programs constantly to do our mission better. When we are trying to implement a new solution to old problems–a solution that is working in Venezuela, but must be adapted to different conditions here in Birmingham, do we have to go all the way to the root causes? Should we not be doing it because others are already working on the root causes from a different angle? I believe that our program provides many levels of benefit to our constituents and our community. We’re succeeding better on some levels than others. We’re trying to improve on every level.
I see the proliferation of non-profits and wish I wasn’t part of a mob. There is a perception here that a 501(c)3 is a golden goose. Unfortunately, for many local politicians in the news recently, it was just that. Makes the uphill battle of becoming a legitimate cause even more difficult.
[Reply]
Brendan Reply:
July 17th, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Jeane: fantastic comment, thanks.
Personally, I’m less caught up on whether people have got to root causes, then that they’re actively trying, with their eyes open. So comments like this:
“Should we not be doing it because others are already working on the root causes from a different angle? I believe that our program provides many levels of benefit to our constituents and our community. We’re succeeding better on some levels than others. We’re trying to improve on every level.”
Make me believe that you’re seeing things well, and that whether your work was ultimately impactful, it was probably more helpful than someone else who did not ask questions like that.
And there’s nothing wrong with new solutions to old problems. That’s one of the main benefits of new start-up non-profits.
Great thoughts, thanks,
B
[Reply]
Another good example: http://aidthoughts.org/?p=295&cpage=1
Thanks to Matt,
B
[Reply]
Just came across this accidentally, and I must say I agree with the thrust of it. It seems that we’re all asked to donate to many charitable organizations and it can be difficult for many to choose who their money goes to. New sneakers for foster kids? That sounds worthy. Firefighers’ fund? Another worthy endeavor. Inner city literacy (certainly a cause that is near to my heart)? Stuffed animals
for kids in the cancer ward? Currently, this is what we do:
Monetary donations go to our church (which runs multiple charities–including an excellent homeless shelter that assists in job placement and sobriety counseling) and to Heifer International (supported via our church but also by us independently). I know of no other organization that has the impact Heifer does; they’re smart and don’t waste resources; they foster education and independence with a focus on sustainability.
Used clothing, toys, books, and games are donated to local organizations to use as they see fit.
Time and sweat is donated to other organizations–PTA, library/literacy council, hospice, soup kitchen, Habitat for Humanity, knitted hats for the children’s hospital, etc.
It is often difficult, faced with all the need around us, to choose wisely where to donate our resources. As much as I love the idea behind Toys for Tots, I have to remind myself that the twenty dollars I spend on a toy would be better spent on a flock of chicks for a family in Ecuador–a gift that, in time, will provide food, income, and education for not only that family, but an entire community.
[Reply]