Slog

News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

Monday, November 24, 2008

Re: Human Spam

Posted by Dan Savage on Mon, Nov 24, 2008 at 12:03 PM

They've got a better word for human spam in the UK, Dom: chuggers. The Guardian:

With their bright jackets emblazoned with the names of Britain's worthiest charities and their voluble youthful optimism, chuggers, a conflation of charity and mugger, have become a high street fixture with the power to inspire a pang of guilt in the hardest-hearted shopper.

But a survey of their tactics has found that some face-to-face fundraisers are not as good as the causes they represent. They have been caught out misleading the public about how they are paid, harassing shoppers who say they are not interested, and asking donors to lie on direct debit forms to help them meet their targets.

And I'm not the only person who thinks you shouldn't encourage chuggers by giving 'em money:

The charity watchdog Intelligent Giving, which conducted the mystery shopper survey, said almost all chuggers may be breaking the law and many are breaking the fundraising profession's own code of conduct. It is calling on the public to boycott them and force them off the streets.

And they do come to my door, Dom.

Share via

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • Newsvine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Email
 

Comments (29) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
The best thing is give em your leftovers if they say they're hungry.

If they're not hungry ... they shouldn't be asking for money.

Now excuse me while I ignore all the chuggers on the way to Bulldog News on the Ave.
Posted by Will in Seattle on November 24, 2008 at 12:11 PM
2
This is Seattle, not the UK.

If you just can't stand some people in your community spending their Sundays on some grass roots advocacy or organizing, maybe you shouldn't go to the Ballard market. Go to Whole Foods. Let the rest of us enjoy our community atmosphere.
Posted by whatever on November 24, 2008 at 12:12 PM
3
You know the funny thing about the First Amendment is that it even protects the rights of people you find annoying.

Why does Dan hate America and democracy so much?

Posted by Mr. X on November 24, 2008 at 12:18 PM
4
They come to all of our doors, Dan. But they come to our doors less than they did a decade ago, when they started more street canvasses. And the more they are successful "out there" the less the need to come to our doors at all.

And a derogatory name for something happening in the UK, doesn't change my perspective about what the ACLU is doing on the streets of Seattle.
Posted by Dominic Holden on November 24, 2008 at 12:19 PM
5
Dan is sounding more and more like Ken Schram - old, cranky and angry at the world.
Posted by get a grip on November 24, 2008 at 12:22 PM
6
You know those kids, usually black with really strong Southern accents and ultra-exaggerated politeness, selling magazines for some kind of "empowerment" scheme? We get those at least once a year. They are usually the victims of a shocking fraud, held virtually prisoner thousands of miles from home, herded and fed like slaves, beaten and raped.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/us/21m…

http://www.houstonpress.com/2008-07-17/n…
Posted by Fnarf on November 24, 2008 at 12:23 PM
7
The reason it is not spam is that it involves one real, physical human speaking at the same time and place as their potential listener. There is no outsize distortion of your ability to reach people when it is just you talking.

Spam is when you click your mouse and hit every address in your book, or use bots to email millions of random addresses. Even bulk rate postal ads pay fee which is proportional to the quantity of mail they send, but spam is fundamentally different.

I agree that it is annoying, but the word "spam" is simply incorrect.
Posted by elenchos on November 24, 2008 at 12:24 PM
8
What about those pesky pruggers (protest + muggers) who took over the streets a couple Saturdays ago?

Stop harassing people who don't want to be bothered, don't lie, and the problem is solved. I've noticed the canvassers on Broadway are much more tame lately -- if all canvassers were like that it would not be an issue.
Posted by jrrrl on November 24, 2008 at 12:26 PM
9
Case closed, that's all she wrote.

Now, what about the Marlee Ginter affair? Did she apologize? According to the Stranger she's no longer sucking off goats.

So, did she apologize?
Posted by would like to know on November 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM
10
The aggressivley friendly post-adolescents on Broadway fit the name. They all but order people to come over and shake hands while asking one to "help the children". Their so-called charity is a scam and they are the only children being helped because they get a percentage of the take.
Posted by inkweary on November 24, 2008 at 12:44 PM
11
Did Marlee Ginter come to your door and apologize? How come she's not blowing goats? She's now a fine journalist? What gives?
Posted by tell the truth on November 24, 2008 at 12:49 PM
12
@6 That's terrible! I don't buy magazines from door to door schemes because pressure sales annoy me in general, but I had no idea it was that bad.
Posted by beguine on November 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM
13
Marlee Ginter enslaved a bunch of goats to do background work on her tv news stories. At least, that's what I heard. Or maybe she's a fine journalist. I'm so confused.
Posted by change of face on November 24, 2008 at 12:58 PM
14
I don't know why everyone always complains about the doorbellers. I love the young activists from Washington Citizen Action, the ACLU and KC Dems. The WashPIRG doorbellers tend to be a little too far on the gamey side for my tastes, however.
Posted by Albert Hamilton Fish on November 24, 2008 at 1:03 PM
15
Thanks for the vocabulary word of the day. Do not support the chuggers. If you have a social conscience and some cash burning a hole in yer pocket use yer internet tubes to find the most worthiest bestest actual charity to send yer pocket-hole-burning cash to.
Posted by umvue on November 24, 2008 at 1:03 PM
16
@10 Isn't the children's charity they solicit for Savethechildren.org? That charity gets very high marks by charity rating groups. But I still hate that they put a Chugger on every corner in a four-block radius, so that I have to bob and weave around them just to get down the street.
Posted by Luckier on November 24, 2008 at 1:11 PM
17
Agree with #15 - if you want to support the ACLU or whatever, donate to them directly. A lot of times the people on the street asking for donations work for subcontractors and the actual charity gets very little of the money. The canvasser gets a cut and also whoever owns the subcontractor gets a cut. Check out this PI article, "State Tracks Least-Charitable Charities:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/3425…

Besides the fact that I don't have very much money and want it all to go to the organization, I don't want to support this fundraising strategy. Hopefully we'll see more actual grassroots activism from progressive organizations.
Posted by asteria on November 24, 2008 at 1:17 PM
18
@16 - those people most likely don't work directly for Save the Children, they probably work for some for-profit subcontractor.
Posted by asteria on November 24, 2008 at 1:19 PM
19
@ 17) Giving money directly to a nonprofit does not mean all of your money goes to the organization's work, exactly. All organizations have a large staff dedicated to fundraising--usually one of the largest in any successful nonprofit--called development. So whether you give online, in the mail, by phone, or to a canvasser on the street, some of your money is going to the staff that raises and administers the money. And to suggest that people in the street, talking about the issues of the day and raising money to address them is not "grassroots" enough is absurd. There couldn't be a more grassroots way to raise dough.

But without raising money on the streets, these organizations would raise less of it. You can't expect an organization to sit back idly and wait for people to send them cash. Those organizations die.
Posted by Dominic Holden on November 24, 2008 at 1:30 PM
20
This is nothing. Canvassers in this town are polite and nonaggressive, if you tell them you're not interested, they move on to the next person. And, for the most part, they're raising money for nonprofits.

The situation is far worse in New York. Since Manhattan is so dense and apartment buildings make it impossible to doorbell, tons of canvassers are on the streets. People shilling for products and services too. Since no one drives, it's impossible to avoid them, and they rarely take no for an answer.

Seattlites have it easy.
Posted by keshmeshi on November 24, 2008 at 1:30 PM
21
People do NOT always move on to the next person when you tell them no. Sometimes they begin shouting at you from across the street and continue while walking beside you or following you for half a block or so.

I am polite and say no thank you repeatedly, but if pressed I will glare at them and say no. Or just ignore them completely.

I try to empathize. I am sure their jobs sucks, but they shouldn't also bring the suck on themselves. And if it's that bad go get some other job. And leave us alone.
Posted by Nay on November 24, 2008 at 2:11 PM
22
I agree with @15 in terms of who shows at my door.

But ... you get people from KC Dems?

Wow, how does your neighborhood rate?
Posted by Will in Seattle on November 24, 2008 at 2:20 PM
23
Isn't Chuggers another name for Citibank?
Posted by Joseph on November 24, 2008 at 2:21 PM
24
Isn't goat blower another name for Marlee Ginter? Or did it get changed to fine journalist, without her issuing an apology?
Posted by pls. publish her apology kthxbai on November 24, 2008 at 2:33 PM
25
This is how organizations build a membership base. Why are you complaining about it?

Also, Dominic Holden writes a lengthy refutation of your original post, accurately pointing out the importance of canvassing to causes that you personally write about at length, and your only response is to imply that it might be illegal in England?

Better blogging, please.
Posted by TValley on November 24, 2008 at 2:46 PM
26
@25, welcome to the Stranger. This is a magical land where the "editor" can taunt a tv journalist for days on end, writing multiple times that she might be blowing goats and demanding an apology for a story she did, and then *poof!* suddenly said editor transforms her into a fine journalist, with no explanation of whether or not his ranting had any effect on getting an apology, correction, or redaction.
Posted by i am the eye in the sky on November 24, 2008 at 2:51 PM
27
You can't walk through Union Square in Manhattan without being barraged by Chuggers for Greenpeace and Children International, which, by the way, are both reputable nonprofit organizations. As someone who actually works in the field of development, I can tell you that this is the worst development strategy ever. Also, why on EARTH would I give out my credit card information to some kid in the middle of Union Square?! Are there people who actually do that?! I just tell them I'll go to the website and make a donation so that I know a portion of my donation is going to be paying for commission.
Posted by kerry121303 on November 24, 2008 at 2:53 PM
28
*isn't* going to be paying commission...sorry. Shud prooffrreeaadd butter.
Posted by kerry121303 on November 24, 2008 at 2:54 PM
29
I always tell em I hate kids, especially African ones. Works every time!!!
Posted by I hate kids on November 25, 2008 at 11:20 AM

Add a comment

 

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC
1535 11th Ave (Third Floor), Seattle, WA 98122
Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Terms of Use