Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/14/us/animal-charity-investigation/index.html?hpt=hp_t2

This is the second major revelation that large charities have spent the majority of their fundraising to pay off Quadriga Art, a direct mailing service. Only a fraction of the funds collected actually go to their intended recipients. (Animal shelters, disabled veterans, ect....) The rest goes toward paying off Quadriga Art, which states that their "aggressive strategy" in direct mail marketing is a "successful strategy."

So if you donate to any major charities, or are considering donating, please do the homework and find out if they're affiliated with this organization. I don't doubt that as scrutiny increases, there will be more charities found that are significantly in debt to Quadriga and not meeting their charitable obligations elsewhere.

[Urist Imiknorris]

a) Bastards.
b) Quadriga.

[Putnam]

My grandmother has told me about how we need antitrust laws for non-profit companies, since, at least here in Washington, one company owns nearly all the food banks.

[Iknowbetter]

You obviously don't know anything about direct mail marketing or building databases.  The CNN report is so one sided it makes those of us in the Fundraising business sick.  CNN's rating are so bad they are saying anything that will capture people's attentions.  If yo noticed last night at the end of the piece, Adnerson Cooper had to say that not all Charities are bad.  That is because so many Non-Profit organizations are so angry at them for being irresponsible with their reporting.

None of these organizations owe 1 penny to Quadriga Art.  The programs they create are completely funded by Quadriga and the organizations have NO RISK (zero - 0). If the programs fail, which they do from time-to-time, Quadriga bears the loss, NOT the organization.

The other part that isn't being shared because of the "ambush" tactics, that make for good ratings, is that all these organizations have received a portion of the money that has been donated.  But because of the high initial costs to build a significant database of active donors, Quadriga must get paid first.  There are so many costs for the programs they are running.  How else would they pay for the materials, postage and staff costs to run the program??

So before you all go off spouting about things you know nothing about, ask a professional about their profession and whether a report or statement is correct.  Otherwise as is the case here, you and all the others are making incorrect statements and hurting all the other organizations that do so much good for so many in need of help!!

[nenjin]

So when the article says multiple charities are several million dollars in debt to Quadriga, it's just lying? Pardon me if I'm going to take the word of any news agency over a company spokesperson.

The only part of your post that holds any water is "not all charities are bad." Considering I didn't state that charities were bad, I don't know what you're on about. I have no problem with charities. The fact AC says that the end of the article "not at all charities are bad" has exactly fuck-all to do with Quadriga, which is not a charity.

Or how about that no one at Quadriga will go on record with their name when discussing this issue? Or the fact that Congress decided it was a serious enough issue to launch its own investigation?

But thank you, random anonymous internet spokesperson, for your clearly even-handed and thoroughly researched input. If you'd like to pony up any proof, as opposed to just going "Nuh uh" feel free.

Oh wait, I have some.

In 2010, SPCA International owed $8.4 million to Quadriga Art LLC and its affiliated company, Brickmill Marketing Services, according to publicly available Internal Revenue Service 990 tax records.

You wanna take another crack at that whole "no one is at any risk" thing again, sparky? Ah wait, never mind, you're just a damage control bot that came here specifically to defend your company. Your credibility is going through the roof.

[Iknowbetter]

I have nothing to do with Quadriga. But I have worked in the direct marketing business all my life and spent time helping companies do fundraising.

If you know anything about public relations and the media, which is obvious you don't, you would know that news organizations only make money of they sell their product.  60 Minutes and many others like them have made a living ambushing companies and ONLY showing us sound bites of what they believe the consumer will like the best.  I know people at CNN because of my industry background and they say Quadriga has tried to provide information that is not being discussed.

So don't be dupped by the media.  This is not the first time the meidia has gone after Non-Profit organizations.  There are some very bad people out there.  Why do you think the Telemarketing industry has special federal regulations for soliciting money?? Oh yeah, you aren't from the advertising business so you can't answer that.  Get your facts straight before you make slanderous statements. And lastly, a company spokes person wouldn't take the time to respond to your dribble.  That too is another rule of PR!!

[nenjin]

Again, they have proof. What do you have, other than your gums flapping? But let me guess. The IRS is in on it with CNN to fake tax records that show charities several million dollars in debt to Quadriga and giving out a miniscule fraction of their donations to the actual recipients. All part of the "conspiracy" against direct mailing too?

Don't let me stop you though. This is highly entertaining to read.

[Moghjubar]

slanderous statements

Oh noes!  Lies and slander!  Be careful nenjin, you might get sued for re-posting news stories and discussing them on a forum!

Also IKnowbetter, welcome to the bay12 forums, we hope you enjoy your stay and discussion about Dwarf Fortress Quadriga Arts.

[nenjin]

For more fun reading, go google Terri Crisp to see the caliber of people that are involved in this, and the kinds of shenanigans they've been up to for the last 5 years.

Oh noes!  Lies and slander!  Be careful nenjin, you might get sued for re-posting news stories and discussing them on a forum!

Thanks. My journalism degree more than prepared me for how to not libel and slander people. It also prepared me for dealing with scumbag PR people.

Also, iknowbetter, slander is an oral communication. Libel is printed. You might want to go take a refresher course.

[GlyphGryph]

Come on, you don't need a degree to know this guy's PR. He practically admitted it. If, somehow, he isn't, he's a pretty good actor.

[Agdune]

That said, the statement of media bias in reporting is an extremely valid one. Mebbe it's just because I'm Australian (where this exact issue has been flavour of the month since that whole 'phonetapping, extortion and incredibly widespread corruption' thing in the UK and almost all our major media is owned by that same corporation) but yeah, while I'm not willing to accept what has been said by either party as completely true, I'm actually going to be more cynical regarding a for-profit organisation's reporting of an emotionally charged subject than that of some random on the internet.

The basic points he raised are valid; there are a crapload of perspectives on the issue which we should know are not being addressed (and many which could not be, without the article basically being a thesis on the matter) and the mainstream media has a long tradition of going after easy targets, then piling on hyperbole and emotion for the sake of ratings (Hell, Kent Brockman was created as a parody of this exact tendancy, "stories on supermarket prices and dogs with credit cards"). If 'charity fraud results in puppies suffering' isn't an emotionally charged subject, what the hell is?

News organisations using their influence to push the agenda of their owners/members isn't exactly unheard of, and there are alot of reasons for individuals/organisations to screw other individuals/organisations over. e.g. in Aus there's currently a major political scandal involving an MP who claims that his old union boss framed him for hiring hookers with union funds. The organisation brought in to assess the situation eventually returned that the MP had acted improperly. It later came out that the second in charge of that organisation is the husband of one of the involved parties in the scandal and if the MP's accusations are correct, would have used her influence to further incriminate the MP, to protect both her husband and herself (as his accusations involve her being responsible for a huge amount of fraud). Add to that the fact that the news organisations reporting on this matter have been accused of bias (as that MP being removed from parliament would force an election and a government less hostile to the News Limited corporation would stand a good chance of being elected)... You can see how these apparently simple matters can get amazingly complicated when more and more people start getting involved? By now the water's so muddied by hyperbole, accusations of lies and misconduct and competing interests that I doubt the objective truth is ever going to be found out, but hell if that's going to stop the media from reporting as if all the facts are in. After all, if there's an investigation going on, there must be SOME guilty party, right? So let's just shotgun some emotional turmoil in there, SOME of it must be true!

I'm not saying that there's no issue here and you should all move along, but also don't jump down the throat of the only guy who isn't joining the emotion bandwagon (even if he is being a dick about it) and look at this critically. I don't think many of us are taxation experts and neither are the journalists who cobbled together that article. Yes, the IRS is apparently conducting an investigation, but that does not guarantee anything untowards has happened, only that the possibility seems apparent from an outside perspective. We have no idea of the accounting tricks used by those organisations. Accountancy and Economics are tertiary degrees FOR A REASON. That shit ain't simple and there are a hell of alot of legit tricks you can use with your balance sheets to cut costs which on paper look like incredibly horrible decisions (throwing a pile of money into a debt, then recycling it through some other means isn't that much of a far-out trick) that work out in the end based on the taxation laws of the jurisdiction they're based in.

Let the investigation take place and use evidence from THAT before deciding that something has definitely happened. Maybe they're corrupt. Maybe they're stupid. Maybe the journalists who made this story are stupid and the real story is nothing like the 'PUPPIES BE SAD' one they've farted out in an afternoon. There's bugger all evidence in that article that can't be subjectively interpreted.

[Megaman]

Man, you know a company's pathetic when it googles itself and sends angry PR people to defend it on the internet.

[kaijyuu]

Hey, I do that all the time.



...or would, if anyone ever talked about me D:

[Agdune]

Guys, I don't imagine he's PR. Nobody paid to do PR on the internet (or even doing it for free) would get so indignant about the points they're discussing. They'd hopefully also refrain from using multiple instances of punctuation on the end of a sentence ( !! ?? ). They might also chose a more innocuous name than "I know better". Or use spell check. Or good Grammar. Or sentence structure. I don't think we're facing a corporate spy here, guys, unless it's the most brilliant double-subversion ever.

[Cthulhu]

I remember a few funny public scandals where PR shills got way worse than what this guy is doing, to the point where they made their companies look bad.

Something about digging up personal information about people and posting it in their comments maybe?  I don't remember exactly.