The other day, this very large direct mail package arrived in my mail box. Yes, that is a ruler next to it – the envelope measures more than a foot tall and nearly 10 inches wide.
The message is “MASSIVE injustice demands a MASSIVE response”, but if anything, I think the huge package does a disservice to the cause it calls the reader to support.
First, the recipient is addressed “Dear Friend”. Amnesty International is asking me to take action, but it can only address me as Dear Friend? They spent all this money on the contents of the package, which include a four page letter, two pages of petitions, address labels (that actually DO have my name on them) and a return envelope, but they can’t splurge on personalizing the greeting?
Second, I really wonder about the performance of a direct mail piece that has two asks – sign the petition and give money. Yes, we all want to engage our donors in the work that we do. But, I don’t think we should ever mix messages. If you are asking for money, let’s hope it’s on the heels of true donor engagement, not stuffed into the solicitation package.
Third – and I thought this went out in the 1990’s – the offer is a free Amnesty International totebag with a gift of $25. Do you really want donors that come in to the organization because of a tote bag? Remember all the churn and burn we’ve seen throughout the years in direct mail? Premiums may bring in donors, but how passionate are they about the mission of the organization? Will they stay, become monthly donors, and leave bequests?
I find this piece to be very retro 1995 and it makes me wonder if the pendulum of progress towards personalization, true donor engagement, and mission-driven direct mail has swung back the other way. Is Amnesty International trying on the bell bottoms of direct mail fundraising and hoping they’ll come back in style?
