Do you HAVE needs, or do you MEET needs?

Kay Sprinkel Grace reminded me of some great truths of fundraising at the DMA Nonprofit Federation Leadership Summit in Tucson last week. One of them was:

"People don't give to you because you have needs; they give to you because you meet needs."

One very good and one very lousy email arrived within days to confirm her thoughts. First was this one from MotherJones:

Dear Friend,

A few days ago I wrote to describe how Mother Jones had hired veteran reporter James Ridgeway after he’d been fired by the Village Voice when they closed their Washington office. Since then, you might have seen reports of other significant newsroom cuts, including the announcement, by Time magazine, that as part of a 650-person reduction in staffing, it was laying off the extraordinary investigative team of Don Bartlett and Jim Steele. Last week the Washington Post announced that 70 newsroom staff were taking offers of early retirement.

The gap between the news needs of Americans and the ability of the commercial press to provide for them is getting cavernous. But long ago Mother Jones pioneered a model for producing high-quality investigative reporting that doesn’t disappear when corporate profits are squeezed. This is the time when the independent, non-profit press – and Mother Jones specifically – can step up to the need. That’s why we hired Ridgeway as our new Washington, D.C., bureau chief and that’s why Mother Jones is increasing our reporting staff in both San Francisco and DC, and why they all will be reporting for both Mother Jones magazine and MotherJones.com. We’re building a home for investigative talent at Mother Jones, but we need your support to do it.

Basing journalists inside the Beltway does not come cheaply, and we’re happy to say that both advertising and subscriptions are paying part of the freight. But Mother Jones was set up as a non-profit thirty years ago in part so that we could insulate our reporting from certain kinds of commercial pressures. We have always been able to depend on contributions from readers like yourself to cover a portion of our investigative expenses, and I’d like to ask you to help us pull off this latest expansion.

We need to raise $45,000 to cover the operating costs of the D.C. bureau till the end of the year. Would you be one of a thousand people to kick in $45 to the Mother Jones Investigative Fund?

Of course, contributions of any size will help us get there. And all gifts will be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks!

Jay Harris
Publisher

It set forth a clear opportunity, a specific need it can meet, even a bit of a vision, along with a very specific ask. Now consider this one from the National Libertarian Party:

Dear Rick,

The Libertarian Party needs your help.

A major election is only 145 days away and with it is a great opportunity to move the Party forward and to steer our nation in a more libertarian direction.

The nation is ready for change. American voters are waking up to the realization that the two-party system offers no solutions for our nation. They are finally realizing that the Republican and Democratic Parties exist simply to maintain their own power and ignore the problems of our nation.

We need a strong Libertarian Party that will put our nation back on track.

But right now, we can't fully take advantage of this opportunity without your help.

For over four years we've carried a monthly average of over $108,000 in debt. Right now, we owe $104,000 in debt with virtually no cash reserves.

Every month we manage to scrape by while the two major parties build larger and larger war chests that they reserve for campaign season.

It's past time to significantly reduce this debt and to build a reserve of funds that would allow us to address opportunities in the media and elsewhere for the benefit of our candidates and the Party.

This one is all about how much they need my money, and not a bit about what needs they'd meet if they had my money.

Which email would make you click? Do your emails look like the former, or the latter?