lundi 20 juin 2011

Quand les petites phrases rapportent gros

Michele Bachmann, candidate républicaine aux primaires du parti républicain : « Plus je cause plus je palpe. »

Dans ce papier de Dan Eggen et T.W. Farnam paru ce matin dans les colonnes du Washington Post, les journalistes détaillent la technique des politiciens américains de faire feu de « petites phrases » pour accroître leur levage de fonds.

Michele Bachmann, others raise millions for political campaigns with ‘money blurts’

In the ever-evolving world of campaign fundraising, some politicians have stumbled on yet another way to bring in buckets of cash. Let’s call it the “money blurt.”

Here’s how it works: An up-and-coming politician blurts out something incendiary, provocative or otherwise controversial. The remark bounces around the blogs and talk shows and becomes a sensation.

And in the midst of it all, the politician’s fundraisers are manning the phones and raking in the donations.

Consider Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.), the tea party favorite and newly minted presidential candidate, who has made a specialty of raising money in the wake of bold and well-placed remarks. Shortly after accusing President Obama of having “anti-American views” during one cable-news appearance, for example, Bachmann took in nearly $1 million.

The use of money blurts could have a significant impact on the strength of some candidates’ fundraising efforts, which will come into focus next month with the release of fresh disclosure forms for GOP presidential campaigns. Bachmann aides have said she received a major boost with her appearance at a Republican debate in New Hampshire, though they did not release numbers.

The phenomenon marks another phase in the quest for money in politics, fueled by the eternal hum of the Internet, social media and 24-hour cable news. The tactic could prove especially valuable for insurgent candidates such as Bachmann who are likely to rely heavily on smaller donations for their 2012 campaigns.

“It’s a great way to attract a very high volume of small donors and drive excitement,” said Ron Bonjean, a GOP consultant and co-founder of Singer Bonjean Strategies. “If you’re in the money game and you say something controversial, you’ll have support from a very energetic core.”

The money blurt — spontaneous or not — is a close cousin to a technique called the “money bomb,” in which a campaign or its supporters designate a specific day or time period to raise a vast amount of cash and generate publicity. The best-known practitioner is libertarian favorite Rep. Ron Paul (R-Tex.), whose followers have used money bombs to raise as much as $6 million at a time for his presidential campaigns.

As for money blurts, perhaps the most famous example came in September 2009, when back-bench House Republican Joe Wilson (S.C.) yelled “You lie!” during an Obama address to Congress.

Within a week of the outburst, supporters had given more than $2 million to the little-known congressman, urged on by conservative bloggers and Wilson’s own campaign. His Democratic challenger cited Wilson’s remark in his own fundraising, prompting a sudden campaign arms race.

“Our office has been overwhelmed with phone calls, letters and contributions,” Wilson said several days after the incident.

Former congressman Alan Grayson, a liberal firebrand from Florida, attracted GOP condemnation in 2009 after he said on the House floor that the Republican health-care plan amounted to “Die quickly.” He quickly raised nearly $1 million.

lundi 13 juin 2011

Les « mères » de la place de Mai épinglées

Où sont passés les sous des mémés ?

Le quotidien de gauche britannique The Guardian publie ce matin un papier d'Annie Kelly sur le scandale qui frappe l'organisation qui a beaucoup fait pour dénoncer les excès de la répression militaire contre la guérrilla d'extrême-gauche durant les années soixante-dix en Argentine.

Annie Kelly ne s'est pas foulée et son enquête est superficielle. Il est fort probable qu'elle n'entend pas l'espagnol car elle ne donne aucun renseignement sur le contexte et sur le passé des escrocs. Heureusement, la presse argentine a fait son travail. Voir deux exemples plus bas.

Il est fort probable que nous n'en saurons pas davantage dans l'hémisphère nord sur cette affaire dans la mesure où les journalistes répugnent à mettre en lumière les scandales qui éclaboussent des organisations de gauche aussi emblématiques.

L'autre scandale concernant des victimes en Argentine est resté à ce jour sans écho en Europe. Les victimes des terroristes d'extrême-gauche font l'objet d'un traitement discriminatoire scandaleux alors que leurs bourreaux bénéficient de prébendes et fréquentent les allées du pouvoir.

Pour en revenir sur le scandale, il illustre un des obstacles majeurs au fundraising en Argentine, le manque de sérieux dans l'utilisation des fonds.

Scandal hits Argentina's mothers of the disappeared

Mothers of Plaza de Mayo's former legal adviser accused over misuse of funds as presidential ally fears election backlash

Annie Kelly in Buenos Aires

For more than 30 years the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo have been a symbol of courage against adversity and the enduring battle against injustice.

Faut pas pousser. C'est une vision unilatérale par une bobo qui débarque de la première classe de British Airways sans rien vouloir connaître du contexte. Attention, le reste du papier est de la même farine.

Clad in white headscarves, the Mothers first appeared during the dark days of the Argentine dictatorship, a group of ordinary women valiantly facing down a brutal military government as they silently marched in front of Argentina's national congress demanding information about their missing children.

But now the headscarf has slipped as the Mothers have become engulfed in a corruption scandal that has stunned Argentina and could threaten to destabilise President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner and her government, just five months before national elections.

Last week the group was forced to fire one of its most high-profile executives over alleged misuse of funds meant for government-backed social housing projects. Prosecutors accuse the group's former legal adviser Sergio Schoklender, his brother and more than a dozen others of fraud and money laundering and of siphoning off substantial chunks of public money into personal businesses. Media reports allege that while Schoklender earned the equivalent of £13,000 to help Argentina's poor, he acquired an 18-room mansion, a yacht and sports car. Schoklender denies any wrongdoing.
La presse argentine est moins révérentieuse.

Kirchner was reportedly furious when news of the scandal broke, particularly given her close association with the group. The Mothers of Plaza de Mayo split into two factions in 1986, and the largest and most powerful group – headed by the 82-year-old Hebe de Bonafini – is a huge political ally and public relations tool of her administration.

Kirchner's late husband, the former president Néstor Kirchner, went to great lengths to establish close ties with Bonafini and the Mothers, an alliance continued by her government after she was elected in 2007.

Few political rallies are complete without a white headscarf appearing prominently next to the president, who has staked much of her public reputation on championing human rights.

Kirchner's government has also helped the Mothers transform themselves from an advocacy group into a powerful anti-poverty organisation.

Since Bonafini declared in 2006 that "there is no longer an enemy in the Casa Rosada [Argentina's seat of government]", the Kirchner cabinet has handed the Mothers more than 187m pesos (£28m) to complete thousands of social housing projects. Last week opposition politicians claimed that only 35% of these projects had so far been completed and that the Mothers and federal officials had shown a shocking failure of responsibility to the Argentine people.

Influential union leaders and the heads of other human rights groups including Las Abuelas, the group of grandmothers working to identify babies stolen from political prisoners during the dirty war of 1976 to 1983, have all called for Bonafini to be formally investigated.

Bonafini, who helped found the Mothers of Plaza de Mayo after the disappearance of her two sons and daughter-in-law, denies knowledge of any wrongdoing and has accused the Schoklender brothers of being "traitors and scammers".

"The Schoklenders are one thing and the Mothers are a completely different thing," she told Argentine national radio. "We personally carried on with the battle to vindicate our children … and no one is going to hurt our public image."

Government officials are struggling to contain the scandal and preserve the integrity of the group's reputation.

Argentina's foreign minister Héctor Timerman stated that any attack on Bonafini was inextricably an attack on the government itself.

As the scandal gathers pace, some analysts have suggested it could cause Kirchner to delay announcing whether she will run for re-election in October as her party frantically works to distance itself from the allegations.

Shaming the dictators

The Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo came together during Argentina's military dictatorship between 1976-83 when some 30,000 suspected people were "disappeared' in state-sponsored violence against suspected leftwing subversives. In 1977 mothers of some of the disappeared started to meet every Thursday outside congress in Buenos Aires to demand information about their missing children. With the return to civilian government in 1983, the Mothers resisted the decision to pardon "dirty war" officials and vowed to continue their fight for justice.

In Argentina the enduring memory of the Mother's bearing placards covered with the faces of their disappeared children has helped them become a powerful political and social force in the decades since the fall of the dictatorship. They are widely considered Argentina's moral compass as the country still struggles to atone for the crimes of the past. They have also become one of the world's most renowned and respected human rights organisations.

Voici la version des mères de Mai :

Voici ce que dit un journaliste réputé :

vendredi 10 juin 2011

Xénophobie light

Une campagne australienne qui, déclinée en France, ferait hurler les tenants de la bienpensance.

Pour en savoir plus, cliquer ici.

jeudi 9 juin 2011

Nouveau cru pour la Fondation de service politique

Le nouveau messade de prospection pour la Fondation de service politique, un association d'orientation catholique qui mène une politique de prospection très dynamique à la suite du succès de leur pétition contre l'entrée de la Turquie dans l'Union européenne.

La nouvelle mouture de leur campagne de prospection (encartée dans le périodique l'Homme nouveau) est une déclinaison très remaniée de la précédente.

A-t-on gagné au change ?

Voici la première page de l'édition 2011 :

Comparée à celle de l'an passé :

La trame des arguments est très proche, parfois les textes sont identiques.

Toutefois, l'approche 2011 est plus théorique, plus abstraite. Dans l'édition précédente, le texte faisait référence aux mères en difficulté qui enrochaient l'argumentaire dans l'humain.

En revanche, le texte est plus aéré, les points forts de l'argumentaire mieux mis en valeur.

Notons que la référence au besoin de locaux plus vastes a été abandonnée.

Laquelle des deux versions aura la préférence des donateurs ? Bien difficile de le prévoir.

J'aurais aimé une approche totalement différente, insistant moins sur des argumentaires propres à faire plaisir aux énarques qui composent l'équipe de la FSPP, et davantage sur une problématique humaine.

Mais voilà, souvent nous nous heurtons à l'ego des signataires.

Ce matin, un de mes interlocuteurs a refusé un texte que je lui proposais parce qu'il ne correspondait pas à l'idée qu'il se faisait d'une lettre signée par lui.

Il veut des chiffres, des notes, des références, des paragraphes avec des 1, des 2 et des a, des b, en un mot, tout ce qui fait fuir le lecteur qui n'est pas expert comptable.

Bref, mon interlocuteur n'a pas envie de convaincre des donateurs potentiels, il a envie de plaire aux membres de son Conseil d'administration.

A ce train là, on ne va nulle part.

La dérive de Caritas condamnée

Que penserait Pascale Clark de ma campagne ?

Une association caritative qui entre dans le monde dangereux du fundraising et de l'humanitaire tend à perdre son identité originelle au profit de la « feel good attitude » que l'on retrouve dans les ONG internationales, de Greenpeace à Amnesty ou encore le CCFD.

Le contact avec le monde feutré des fundraisers caritatifs, qui pour la plupart sortent du même moule, l'embauche d'administratifs qui ont déjà une expérience dans d'autres organisations, tend à gommer les spécificités, à effacer ce qui ne passe pas bien dans une réunion professionnelle.

Comment un fundraiser bien mis pourrait-il présenter à ses pairs une campagne non consensuelle ou qui ne colle pas avec les normes d'acceptabilité ?

Au fond de lui-même un fundraiser français se demande : « Que vont-ils en penser à Libération ou aux Inrocks ? Qu'en pensera Pascale Clark sur France Inter ?»

Il en résulte une tendance au conformisme, comme en témoignent les campagnes des Scouts de France, qui se répand inexorablement.

De temps en temps, le client se rebiffe.

C'est ce qui s'est passé fin mai lors de l'Assemblée générale de Caritas Internationalis.

Voici comme le quotidien la Croix, bien fait, mais lui aussi aussi terriblement conformiste, présente les faits sous la plume de Frédéric Mounier à Rome. Pour une analyse plus proche des motivations du Vatican, lire le numéro du 4 juin 2001 de l'Homme nouveau.

Rome appelle les Caritas à un examen de conscience

Réunis à Rome du 22 au 27 mai pour leur Assemblée Générale internationale, les 165 Caritas à l’œuvre dans le monde sont appelées par le Saint-Siège à raffermir leur identité catholique.

C’est dans un climat tendu que s’est ouverte à Rome, dimanche 22 mai, l’Assemblée générale internationale de Caritas Internationalis. Depuis plusieurs mois, des tensions étaient perceptibles au sein de la galaxie des 165 Caritas dans le monde.

Cette confédération décentralisée, qui célèbre son 60e anniversaire, est l’un des tout premiers acteurs mondiaux dans la lutte contre les pauvretés, et la première ONG catholique. Soutenant 24 millions de personnes dans le monde, employant 440 000 salariés et 625 000 bénévoles, ces 165 Caritas, fédérées à Rome par Caritas Internationalis (CI), s’appuient chaque année sur des ressources, privées et publiques, de 5,5 milliards de dollars (3,9 milliards d’euros).


Cette galaxie a globalement mal vécu le veto mis par le Saint-Siège, le 15 février dernier, au renouvellement du mandat de Lesley-Ann Knight, actuelle secrétaire générale. Le Secrétaire d’État, le cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, avait alors écrit aux conférences épiscopales, chacune responsable de « sa » propre Caritas locale, pour leur faire part de sa décision, inédite dans l’histoire de CI, mais fondée en droit.

Le statut canonique de Caritas Internationalis, promulgué par Jean-Paul II le 16 septembre 2004, prévoit en effet cette possibilité, et confie au conseil pontifical Cor Unum, présidé par le cardinal guinéen Robert Sarah, le suivi de l’association.

Dès l’ouverture de l’assemblée, dimanche 22 mai, le cardinal hondurien Oscar Maradiaga, président sortant de Caritas Internationalis, a confirmé son soutien à L-A Knight, louant « son professionnalisme, sa foi profonde et son engagement envers Caritas », et affirmant, face aux très nombreux représentants de la Curie romaine présents : « La façon dont elle n’a pas été autorisée à se présenter a suscité du mécontentement au sein de notre confédération, surtout parmi les nombreuses femmes qui travaillent pour Caritas dans le monde. »


Cette Assemblée se trouve à la croisée des chemins. D’une part, Rome, s’appuyant sur des arguments théologiques et juridiques, l’appelle fermement à réaffirmer son identité catholique, son caractère propre, source de l’œuvre de charité. L’encyclique « Caritas in Veritate », signée de Benoît XVI, en est la boussole.

D’autre part, l’impératif de lutte contre les injustices économiques, sociales et politiques, qui constitue le quotidien des militants des Caritas, les conduit à prendre des engagements aux frontières de l’Église.

Faut-il promouvoir la charité ou lutter contre les injustices ? Marquer l’action caritative du sceau évangélique, ou l’envisager en partenariat avec tous les hommes de bonne volonté ? Ces termes s’opposent-ils ou se complètent-ils ? Autant de questions qui ont sous-tendu les débats, dès l’ouverture, dimanche.


Le cardinal Maradiaga a ainsi affirmé : « Nous n’avons pas un modèle de vraie Caritas, mais ces diverses organisations et communautés sont toutes appelées à être Caritas dans la vérité. Vous avez uni des personnes de différentes religions et convictions dans la communion des actions. Je suis fier de votre travail et de votre façon d’être Caritas. L’histoire du salut est l’espérance pour tous les opprimés. La justice est la première voie de la charité. »

En revanche, le cardinal guinéen Robert Sarah, président du conseil pontifical Cor Unum a lui, appelé à un « examen de conscience et à une analyse de la nature juridique et du fonctionnement de la Confédération », il a précisé : « Nos organismes de charité se situent dans l’Église et non pas à côté d’elle. Une Caritas qui ne serait pas une expression ecclésiale n’a pas de sens ni d’existence. L’Église ne peut être considérée comme un partenaire des organisations catholiques. »

Et il a conclu : « Le pain est important, la liberté est importante, mais la chose la plus importante de toutes est notre foi au Dieu d’Amour et notre agenouillement pour l’adorer et le servir en servant les pauvres. »


À sa suite, le cardinal Secrétaire d’État, Tarcisio Bertone, s’exprimant au nom du pape, a été très clair : « L’activité caritative de l’Église, comme celle du Christ, ne peut jamais se limiter à l’assistance aux besoins matériels, quelle qu’en soit l’urgence.Une assistance humanitaire qui ferait abstraction de l’identité chrétienne et adopterait une approche, pour ainsi dire, neutre, qui chercherait à plaire dà tout le monde, risquerait (…) de ne pas rendre un service à la hauteur de la pleine dignité de l’homme. (…). En résumé, l’Église ne doit pas seulement faire la charité, mais la faire comme le Christ. »

Ce soir, un nouveau président devrait être élu. Le cardinal Maradiaga, a priori, se représente. Mais le Français Denis Viénot, qui présida CI par intérim de 2005 à 2007, après une longue expérience au Secours catholique, dont il fut le Secrétaire Général, est également sur les rangs.

Le nouveau Secrétaire général sera ensuite choisi par le nouveau comité exécutif jeudi soir, parmi deux candidats : le Français Michel Roy, actuel directeur du plaidoyer international au Secours catholique, ou l’Américain d’origine tchèque Karel Zelenka, représentant de Catholic Relief Service (CRS, agence de développement de l’épiscopat américain) en Afrique du Sud.

Au-delà du slogan de l’Assemblée « Une famille humaine, zéro pauvreté », le véritable enjeu de l’Assemblée sera de mieux définir les relations entre l’association sur le terrain et les instances romaines de contrôle, avec toute la question de savoir où est mis l’accent : la charité ou la justice.

mercredi 8 juin 2011

De l'importance de dire merci

Je savais dire merci avec style

J'ai souvent insisté sur l'importance vitale pour le maintien et le développement d'une relation à long terme avec les donneurs d'une politique sérieuse de remerciements.

KTO vient de nous donner un tout récent exemple de ce qu'il ne faut pas faire. Une lettre plate, sans intérêt.

Toutefois, je dois admettre à leur décharge deux points. Ils postent une lettre. Et ils la postent rapidement. Il est vrai qu'à tout prendre il vaut mieux une mauvaise lettre que pas de lettre du tout ou arrivant trois mois après le don.

Pour aborder la question avec le soutire, voici un post d'Harry Mount dans The Telegraph sur l'art de feu la princesse de Galles dans la rédaction de lettres de remerciement.

Princess Diana, patron saint of the thankyou letter

Thankyou letters - Champion of a dying art

The auction of a collection of letters from Princess Diana to an old kindergarten teaching colleague shows the princess in a touching, determinedly jolly, ultra-thankful light.

Highgrove, she writes shortly after her wedding, “will just be a cosy roost for Mr and Mrs Wales to roost, with bright colours of course!”

While her marriage was falling apart, and her husband was reigniting his affair with Camilla Parker Bowles, Diana continued writing away in the upbeat, coy, exclamation-mark-littered, traditional school of thankyou-letter writing. On her fifth wedding anniversary in 1986, she writes, “The five years have flown by and what with two little men to look after, its [sic] not surprising!” What’s more, she follows the crucial rule of thankyou-letter writing: always go over to the second page.

There are spelling mistakes and little sign of inspiration but, still, the letters reflect well on Diana. For all the intellectual shortcomings of the traditional Sloane education, there is one gleaming compensation – manners.

The art of the thankyou letter is in steep decline, killed off by the internet and supposedly busier modern lives; an excuse, in fact, for the triumph of selfishness over thoughfulness. But the thankyou letter lingers on, in Sloaneworld and in royal circles – Prince Charles is said to hand-write dozens of letters each week.

As the phenomenon goes into decline, the arrival of a letter on the front-door mat - however tritely or badly written – brings even more of a thrill; particularly if, like Princess Diana’s letters, the letter is topped with a coronet and the words “Kensington Palace”.

Le fundraising à l'honneur dans le Figaro

La philanthropie, le fundraising et les fundraisers à la une !

Le fundraising et les fundraisers seraient-ils en passe de sortir de l’ombre ?
Une fois n’est pas coutume, les fundraiseurs sont sous les feux de la rampes grâce, d'abord, au cahier que consacre ce jour Le Figaro (partenaire du 10 °Séminaire de la collecte de fonds) au mécénat, à la générosité et aux associations. Au menu de ce cahier, qui donne une image à la fois dynamique et professionnelle de notre métier : le portrait d’une « fundraiseuse » de terrain, Claire Dognin (fondation des apprentis d’Auteuil), un article consacré à la structuration des métiers du fundraising, un article présentant l’AFF et bien d’autres papiers de fond sur le mécénat culturel, l’enseignement supérieur ou la fiscalité.
Dans le cadre du partenariat qui unit l’AFF est Le Figaro, ce cahier sera distribué aux participants du 10° séminaire francophone de la collecte de fonds qui se tiendra du 28 au 30 juin.
Coïncidence ou tendance ? Le même jour, Radio Notre Dame choisissait de consacrer l’émission « La voix est libre » à la philanthropie. Heure durant laquelle Gabriel de Broglie, Chancelier de l’Institut de France, Jérôme Kohler d’Initiatives Philanthropiques et Yaële Aferiat, Directrice de l’AFF ont pu échanger à bâtons rompus sur les enjeux du développement de la philanthropie en France. La professionnalisation - à la fois de mécènes et des organisations faisant appel à la générosité – était ici aussi au rendez-vous, et ce fut l’occasion de renouveler un message fort de mobilisation de l’ensemble des acteurs de la société civile pour développer une culture philanthropique dans notre pays. Retrouvez bientôt sur facebook le lien vers le podcast !.
Voilà donc une belle façon de célébrer en beauté l’année des 20 ans de notre association et de contribuer au rayonnement de nos métiers !

mardi 7 juin 2011

Savoir remercier, KTO peut mieux faire

La télévision catholique KTO conduit une vigoureuse campagne de recrutement de donateurs sous l'égide de la Fondation Notre dame.

Il leur reste une chose importante à apprendre. Savoir remercier leurs donateurs.

Voici la lettre qu'un ami a reçue.

Elle mérite d'entrer d'urgence dans la clinique spécialisée de Lisa Sargent.

Comment peut-on manquer à un tel point de sensibilité pour négliger une pareille opportunité pour communiquer avec ses donateurs ?

Ce texte semble avoir été rédigé sur un coin de table un jour de pluie. Il transpire l'ennui, l'envie de partir à l'autre bout du monde faire autre chose.

Un bon conseil à Olivier Braillon, le directeur de la Communication et des ressources. S'il n'aime pas écrire des lettres de remerciements qui ressemblent, même de loin, à ce que doit être une lettre de remerciements, qu'il en confie la rédaction à des professionnels.

Même si ça lui coûte quelques picaillons au passage.

Une étude sur les courriels

Une analyse intéressante de l'usage du courriel par le sociologue espagnol Miguel del Fresno publiée sur le site Marketing Comunidad.

Miguel del Fresno

Hace una semanas se pusieron en contacto conmigo desde Yahoo ofreciéndome analizar y comentar como sociólogo los resultados de una investigación a escala europea, que estaban finalizando, sobre el uso del email aprovechando que van a lanzar su nuevo Yahoo! Mail. La idea de pensar alrededor de algo en lo que no reparamos porque lo hemos asumido dentro de la más absoluta normalidad me fascinó. Y acepté. El email es un servicio tan omnipresente y ubicuo en nuestras vidas que apenas hay estudios empíricos más allá de las descriptivas tasas de penetración, y a partir de ahí raramente se profundiza más en su usos supongo que debido a esa normalizción absoluta con la que está presente en nuestras vidas en el día a día. Así que después de darle un buen repaso a las tablas de la investigación hice un breve documento de conclusiones. Ahí van:

El email se ha convertido en un servicio de comunicación glocal. Por un lado, el email es global en su uso como demuestra las altas tasas de penetración en todos los países y en diferentes estratos de población. Y por otra parte, el email es adaptado por cada persona, grupo o país de forma local a sus usos y costumbres. Internet no ha cambiado solo la manera en que se hacen muchas cosas sino, aún más importante es cómo las personas adaptan Internet a sus vidas. Esto se refleja en muchos de los datos que aporta la investigación, por ejemplo, como más de la mitad de los británicos usan el email seis veces más en el baño que los franceses.

Más allá de las cuestiones más o menos anecdóticas el email ha alcanzado una extraordinaria tasa de aceptación y uso debido a múltiples factores. Para entender la penetración social del email hay que verlo más allá de la tecnología y, por tanto, incidir en la utilidad y valor social del mismo. Las características que han hecho del email un servicio de comunicación glocal son:

· Facilidad de uso: no se necesita ninguna habilidad especial ni conocimientos si el interface está bien diseñado
· Gratuidad: ningún coste a la que se ha sumado la creciente oferta de espacio gratuito que no limita el almacenamiento e intercambio de imágenes y/o videos
· Ubiquidad: la posibilidad del acceso web al email desde cualquier lugar (hogar, hoteles, salas de espera de aeropuertos, cafés, etc.), momento (siempre disponible) y tipos de dispositivos (web, portátiles, tablets, móviles, tv, etc.)
· Multiuso: al ser un servicio que es útil tanto desde el punto de vista profesional como personal.
· Privacidad: ofrece garantías razonables de privacidad y un menor nivel de exposición social que los mensajes públicos en redes sociales.
· Instantaneidad: es tan útil como los SMS pero sin coste por envío y permite, en caso de desearse, ser utilizado para comunicaciones más extensas como las tradicionales cartas postales (¿tiene Yahoo chat asociado al correo web?).
· Expresividad: se trata de un canal idóneo para la expresión y emotividad, rápido y eficaz, como demuestra su uso en las relaciones personales.
· Organización: coexiste de forma natural con el teléfono móvil en las familias con progenitores que trabajan fuera del hogar a la hora de organizar de forma eficiente y en tiempo real, sobre todo en las ciudades, el día a día de las familias y parejas.
· Alternativa: el email también se presenta como sustitutivo del teléfono móvil debido a su bajo coste e inmediatez si no se trata de casos de urgencia.
· Sociabilidad: como herramienta social permite mantener un contacto abierto de forma constante con amigos, familiares o conocidos con altas dosis de informalidad, lo que hace aún más ágil su uso.
· Normalización: el compartir con otros la dirección de correo electrónico es un acto social de creación de vínculos de relación tan normalizado como la del número de teléfono.
· Redes sociales: el email tiene su supervivencia garantizada ya que no compite con las redes sociales, de hecho está redes sociales se basna en el email como identificador individual y sirve como forma secundaria de comunicación dentro de las redes sociales más populares. De hecho se plantea como el complemento necesario y obligatorio para maximizar el uso y utilidad de las redes sociales.
· Grafo social personal: el email es una herramienta de cohesión, mantenimiento y activación de la red social de cada persona debido a que permite mantener vivo el vínculo, una suerte de cordón umbilical relacional, que es posible activarlo en cualquier momento con cualquier persona de la red social.

El servicio de email se presenta como un potente canal por sí mismo y, al mismo tiempo, un eficaz complemento a otras tecnologías y canales de la actividad social, personal y profesional, actual. Gracias a sus altas dosis de valor para sus usuarios y su amplia penetración de uso en todas las culturas parece tener garantizada una larga aceptación en el día a día.

lundi 6 juin 2011

Savoir parler au téléphone

Le sourire, et un bon script, sont la base du succès.

Au téléphone, le sourire se voit. Telle était la phrase répétée par mon interlocutrice voici une vingtaine d'années quand j'écrivais un article pour un encyclopédie de marketing publiée alors par les éditions Atlas.

Cette entreprise de services téléphoniques formait ses opérateurs à sourire car l'expérience prouvait qu'une personne affable et souriante était mieux en mesure de faire passer son message qu'un opérateur mal embouché.

Je ne suis pas un grand expert de fund raising téléphonique, mais je l'utilise assez pour savoir que le résultat final dépend non seulement du sourire de l'appelant, masi aussi de la qualité de son script.

Voici un article de Joe White, disponible sur le site de SOFII qui apporte un point de vue sur le travail préalable à la conversation.

Joe White.

In the following article, veteran telephone fundraising specialist Joe White, president of Left Bank Consulting in Canada, critiques the three sample telephone scripts on this page. These scripts are real and were used in fundraising campaigns. Names have been changed to conceal each organisation’s identity.

Critique of sample script no. 1

There are a number of problems with this script. Firstly, the wording is awkward; it is not written in a natural conversational style. While thanking donors at the start of a phone script is a basic requirement of telephone fundraising, making an assumption about what a donor ‘knows’ is a mistake. Lots of donors don’t read your direct mail or newsletters. Instead, use the personal connection to deliver something different, new and interesting.

This script doesn’t engage the donor. It focuses on what the charity is doing and the sentences are far too long: 39 words, 27 words. Shorten your sentences and be conversational because you face losing donors with scripts that drone on and on.

The first ask is wasted as it is written in the third person. At its most basic level, fundraising is people asking people for money. Keep the ask simple and personal. In this script, what exactly does ‘reach out to more animals’ mean – getting an email address?

I prefer scripts that help callers to make a personal connection with the donor, such as ‘We really appreciate your support of our programmes to help animals that we both love. Do you have an animal – perhaps a pet dog or cat?’ Using this technique helps to make a connection between the caller and the donor. However, callers have to be careful not to lose control of the phone call by letting the donor chatter away for 20 minutes about Fluffy, her pet cat.

The wording of the second ask is also clumsy. When you write a phone script, take a few moments to read your sentences out loud to see if they pass the ‘conversation test’. Would you really say something like this? Scripts need to provide the callers with support. They should use concise language that can frame the discussion.

Finally this script continues to be all about the organisation – I don’t think there is a single ‘you’ in this script. It should be full of phrases such as ‘you understand’ or ‘you helped to make this possible’ or ‘you love animals’ and should be full of thank yous.

Critique of sample script no. 2

I don’t think calling people for a ‘brief update on our work’ is very compelling. In this script, why not start with ‘I’m calling to talk to you about the pending increase in electric rates. The increases are outrageous.’ Interject some emotions as it will involve and capture the attention of your donor.

It’s good to remind donors (especially lapsed ones like those addressed in this script) that they have benefitted (saved money) because of the efforts of the charity. However, the figure of 10 billion dollars is hard for most people to grasp. Instead it might have been better to say that ‘Free Hydro has saved rate payers like you and me about $120 per year.’ This will immediately get their attention and their gratitude.

The first sentence in the third paragraph has 52 words. This does not resemble any conversation that I’d be likely to get into. See if you can shorten this sentence and make the information punchier. For example ‘Free Hydro is working to help you by suing in court if we have to. We’re lobbying the politicians and we’re putting pressure on the decision-makers.’

When you are trying to have a personal one-one-one conversation, don’t use the third person, ‘We are calling past supporters of Free Hydro and asking them to help with a generous contribution.’ Write something like ‘I am calling you because you have supported us to keep utility rates down. I’m calling for your help again now’ instead.

In the second ask, don’t apologise for asking for financial support. Be proud – you’re working for this great and important cause. Make sure your scripts get this across. Try, ‘This is a great cause. I’m sure if you were able to you might consider another gift. I’m sure we can find a good level for you.’

Notice the language ‘working to hold politicians accountable’ versus ‘we’re holding politicians accountable.’ Why use two verbs? Be direct, assertive, proud, and confident. People give to urgent, exciting and dynamic causes.

The third ask is lame. I’d rather go right to ‘thanks very much for your time. Before I go, will you match last year’s gift of $25 to help us make a difference?’ You’ve done all of the explaining and this person just wants to get off the phone by this time. Give him a final chance to make a gift and then end the call.

Critique of sample script no. 3

I like this script. It thanks the donor and reminds her or him of the goals and importance of the college.

However, problems arise in the second paragraph. It states that the board of trustees raised fees and it is hurting low-income students. It then uses nuanced language as a call to action and weakly suggests that ‘we have to do a bit more.’ This is hardly motivating – we can all do a bit more.

The third paragraph successfully keeps the donor’s focus on ‘needy students’ and puts the significant date of the end of December into the donor’s mind.

Mentioning a credit card in an ask in almost assumptive. It’s as if the donor has already agreed to make a gift and is just deciding whether to use MasterCard or Visa.

The second ask uses a great technique called the ‘symbolic ask’ which seeks to create a logical or emotional connection that makes it easier for the donor to nod ‘yes’ which is close to saying yes to a contribution.

The third ask is right to the point and short: ‘help us reach our goal’ and ‘you can close the gap.’ It is designed to make it easy to say yes.

Remember that 70 per cent or more of calls end as refusals. Staying on the phone, connecting with donors on a personal level and getting them nodding/agreeing during your call are what good fundraisers should do. The script is a tool that guides and offers them examples of language that can facilitate getting a yes.

Quelques bons courriels à étudier

L'association Network for good offre quelques exemples de bons courriels.

A visiter ici.

samedi 4 juin 2011

La traite compassionnelle

Les adoptions internationales confortent la « feel good attitude » de riches bobos au prix du déracinement de l'enfant et de la destruction de ses liens familiaux et culturels.

Cet article de l'Independent rappelle la triste réalité des adoptions internationales que la bien pensance ne veut pas voir.

Profit, not care: The ugly side of overseas adoptions

In rural Nepal, where the going rate for a healthy orphan is $5,000 (£3,000), some 600 children are missing. They were taken by agents who came to the villages promising that they would educate the children and give them a better life in the capital, sometimes for a steep fee. The children never returned.

Between 2001 and 2007, hundreds of Nepali children with living parents were falsely listed as orphans and adopted by high-paying Westerners thousands of miles away. One widow, according to the child protection charity Terre des Hommes, was unable to feed her seven children and sent them to an urban "child centre", where three were quickly adopted without her consent by rich Westerners. Another, Sunita, was told by sneering authorities that she would never see her child again. She doused herself in kerosene and struck a match.

Tens of thousands of babies, toddlers and young children are now adopted across international borders every year, according to Unicef. There has been a decline since 2004, but in 2009, the last year for which reliable figures are available, the top five adopting countries alone took in 24,839 children from overseas. Half of these, some 12,753, went to the US, with Italy taking 3,964, Spain and France around 3,000 each, and Canada 2,122. Britain, where very strict rules apply, has very few overseas adoptions.

The Nepali adoption industry is part of a broader child-trafficking trend which saw some "orphans" from the rural provinces of Humla and Jumla sold to circuses. Western prospective parents, however, are the preferred revenue stream. Adoption alone brought $2m per year into the country before 2007, when the programme was suspended pending an international inquiry which uncovered many cases of child abduction and improper financial gain.

Nepal is far from the only country where international conventions on the rights of children have been breached as unscrupulous middlemen trade toddlers like livestock to desperate Western couples. The process is simple: parents in Europe and America contact an adoption agency in the country of their choice, either privately or via a home agency. Money changes hands, and their papers and the papers of the child are checked, the latter being easy to falsify. More money changes hands, and the child goes home with new parents.

Many of these adoptions are legitimate, beneficial, and bring nothing but joy to the new parents and hope to the child. But there is another side. The possibilities for corruption and back-hand profit are immense, because the emotional stakes are so high. "When people want something so very much, like a baby, the amount of money they are prepared to throw at it can be limitless," said Andy Elvin of Children and Families Across Borders. "In some countries, those amounts of money on offer mean that people do things they wouldn't otherwise do, and that's the problem."

According to Terre des Hommes, there is now, in many cases, "an industry around adoption in which profit, rather than the best interests of the child, takes centre stage". The business is a seller's market, because there are far fewer orphans in need of adoption than Western prospective parents wishing to adopt. Although many children adopted in this way do enjoy loving, stable homes with their new families, the number of truly "adoptable children" in overseas orphanages is smaller than the number of prospective parents.

Even in the aftermath of wars and natural disasters, those without a single relative to provide proper care is insufficient to meet the current demand for exotic orphans. After the tsunami in Japan, many Westerners inquired as to when and how they would be able to adopt a tsunami orphan, only to be told that any child left parentless by the flood waters would be rehoused with extended family.

There is sometimes a distinct missionary element to this charity. Christian lobby groups exhort congregations to demonstrate their faith by adopting foreign orphans from countries that know neither Jesus nor Walmart. Networks exist to help individual ministries organise funds to pay the orphanages and middlemen who supply the babies. Last year, 10 Southern Baptists "obeyed God's calling" by smuggling 33 Haitian children – most solicited from living parents – across the Dominican border to await adoption by American believers. All 10 missionaries were jailed, but Christian adoption lobbies in the United States are putting increasing political pressure on organisations such as Unicef to ratify their agenda rather than raising ethical issues about the human rights of the children involved.

There are more mundane reasons why Western couples might wish to adopt overseas rather than be matched with one of the tens of thousands of children in need of adoption at home (many of whom do not match, in age or background, the ideal child some would-be parents want). One Ukrainian tourist website boasts that "Ukraine has very few restrictions" and adding that unlike many countries, which seek to eliminate unfairness with rigorous matching systems, "prospective parents have the chance to choose the child they wish to adopt". "Ukrainian children are typically family-oriented, caring, make attachments easily," enthuses the site, as if it were selling a new breed of house pet. "They look to their new parents with adoration."

Mr Elvin, of Children and Families Across Borders, said: "There is an almost inexhaustible demand for very young children to adopt. People looking to adopt are generally looking to adopt children under the age of three, and preferably under the age of one. That's your essential problem. In America, which is the biggest importer, if you like, there are 23,000 children in the foster system waiting for adoption, but most of them will be aged five to 16. There's a very rich, powerful and well-resourced inter-country adoption lobby in the United States."

The leading supplier of babies for adoption is China, which sent 5,078 children abroad in 2009. Russia sent 4, 039, and 4,564 came from Ethiopia, one of a range of countries which, through lax regulation, had a vogue as a ready source of babies. It used to be Vietnam, then Guatemala (at one point an estimated one in every 100 babies born there was sent for adoption to the US). Ethiopia, which, until recently, was sending 50 children a day out of the country, announced a clampdown in March. No one yet knows where the agencies and desperate parents will turn next.

No matter how faithful, well-meaning or loving the prospective parents, there can be no doubt that parts of the international adoption industry can play fast and loose with the human rights of children. Those at risk are not only those who are traded, but those who remain. In some countries, international adoption is beginning to replace less profitable systems of child support.

The routine export of unwanted Korean babies to America, a 60-year tradition dating back to the Korean War, has directly prevented what a 1998 study called "alternatives for parentless or abandoned children". Most Korean "orphans" are, in fact, the children of unmarried or impoverished mothers. And while a system exists whereby those babies can simply be sent abroad, there is no reason for Korean culture to accommodate them. In other words, not only is there no global "orphan crisis", but the international adoption trade actively hinders the establishment of proper welfare provision in "sending" countries.

An international treaty designed to prevent babies from being directly traded has been only intermittently effective and, in some cases, seems to have given this well-intentioned traffic in human beings a stamp of authority. The 1993 Hague Convention on Intercountry Adoption requires its 81 signatory countries to provide regulatory bodies to oversee adoption but, despite these stipulations, abuses and child trafficking persist.

According to Unicef, "systemic weaknesses" in the Hague system facilitate "the sale and abduction of children, coercion or manipulation of birth parents, falsification of documents and bribery". A key weakness is the convention's failure to prevent signatory countries from adopting from non-signatory countries, so many adoptees to the US and Europe come from states with no obligation to oversee the process.

Even where trade is done with convention signatories, "the abuse, sale of or traffic in children" is only prevented indirectly. Although non-signatories are more poorly monitored, some of the worst reports come from countries, such as China, which have signed the convention. Nor does the treaty prevent financial gain in the transfer of children – only "improper" financial gain.

Organisations such as Unicef, the Red Cross, Terre des Hommes and Save the Children agree that adopting countries must take more responsibility to ensure that inter-country adoptions take place "with the best interests of the child as the primary consideration". The painful truth is that, as Terre des Hommes puts it, no adult or couple has "the right to a child", not even if they believe that by exercising that right they may be saving a foreign baby from poverty in "heathen" lands.

Across the world, there are thousands of parentless children needing adoption, and there is nothing remotely wrong with placing children with caring families. Unfortunately, the international adoption trade has become a murky trench of money-making and malpractice. Extant systems of oversight are rickety, but there is much that can and should be done to tighten up the provisions of The Hague convention to ensure that adoption does not become a byword for benevolent human trafficking.

vendredi 3 juin 2011

Un avis de bon sens sur la dernière campagne d'Amnesty

Amnesty should get over its Messiah complex: the people of the Third World don’t need to be 'saved'

The campaign video above captures pretty well why I won’t be wishing Amnesty International a happy 50th birthday. It features Amnesty’s Western supporters looking gobsmackingly smug as they imagine themselves waltzing into the chaotic Third World to free prisoners from filthy jails, or remove the blindfolds from the oppressed, or take the guns out of the hands of brain-warped, warlike children. It rather confirms the Messiah complex of Amnesty’s activists – We can make the blindfolded see! We can save the children! – and their view of the world as being neatly split between a caring West and a brutalised South. In this narcissistic notion that the Third World is packed either with brutes who must be condemned or innocents who must be saved, Amnesty has carried into the twenty-first century the Kiplingesque view of foreign peoples as “half devil, half child”. On its fiftieth anniversary, anyone who genuinely cares about the fate of people who live without democracy and freedom might do well to ponder the difference between patronising those people and offering them real solidarity. Amnesty does way too much of the former, and hardly any of the latter.

Dites à ma mère que je suis pianiste dans un bordel

Ne dites pas à ma mère que je suis dans la publicité-- elle me croit pianiste dans un bordel

Cette phrase de Jacques Séguéla m'est revenue une fois de plus à l'esprit quand j'ai raccroché voici quelques jours le téléphone après une conversation avec un possible client.

Une association française avec un grand potentiel pour le fund raising venait de subir un revers en justice, perdant le procès intenté à des tiers dans une cause ayant reçu une très grande publicité dans les médias.

J'ai repris contact avec son président pour lui suggérer de transformer cet échec en succès grâce au marketing direct.

Je lui ai expliqué comment cette déconvenue pouvait se transformer en une superbe opportunité pour rebondir, recruter de nouveaux donateurs et recueillir des fonds pour financer l'appel et une campagne en direction de l'opinion publique.

Après m'avoir écouté, il m'a répondu qu'il n'était pas intéressé parce qu'il avait assez d'argent et qu'il ne croyait pas au fund raising car lui même n'ouvrait aucun courrier de cette nature.

Enfin, il m'a sorti son argument massue : « et je trouve que ce que vous faites est immoral ».

La conservation s'est poursuivie par mes contre-arguments, notamment en citant le nombre faramineux d'oeuvres pieuses qui font appel au marketing direct.

Rien n'y a fait.

Voilà comment j'en suis venu à me souvenir de cette phrase de Jacques Séguéla et aussi à ce que ma propre mère m'avait dit un jour : « tu ne fais pas un métier convenable».

Les vieux et le fund raising

Diana Athill : «il ne faut pas prendre les sous des petits vieux». Alors, on fait quoi nous les fund raisiers ?

Voici l'entretien du Guardian de ce matin avec Diana Athill relatif au scandale de la maltraitance des vieux au Royaume Uni. J'ai été frappé par la phrase :
You can't make money out of old people

C'est pourtant la base du fund raising.

Why the private sector shouldn't touch social care

'The ghastly thing is, a great percentage of homes are run by private companies. And you don't set up an old people's home as a private company unless you think you're going to make a profit. You can't make money out of old people."

The last time I saw Diana Athill was about six months ago, in Shoreditch House, where she was reading Desdemona, a short story she'd written in the 1960s that won an erotic fiction prize in Transatlantic Review. (If you have no interest in the lives of elderly people and would prefer to read something whose lines will be ringing in your mind for months, then I direct you to this collection: Midsummer Night in the Workhouse.)

I didn't at the time realise that Athill was even in a care home, but she had been for a year and a half. The Mary Fielding Guild is, she warns me, rated one of the best six care homes in the country. This is in no way representative of the way elderly people are treated in residential places. It looks genteel, and it's in a genteel part of town, but as she says, "We're fed, warmed, cleaned, kept entirely, on what we pay. And what we pay is considerably less than you can pay in far worse places."

Can this possibly be true? It feels like an Oxford college, with a cheerful atmosphere and deeply pleasant surroundings. But if the cost isn't much more than somewhere run by Southern Cross, then something has gone seriously wrong. Some people in care homes are able to live proper lives, while other people pay the same rates and get bottom-of-the-pile, collectivised treatment.

Athill has never, in my brief experience, been sloppy with her facts, let alone wrong, and this is no different: care homes, be they atrocious or Ritz-for-the-old, are all in the same ballpark. You can, if you really shop around, pay less than £400 a week (I didn't find any for less, but Southern Cross have taken their prices off the internet; or maybe they never posted them). And you could, if you were determined, pay more than £900. But around £550 a week seems to be where most places are sited.

This is as pure an argument as you need against the private sector going anywhere near social care. Where need is serviced by the third sector (Mary Fielding is a trust, run by "high-minded individuals. And I really do mean they're high-minded"), it is civilised. Where it's serviced by people trying to turn a profit, it is not.

"This place is a dream …" Athill continues. "I'd been here for about a week and I thought, 'what is it about this place that's so marvellous?' And I realised, it is goodness – an extraordinary feeling of goodness. None of these people are anything but genuinely kind. That's the secret of a decent place. You can't get it if you're a remote company, running a scruffy little place and trying to make some money out of it.

"A very nice young woman who comes and does my feet, she's a visiting chiropodist, she goes to quite a lot of homes. I said to her, what are the other places that you go to like? And she said 'Don't ask'. It's frightful what can go on in these places; you've got these helplessly dependent people who've got limited funds, and you've got to do everything for them."

Clearly, residential care is incredibly expensive whoever you are, wherever you are, and Athill says, "If I had daughters, I'm afraid I would probably be taking advantage of them. Daughters are sweet, and if you're sufficiently nice to your daughters all your life, they tend to rally round their mums when they're old and frail.

"I did it myself. I didn't quite go and live with my mother, but I changed my plans and I used to work three days in London and do four days with her. And I'm very glad I did."

There is a mischievous lack of rue in her voice, as if tacitly to note that daughters might be sweet, but they make plenty of demands of their own.

Equally clearly, it's a source of tremendous anxiety to old people that they flog their houses to fund this care, and then don't know how long the money will last. But the point is, a well-run care home can be a wonderful place. Athill says she can work and concentrate better here than she did when she lived independently.

'If I'm reviewing a book or something, it's lovely. I can spend the whole day without worrying about anything; no dog to walk, no shopping to do."

I wondered whether one felt one's age more, living in sheltered accommodation or living at home, and Athill replied, "I think how aware one is depends entirely on one's health. As long as you don't have aches and pains, and forget everything all the time, you feel just like you always did. But you do, when you start to get aches and pains, become aware of it."

None of this is easy. Athill remembers packing up her house, and says feelingly, "I had total panic, the awful horror of giving away your things. It was very, very, very painful – so painful that I ended up spending two days in hospital thinking I was having heart failure."

But there is one quite simple proof here, which is that you can, for the money, have a civilised life. If the business model is broken for Southern Cross, if life is miserable in the main tranche of care homes, it is because the private sector is unsuited to this work.

mercredi 1 juin 2011

Les pauvres sont riches

Lucky day: Laurie Harrison, from Clitheroe, winner of the vintage Rolls-Royce which was generously donated by Bill Richards to be raffled for Help For Heroes, a charity which helps wounded soldiers.

The Roller in a raffle: £5,000 raised for charity from car donated by ex-miner worth £15,000!

When Nathaniel McMaster went out looking for raffle prizes to raise money for wounded soldiers he was probably counting on a few bottles of wine and perhaps some homemade jam.
So the 15-year-old was astonished when one man handed him the keys to a 1972 Rolls-Royce Silver Shadow.
Former miner, Bill Richards, 62, now a social club landlord, donated his pride and joy to charity after being moved to tears by the stories of courage and tragedy from the frontline in Afghanistan.
Now his Silver Shadow Mark One has been won by a classic car enthusiast who bought two £1 tickets when the car was the top prize at a raffle for Help For Heroes.

In all, the raffle, which was held at a steam rally, raised £5,000. Unfortunately, the Rolls was worth around £15,000.
Last night, however, Nathaniel was just delighted that Help For Heroes would be benefiting.
‘I believe in my country,’ he said. ‘I just want to help out my country.’

The teenager said he was amazed when Mr Richards told him he could have the car. He had been at a car boot sale with his mother Diane, 39, when Mr Richards approached.
Nathaniel said: ‘I do lots of car boot sales for Help For Heroes and Mr Richards came up and said “I’ll give you a Rolls-Royce”. I presumed he meant a toy, then he said it was a full-sized one with 80,000 miles on the clock.’
Mr Richards’ late wife Angela had suggested he donate the car after seeing on TV some of the terrible injuries suffered in Afghanistan.
She died of cancer at the end of last year and Mr Richards wanted to honour her memory.

Fundraising: Nathaniel McMaster, who wants to join the Army, raised £5,000 for Help For Heroes.

The grandfather said: ‘The car was not being used. When you see these lads and girls coming home the way they are, I thought it might raise some money to help.’
Classic car fan Laurie Harrison, 59, a part-time jazz musician, was playing at the Chipping Steam Fair near Clitheroe, Lancashire, and bought the winning ticket. He said: ‘I still can’t believe I won it.’
Mrs McMaster, of nearby Leyland, said: ‘I’m so proud of my son and it is amazing to think he was able to land himself a Rolls-Royce as a prize when the most people would hope for is jars of jam and a bottle of wine.’

La puissance des images

Dans un post sur les Scouts de France, j'avais analysé leur médiocre choix iconographique. Voici un article qu'ils auraient intérêt à lire pour mieux comprendre la puissance des images et des idées qu'elles véhiculent.

Androgynous Male Photo Too Sexy for U.S. Magazine Cover Censored by Bookstores

If you try to pick up the latest issue of Dossier Journal magazine at either Borders Bookstore or Barnes & Noble, you will notice the photo on the cover is covered by opaque packaging. The two major booksellers have determined the cover to be too provocative for their newsstands.
On the cover is male model, Andrej Pejic, shirtless. Pejic, however, has a very female-looking face and the stores have determined that he looks too feminine to be a male. The gender-bending model himself is a worldwide sensation, having appeared in runway shows modeling both male and female clothing.
The 19-year old Pejic was born in Bosnia to a Serbian mother and a Croatian father. The family moved to Melbourne, Australia, when he was eight. Pejic was discovered by a modeling scout at the age of 16 while working at a McDonald’s restaurant.
Since his discovery, Pejic has been noted for his androgynous look, and in Paris fashion shows this year he walked both men’s and women’s shows for designer Jean-Paul Gautier and men’s shows for Marc Jacobs. At the Paris show he even modeled a wedding dress for Gautier. During the most recent New York fashion week, Pejic modeled in five menswear shows and four womenswear shows and has ridden a global wave of popularity in fashion circles with his “femiman” look. He currently ranks as number 11 of the top fifty models on
According to the Huffington Post, they spoke to Dossier Co-Founder and Creative Director Skye Parrot, who explained that the bookstores asked for all copies of the magazine to be placed in “opaque poly bags because even though they knew Pejic was a man, he looked too much like a woman.”
Parrott went on to tell Huffington Post that it’s only the American copies that are being censored, which leads him to believe that the booksellers feel the cover would make potential buyers uncomfortable. Parrott says that it’s Pejic’s looks that make the cover interesting.
“He’s topless, you can see that he’s a man,” Parrrott told the Post, “but if you look at his face, he looks like a woman and he’s so beautiful, he’s both in that picture, in a way. I think that’s what’s interesting about it.”