The Role of Social Media in Enhancing Nonprofit Communication and Fundraising Strategies

Introduction

Social media networks have in the last ten years risen to prominence, emerging from technology and internet developments, changing how people and businesses around the world interact daily. In the modern world, businesses in every sector have shifted their efforts to social media to harness these benefits. More specifically, the charity sector has not been left behind because it requires social media to achieve international prestige. Social media is hosted by the internet platform that can be used to reach numerous people.  The application of social media tools like Twitter and Facebook to communicate, attract traffic to the website of an organization, and increase awareness are some of the few means through which charities have accepted the new technology as part of operations (Wong & Jusoff, 2011). In the for-profit sector, humanitarian crises have to be covered to increase public awareness to the public and to develop the desire to donate online. Thus, social media could be perceived as an efficient, quick, and trustworthy method for creating awareness among the public (Shier & Handy, 2012). The advent of social media has created room for communication potential for both individuals and organizations charities in the Western world continue to adopt social media networks for communication purposes, so it is essential to assess their efficacy in terms of delivery. The purpose of this essay is to explore the effectiveness of four social media platforms (Facebook, YouTube Instagram, and Twitter) by analyzing them in the context of the nonprofit sector.

Literature Review

There is an emerging literature within the nonprofit sector on social media and it has been used in this section. This section will provide a review of existing literature. The main parts are the definition of the nonprofit sector and social media, social media and nonprofits, and the theoretical Model- Dragon Effect Model used.

The Non-Profit Sector

The nonprofit and charity sector comprises a myriad of institutions and organizations that serve primary facets of society (Salamon, 1999). Organizations in the not-for-profit sector are described by terms such as nonprofit, philanthropy, voluntary, non-governmental organization, and charitable organization, among others. Salamon (1999) contended that six characteristics can be used to describe a nonprofit organization: (i) an entity that is formally under the law; (ii) private; (iii) no receipt of profits; (iv) self-governing; (v) voluntary, and (vi) of public interest.

The concept of the social sector or the not-for-profit sector is used to describe organizations established with the aim of not making profits. Not-for-profit is a term that is used to describe the kind of organizations that do not earn profits and engage in social activities such as humanitarian activities and charities. In most cases, not-for-profit organizations are charities that are created with the social aspect, rather than the economic element in consideration. Hopkins (2013) pointed out that a nonprofit organization is driven by a social mission and it is legally limited in terms of how it uses its acquired funds. Non-profit organizations engage in charity or philanthropy work (Hopkins, 2013). Charity organizations could be small, medium, or large.  Unlike profit organizations which are profit-driven, not-for-profit organizations do not share revenues generated. In addition, the founders of it engage in social and environmental activities that can be used to benefit the large population.

In the United Kingdom (UK), there are more than 180,000 registered charities or not not-for-profit at offer social services to society (Quinton & Fennemore, 2013).  Chikoto and Neely (2014) noted that the tendency of need for charitable services has led to an increase in the number of organizations in the United States of America (USA). These charities have shifted from traditional communication and fundraising activities to the use of social media.

Social Media Defined

Social media can be described as an online platform that has gradually developed in the recent past, and it is used to help organizations achieve their goals. Additionally, social media plays a significant role because other than gathering online information, it is also used to share knowledge and information, communicate, and create awareness with a wide array of individuals. In the end, social media is a communication tool that is adapted to exchange ideas and opinions. Barefoot and Szabo (2010) describe social media as an online media platform that is composed of applications that use internet platforms and technology to collaborate, interact, and share content between two or more parties. Similarly, Weinberg (2009) posited that social media is related to information and experiences sharing as well as perspectives via the use of community-oriented websites. Thus, social media is used by people and organizations to create and share information as well as acquired experiences through the use of the internet platform. Kanter and Fine (2010) defined social media as the combination of digital tools that are not only inexpensive and easy to use, but that allow people to develop and control their photos, stories, and videos to share with others at no cost at all. Summarizing is to say that social media is a highly audience-focused medium that allows people to share solutions to social and business issues.

Social media is applied by organizations for marketing purposes. For example, social media Facebook, ok, and Twitter allow users to promote interaction and, share information and content (Barefoot & Szabo 2010). A social media marketing tool, social media is applied to help an organization promote interactions and communication with a targeted audience, thus creating a brand identity and brand awareness. Conversely, promoting website traffic is enhanced (Safko; 2010; Safko & Brake, 2009). Therefore, social media amplifies content marketing efforts and improves the marketing efforts of companies (Lee, 2013). Marketers use social media tools to promote and create awareness among consumers (Smith & Vardiabasis, 2010). Consequently, organizations that use social media can reach the targeted audience and experience exponential growth. Both small and large organizations are currently using social media channels to identify improvement areas, communicate with the audience, and monitor the patterns of their audience (Schaefer 2014). The common types of social media tools are such as YouTube, Instagram, Facebook, and Twitter. Table 1 below is a summary of the common social media tools, unique qualities, focus, and applicability.

Table 1: Social Media Tools: Source: Author.

Facebook: Briefly, Facebook was established in 2004 by Mark Zuckerberg, and it has its headquarters in California. Facebook is now the largest social media tool with over 2 billion monthly active users. The tool allows people to share videos, broadcast live, share messages, and communicate. Recently, Facebook incorporated a feature that allows its users to raise money under different categories such as emergencies, natural disasters, education, and publicizesises (Smith, 2014).

YouTube: As the second largest search engine in the world, YouTube is one of the social media tools that influence SEO. It can be used to share videos and communicate with people across the globe. The tool was established in 2005 and purchased by Google in 2006, and it is operated as one of the subsidiaries of Google. As a social media tool, YouTube allows users to share educational videos, short original videos, and short and documentary films.

Instagram: Instagram was developed by Kevin Sytrom and Mike Krieger in 2010, and it is used to share videos and photos privately. The app has more than 250 million users and the Facebook-acquired application has emerged as one that can be used by not-for-profit organizations. Other than English, it is available in other 33 languages. Additionally, Instagram Stories allows its users to share photos and then add them to Instagram stories. It also allows users to broadcast themselves.

 Twitter: Twitter was founded in 2006 by Jack Dorsey, Biz Stone, Noah Glass, and Evan Williams. Twitter is an online social networking and news service that allows users to post as well as interact with messages referred to as “tweets”. The messages are restricted to only 140 characters. Twitter is used as a source of breaking news. It has more than 319 million monthly active users.

Social Media in the Non-Profit Sector

Social media is used in the nonprofit sector to engage supporters and solicit donations, which are the two basic foundational tasks for charitable work (Ogden & Laura, 2009). With the continued increase in technological advancement, organizations across the nonprofit sector have found new ways that enhance the use of social media, including relationship-building and information sharing. Nonprofits apply social media in several ways that depend on their goals and strategy and goals. Some of the activities that are conducted via social media are presented in Table 2 below.

Table 2: Uses of Social Media by Nonprofit Organizations

Quinton and Fennemore (2013) established that international charities, especially the Western ones have embraced social networks, whereby the majority of them (90%) use Facebook, while Twitter (60%) and 45% on YouTube in that order. In an attempt to develop relationships with their followers, the main priority for charities is to use social networks such as Facebook and Twitter (Lee & Ahn, 2013; Sriramesh, Sanchez, & Soriano, 2012). Social media networks boost viral marketing, as they act as electronic word of mouth which is a fast promotional tool (Hausmann, 2012). In addition, social media continues to replace the traditional communications paradigm because it requires limited resources and time to achieve the set goals (Mangold & Faulds, 2009). Ogden and Starita (2009) explained that the increased use of Facebook among nonprofit organizations is based on its platform that “allows users to advocate for and raise money for any non-profit” (p. 3).  Other social media tools such as Twitter and YouTube are used by organizations for fundraising purposes, public awareness and advocacy, and ensuring accountability, and transparency.  Social media tools were established with personal and simple capabilities in mind, and currently are being used by several organizations, non-profits, and businesses alike to share, and broadcast news, missions, and information (Muralidharan et al., 2011).

The nonprofits use social media for advocacy and awareness. The element behind social media is to communicate messages with different parties (Sklair & Wakefield, 2011). For nonprofits, the messages could form in advocacy as well as awareness campaigns. Advocacy organizations engage and involve people via YouTube videos. Thus, online campaigns depend on an existing community that can now be reached via social media networks. Viral videos and calls for petition signatures are easily shared across social media tools and within personal networks. Social media is used by nonprofit organizations when the mission is to pursue awareness or advocacy and awareness creation (Sklair & Wakefield, 2011).  Advocacy organizations use social media to ask supporters to be part of a movement that is beneficial to the community.

Nonprofits use social media networks to send messages of awareness and advocacy. Social media/networking is used to enhance two-way messaging, connections, and, personal relationships. Accordingly, advocates and supporters are attracted by the messages based on Facebook likes and Twitter followers, and they can be regarded as low engagement to high engagement (Kanter, Beth, Paine, & Paarlberg, 2012)Toto engages people and solisolicitsancial aid, volunteering, or to attend to a fundraising event, the first step by nonprofits is to set up social media accounts. Traditionally, people engaged offline in conventional methods, but social networking platforms have created a space that has the potential to reach different stakeholders. Social media promotes immediate, two-way communication between the network and nonprofit organizations. Social media allows nonprofits to communicate openly and quickly with the public (Kanter et al., 2012). For instance, when a disaster relief organization posts on its social media events that have affected the public, the purpose is to engage them in dialogue via different channels.

Social media are currently being used to solicit donations online for NGOs. Nonprofits usually post links online and through their social media profiles, they can request their followers to donate. On the other hand, donors could fill out forms and use their credit cards to make their donations.  Social media is used to fundraise donations via crowd-funding.  The figure below shows the growth of donations via online platforms in the United States.

Figure 1: Growth of Donations Online in the USA.  Source: Network for Good (2014).

An increase in media coverage of humanitarian crises is one of the aspects that create public awareness and prompts the urge by social media users to donate online (Shier & Handy, 2012). Social media has emerged as a quick and efficient means of undertaking donations to support humanitarian crises communicated via YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram. Lovejoy and Saxton (2012) have pointed out that the advent of social media has allowed communication possibilities that can be used by nonprofit organizations and individuals.

Theoretical Model- Dragon Effect Model

The analysis of the effectiveness of social media in the charitable sector is based on the Dragon Effect Model.  The model is made up of four wings: Focus, grab attention, engage, and take action (Aaker, Smith, & Adler, 2010). Underwing one (Focus), the aim is to identify a concrete measurable goal, and in two (grab attention) focuses on making someone look, and this can be achieved when something personal is shared via social media. The third wing (engage) focuses on the creation of a personal connection, and the access of higher emotions via deep feeling, authenticity, empathy, and telling a story (Aaker et al., 2010). Lastly, the fourth wing concentrates on taking action, by enabling others to achieve the actionable goals. Charitable organizations employ all four wings when using social media networks (Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram).  When the wings work together, they create a ripple effect that connects people in a manner that makes them empowered to engage, co-create, and participate (Aaker et al., 2010). The model is presented in the illustration below.

Figure 2: The Dragonfly Effect. Source: Aaker, Smith, Adler. (2010).

Aaker and Smith (2011) contended that “The Dragonfly Effect is the elegance and efficacy of people who, through the passionate pursuit of their goals, discover that they can make a positive impact disproportionate to their resources “(p. 13). Thus, the model is based on the concept of ripple effect whereby small acts create big change. When incorporated via social media, the Dragon Model drives the proposed change to advance a cause. The economic concept of the “ripple effect,” is used to explain how the spending of one person could increase the income of others (Aaker & Smith, 2010). When used in social action by organizations or individuals, the ripple effect illustrates how small acts such as a Tweet a YouTube video, or an Instagram picture could create big change. The start of small things is the ultimate success of non-profit organizations. Thus, when organizations have the dragonfly wings working together, a ripple effect is created, which connects with people in a manner that makes them feel empowered to co-create, participate, and engage.

Analysis and Discussion

The analysis of the effectiveness of Facebook, YouTube, Twitter, and Instagram is analyzed based on the Dragonfly Effect Model. The four concepts of the model, get to focus, grab attention, engage, and take action have been considered. Also, covered in this section is the effectiveness of social media in terms of fundraising for the non-profit sector, and an analysis of how new technologies, platforms, and social media channels have expanded within the sector. Social media have replaced traditional marketing because they create viral marketing and generate electronic word of mouth that reaches a wider population within a short period (Hausmann, 2012). Thus social media continues to replace the traditional communications paradigm used in charitable organisations.

Effectiveness of Social Media for Nonprofit

There has been a paradigm shift whereby nonprofit organizations have embarked on the use of social media for fundraising, public awareness, and advocacy. This is a result of the increased number of people using social media platforms. For example, more than 24 million people in the UK interact via Facebook daily, while Twitter has 15 million registered users (Benady, 2013). Thus, social media networks have become common trends for social media operations. Based on Social Media Benchmark Study’s 2015 report, the number of Facebook and Twitter users increased by 42% and 37% in that order (Lee, 2016). In addition, social media for nonprofits continues to increase three times faster in comparison to the use of emails. Figure 3 below shows the most preferred social media networks for nonprofits in the Western world.

Figure 3: Preferred Social Networks for Non-Profits. Source: Author

 As shown in Figure 3 above, 98% of nonprofit organizations use Facebook, followed by 70% on Twitter, 45% on YouTube, and 15% on Instagram. These findings have been supported by a study conducted by Quinton and Fennemore (2013) that established international charities have embraced social networks whereby 90% of them use Facebook, compared to 60% which use Twitter, while 45% are on YouTube. Instagram is the least used because it is new compared to the others, and it relies more on pictures and videos. Social media is used by nonprofit organizations to create a relationship with the audience, and this makes it the number one importance for charities using social media networks (Sriramesh, Sanchez & Soriano, 2012).  On the other hand, Facebook is most preferred by nonprofits because it emphasizes the ripple and multiple effects. For example, Facebook allows its followers to post a message and share it by tagging a friend. Based on the Dragon Effect model, the action created by a charity via social media is shared on Facebook, and subsequently, the ripple and multiple effects take place. Drawing from Quinton and Fennemore (2013), social networks use sharing mechanisms that allow the harnessing of digital benefits of word-of-mouth. In this scenario, word of mouth acts as a world of mouth that ensures that fundraisers are recruited. After sharing the information, the message becomes viral, and this could attract people to engage.

Mercy Ships, which is a USA-based charity organization, used a social media marketing strategy that increased its returns three times and increased revenues by 12% (Mano, 2013). The use of social media strategy maximizes the publicity of social events that have a humanitarian aspect to them. Social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, as well as Instagram act as messaging tools between charity organizations and their supporters (Kanter & Fine, 2010). In addition, these four social media platforms are popular because they enable text messaging, which in return, allows coordination and communication. Social media platforms as based on participatory culture, which is powered by user-generated influence.  According to Jenkins et al. (2009), participatory culture is based on the passage of information along knowledge to novices. A user-generated activity comprises the creation of new content like videos on YouTube, tweets on Twitter, posts on Facebook, and images on Instagram. The content is then shared and distributed across space via social media like YouTube, Facebook,k, or Twitter. The benefits associated with user-generated actions in a participatory culture comprise opportunities for peer-to-peer learning.

There has been development of new technologies and expansion of social media channels within the nonprofit sector. According to Horrigan (2010), a study conducted by Weber Shandwick showed that 85% of nonprofits in the West were experimenting with the use of social media, in finding new audiences and recruiting and retaining donors. Through the use of social networking, nonprofits have the potential to reach millions of people within a period of short time. This is because nonprofits with highly effective social media campaigns use the concept of ‘viral’ marketing whereby the campaigns are shared and posted thousands of times within a short period. Based on the Case Foundation’s study, established that Facebook Insights is the most popular social media measurement tool for effectiveness, and this explains its popularity. It is followed by Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram (Lee, 2016) Accordingg to the Dragon’s Effect Model, the role of social media networks is to create awareness, advocacy, and funding. For social media to be effective tools of fundraising of creating awareness, the first principle is to focus on the problem and use the message to grab the attention of the people, before engaging them and taking action (Aaker & Smith, 2010). Charity: Water is an example of a nonprofit that applied the Dragon’s Effect model to realize its success via the use of social media. Harrison told a powerful story via Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter telling a story whereby themes of hope, change, and redemption were evoked (Smith 2015). Subsequently, viewers were engaged and eventually created an emotional connection by using photographs (Instagram) to reveal the urgency of the water situation As a result of social media, Charity: Water has raised over $13 million and completed 1,548 water projects helped more than eight hundred thousand people (Smith, 2015). Thus, the use of the Dragon Effect by nonprofits creates a ripple effect and this explains how small acts can be used to create big change. When Harrison started the charitable organization, he aimed to advance a cause and be happier and more fulfilled with life. This created a feeling that inspired others to follow suit.

Facebook has emerged as one of the effective social media tools used to fundraise and support nonprofit organizations. According to Vericat (2010), social media broadcasts awareness that reaches people. For example, Facebook uses its platform to broadcast messages to hundreds of friends, and this aligns themselves with a specific issue (Vericat, 2010).  In addition, even when people do not donate in the beginning, the messages shared via a Facebook page generate awareness, which results from a simple action. Subsequently, a ripple effect is generated which can recruit engaged volunteers and donors (Vericat, 2010).  On the other hand, nonprofit organizations create viral videos and post them on YouTube and Instagram to create awareness among their supporters. In addition, it is through such videos that people donate to support simple actions. Kanter et al. (2012) contended that Twitter follows and Facebook likes result in high engagement with followers, and this creates the urge to donate to support a cause. When social media network such as Twitter is used, a highly engaged supporter tends to engage more than just consuming the content provided. For example, they would participate in social aspects associated with the online tools such as donating, and retweeting, hence displaying a deep level of support for the organization while engaging in their online networks.

The Internet has offered a platform for communication, especially interpersonal communication of ideas and information (Auger, 2013). The use of social media tools like YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook to draw traffic to a nonprofit organization’s website, plays a major role in increasing awareness of the cause (Wong & Jusoff, 2011). Although charities are behind for-profit businesses they have started to use social media to communicate (Quinton & Fennemore, 2013). Therefore, social media tools such as Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, have the advantage of communicating and raising awareness of issues quickly to the community and sharing ideas, opinions, and knowledge. Social media tools like Twitter and Facebook allow nonprofits to solicit donations via online platforms (Lee, 2016).  Nonprofits like ChildFund UK post links to their websites online provide their social media profiles and request their followers to donate. Accordingly, donors provide credit information whereby they can use their phones to make their donations. Online giving or donations have been increasing significantly despite the little use of social media to generate income. Social media networks with the tag “Donate Now” link could replace the time and effort needed to maintain a campaigning and fundraising strategy for nonprofit organizations. Social media platforms like Twitter could thus be the most effective tools for fundraising as they can meet particular objectives. In addition, potential donors could click to ‘crowdfund’ a campaign that meets a specific program goal.

The economic model of giving can be used to the donor’s response to conventional fundraising mechanisms, including telemarketing, direct mail, and door-to-door campaigns, which usually comprise of amount of fundraising costs and a large number of development personnel. Nonetheless, the advent of social media in the last decade has transformed how prospective donors relate and communicate with nonprofit organizations. The social, decentralized, interactive, and virtual dimensions of social media-linked fundraising create room for a campaign message to cause a ripple effect (Aaker et al., 2010). Recently, social media platforms have adopted online donor engagement and fundraising activities. For instance, nonprofit organizations use Facebook and Twitter as well as Instagram to communicate with their “fans” and to begin to promote it to their supporters and friends, and fundraisers for the cause. Subsequently, a digital word of mouth is created through friends and family members using social media networks.  Through social media, it is possible for nonprofit organizations to enlist “members” and subsequently promote their cause. Eventually, the members are engaged in decentralized fundraising. In addition, those who do not donate could engage other people in their extended networks and encourage them to support the cause (Wang & Graddy, 2008).

The American Red Cross used social media to create awareness in the wake of Hurricane Katrina in 2005 (Kanter & Fine, 2010). The social media campaign was initiated via Twitter and Facebook in an attempt to combat the negative perceptions. The use of social media by the nonprofit has created an opportunity to “engage the people in a conversation to educate the public on the issue (Kanter & Fine, 2010).  Both Twitter and Facebook are widely used social media networks by the American Red Cross, which is a nonprofit organization (Briones et al., 2011). This allowed the American Red Cross to meet its social goals through engagement with the community, recruitment of volunteers, and demonstration of accountability and transparency to the public (Briones et al., 2011; Kanter & Fine, 2010).

Conclusion

Social media tools such as Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram have emerged as effective tools for the development of communications and fundraising strategies. All these tools have been promoted by the internet and the advancement in technology in the last decade. Social media can create a dialogic capacity with a static website whereby the opportunity to share, comment, or interact with other people such as donors and supporters is provided. In the use of social media, it is of paramount importance to engage and build a link with the public. Currently, social media platforms have become common and are driven by the increased availability of Internet tools, attracting new donors, engaging in building community, and conducting transactions online, which is a new type of fundraising. Effective nonprofit fundraising through social media platforms is realized when the organizations share their cause on Facebook or Twitter. Then a ripple effect is created whereby supporters share a novice idea with others, resulting in a continued conversation, and eventually fundraising. Nonprofit organizational websites have been incorporated with social media networks which increase opportunities for them to engage new donors, recruit volunteers, increase fundraising potential, and build community.

The Dragon Effect model has been used in this paper to provide a theoretical analysis of the application of social media by nonprofit organizations to communicate and for fundraising. The model allows nonprofit organizations to focus on a goal, grab the attention of the supporters and donors through media campaign messages, engage the members in a conversation, and take action. Based on the analysis Facebook is commonly used social media tool followed by Twitter, then YouTube, and Instagram is used last. Both Facebook and Twitter allow people to engage in a conversation with the public, while YouTube and Instagram share pictures and videos that communicate a message. Thus, social media platforms are used to create awareness and advocacy, to fundraise, and to engage supporters in a conversation. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and Instagram are perceived as excellent community and relationship-building tools for charities. The concept of crowdfunding can be promoted via social media networks, which eventually ensure that donors share the message and make their donations to participate in a good cause.

References

Aaker, J. L., Smith, A., & Adler, C. (2010). The dragonfly effect: Quick, effective, and powerful ways to use social media to drive social change. San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.

Aaker, J., Smith, A. (2011). The
Dragonfly
Effect. Stanford
Social
Innovation
Review, pp. 1-9

Auger, G.A. (2013) ‘Fostering democracy through social media: Evaluating opposed nonprofit advocacy organizations’ use of Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube’, Public Relations Review, vol. 39, no.4, pp. 369-376.

Barefoot, D., & Szabo, J. (2010). Friends with benefits: A social media marketing handbook. San Francisco, CA: No Starch Press.

Benady, D. (2013). ‘Social media: a message for not-for-profit organizations.’ The Guardian, pp. 1-3.

Briones, R., Kuch, B., Liu, B., & Jin, Y. (2011). Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships. Public Relations Review, vol. 37, no. 1, pp. 37-43

Chikoto, G.L. and Neely, D.G. (2014) ‘Building Nonprofit Financial Capacity: The Impact of Revenue Concentration and Overhead Costs’, Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, vol. 43, no.3, pp. 570-588.

Hopkins, B. R. (2013). Starting and Managing a Nonprofit Organization: a Legal Guide. 6th ed. Hoboken: Wiley, 2013

Horrigan, S. (2010). Five Steps to Social Media Success for Nonprofits’, Social Media Today, pp. 1-3.

Hausmann, A. (2012) ‘Creating “buzz”: opportunities and limitations of social media for arts institutions and their viral marketing’, International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, vol. 17, no.3, pp. 173-182,

Jenkins, H., Clinton, K., Purushotma, R., Robison, A. J., Weigel, M. (2006). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Digital Media and Learning.

Kanter, B., Paine, K. D.,& Paarlberg, W. T (2009). Measuring the Networked Nonprofit: Using Data to Change the World. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, a Wiley

Kanter, B., & Fine, A. H. (2010). The networked nonprofit: Connecting with social media to drive change. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass

Lee, W.  (2013) SEO & Social Media Alignment

Lee, K. (2016). Social Media for Non-Profits: High-Impact Tips and the Best Free Tools. Buffer Social, pp. 1-7.

Lee, Y.J., and Ahn, H.Y. (2013) ‘Interaction Effects of Perceived Sponsor Motives and Facebook Credibility on Willingness to Visit Social Cause Facebook Page’, Journal of Interactive Advertising, vol. 13, no.1, pp. 41-52.

Lovejoy, K., & Saxton, G. D. (2012). Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, vol. 17, pp. 337- 353.

Mangold, W.G. & Faulds, D.J. (2009) ‘Social media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix’, Business Horizons, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 357-365.

Mano, R.S. (2014) ‘Social media, social causes, giving behavior and money contributions’, Computers in Human Behaviour, vol.31, no.1, pp. 287-293

Muralidharan, S., Rasmussen, L., Patterson, D. and Shin, J.H. (2011) ‘Hope for Haiti: An analysis of Facebook and Twitter usage during the earthquake relief efforts’, Public Relations Review, vol. 37, no. 2, pp. 175-177.

Network for Good (2014) ‘The Network For Good Digital Giving Index’.

Ogden, T, & Laura, S. (2009) ‘Social Networking and Mid-Size Non-Profits: What’s the Use. Philanthropy Action, pp.1-21.

Quinton, S. & Fennemore, P. (2013) ‘Missing a strategic marketing trick? The use of online social networks by UK charities’, International Journal Of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Marketing, vol. 18, no.1, pp. 36-51

Safko, L., (2010). The social media bible: Tactics, tools, & strategies for business success (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Safko, L. & Brake, D. K. (2009)The Social Media Bible. Tactics, Tools, and Strategies for Business Success. N.J, USA: John Wiley and Sons

Salamon, L.M. (1999). America’s nonprofit sector: A primer (2nd ed.). New York: The Foundation Center

Schaffer, N. (2014). Maximize your social: A one-stop guide to building a social media strategy for marketing and business success.

Shier, M.L. and Handy, F. (2012) ‘Understanding online donor behavior: the role of donor characteristics, perceptions of the internet, website, and program, and influence from social networks’, International Journal Of Nonprofit & Voluntary Sector Marketing, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 219- 230

Sklair, A., & Wakefield, D. (2011) Philanthropy and Social Media. Rep.: Institute for Philanthropy

Smith, A. (2014) ‘6 new facts about Facebook’, Pew Research Center, 03 February

Smith, A. (2015). Dragon Effect-Charity: Water.

Sriramesh, K., Rivera-Sánchez, M. and Soriano, C. (2013) ‘Websites for stakeholder relations by corporations and non-profits: A time-lag study in Singapore’, Journal of Communication Management, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 122-139

Smith, W. R & Vardiabasis, D. (2010) Using social media as a competitive advantage: the case of small businesses, Problems,s and Perspectives in Management, vol. 8, no.  4,pp. 193-197.

Vericat, H. (2010). Accidental activists: using Facebook to drive change. Journal of International Affairs, vol. 64, no. 1), pp. 177–180.

Wang, L. & Graddy, E. (2008). Social capital, volunteer, i,g, and charitable giving. Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, vol. 19, pp. 23-42.

Weinberg, T. (2009) The New Community Rules: Marketing on the Social Web. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media Inc.

Wong, D.M.L. & Jusoff, K. (2011) ‘Social Networking in Charity Advocacy’, World Applied Sciences Journal [Special Issue: Computer Applications & Knowledge Management], vol. 12, pp. 65-72.