BETA
This is a BETA experience. You may opt-out by clicking here

More From Forbes

Edit Story

Hey Cynics, Hold That Cold Water: Why The Ice Bucket Challenge Worked

Following
This article is more than 9 years old.

A pitcher of cold ice water. A social media account. And a smart phone. Those are the elements of philanthropy's feel good hit of the summer - the Ice Bucket Challenge, starring a millennial near you and almost every celebrity you can name.

This August, it's been as inevitable as a sun burn. Yet as with every great instant movement these days, the backlash is here like a late day summer thunderstorm.

You've probably heard the criticism. It's a stunt, mere "slactivism." It's a substitute for real long-term involvement and engagement. It's all about showing off for social media. It won't change a thing, or cure ALS or ease the suffering of those with the disease.

Which is true, I guess, to some degree. But beyond the celebrity posing (Bill Gates! Jimmy Fallon! Ethel Kennedy! Mr. Met! Entire sports teams!), I'd urge a look at the general age of those engaging in the challenge - which demands either a bucket of ice over the head (or on the torso, depending on style points) or a $100 donation to the ALS Association. And I'd also suggest a gander at the timeline of this thing.

But first the numbers. More than a million challenge videos have been posted on Facebook so far. The challenge has raised well over $4 million and counting, according to the ALS Association. That money will be used to fight amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, better known as Lou Gehrig's Disease - the fatal disease facing former Boston College baseball player Pete Frates, who is credited with steering a meaningless ice bucket celebrity gimmick into a focus on ALS. The ice bucket aspect is the summer equivalent of the many "polar bear" swims and plunges each winter that raise money and attention for ALS.

Not surprisingly with a big, viral social media campaign that demands video and personal participation from thousands, there is significant cynicism about its impact. Vice's Arielle Pardes is emblematic: "It’s like a game of Would-You-Rather involving the entire internet where, appallingly, most Americans would rather dump ice water on their head than donate to charity. There are a lot of things wrong with the Ice Bucket Challenge, but most the annoying is that it's basically narcissism masked as altruism."

But I wonder if she's ever been to a big ticket charity gala? Seen the big shots competing for auction items? Visited a local hospital or museum and noticed the wing named for well-known local philanthropist I.M. Arichguy? Watched the main stage at the Clinton Global Initiative? Heard of corporate philanthropy? And so on.

Narcissism is part of public philanthropy, though it may be too harsh a word. Enlightened self interest is better - because it's not just showing off. There's a reason why people put their names on public foundations and new hospital wings and it's not just ego; any fundraiser can tell you it encourages others to give. Given a choice of a named gift or an anonymous one, any nonprofit organization would choose the name. Public good works encourage others.

Here's why this philanthropic cynic thinks the Ice Bucket Challenge works.

1. It's goofy and easily understood. There are a lot of laughs, some self-deprecating humor, some general silliness. This is in stark contrast to the progressive and insidious disease itself. I think people get that, even younger participants. Also, it's simple - get wet with cold water in the summer, shriek a bit, raise some funds.

2.  It fits the traditionally dry (no pun intended) days of summer fundraising. For a national single disease fundraising operation, summer is a slow time - anything additional will impact the overall budget. That's why linking a summertime activity outdoors really works - and it's frankly a contrast to the more labor intense biking, walking, and running events that require sponsorships and a major commitment of time.

3. It's all about young people (despite the celebrities). Sure there are plenty of boldface names doing the challenge - and plenty of older folk as well - but let's face it, spending some time on Instagram and Facebook, and it's all millennials and their friends. And that's a good thing. How could it be anything else? Participation, awareness, involvement and some donations - what cause wouldn't want that particular long-term investment?

4. People will show off anyway - why not for charity? There's a school of thought that runs against social media campaigns for charity because they involve, quite frankly, showing off - the public embrace of a cause or activity that must by necessity make the sharer look good. But here's the deflation of that argument against these campaigns - people will show off on social media anyway. They'll humble brag about good works, or share vacation photos, or go over forever about how great their kids are or something they just ate. So why not channel some of that toward charity and awareness? Does it really make a great cause shallow? I don't think so.

5. The unifying theme. There's something more authentic about the Ice Bucket Challenge than about some of the big media campaigns and celebrity themed events for charity. There's not much planning. It feels organic and thin, like no advertising agency had a piece of the planning. And in my timeline, the water or giving challenge has morphed into water and giving. It's almost as if participants realize they shouldn't be sharing their videos without making a donation. That's a unifying moment.

In our house, we've had a couple of ice bucket moments over the past two weeks. They've been hilarious. But the kicker for me - and the moment when I decided the whole thing was worth it - came in the form of a question from my 16-year-old:

"Dad, what is ALS?