-
They're not mutually exclusive strategies and depending how you define lobbyist, major charities do this.
An organisation like say, UNICEF, will create pilot projects in-country to demonstrate efficacy, then work with government to expand them and drive lasting change.
Even if people avoid the chuggers, I can imagine there is an additional advertising benefit to having a charity logo visible in a public place.
hugo7-
The other point is that chuggers can raise “unrestricted income”.
Charities get grants from governments or other organisations but often this is restricted in what it can be spent on.Imagine the political backlash if a charity was given money to feed starving kids but spent it on laptops in an unrelated area of the organisation or maybe funded a support group for trans people in an oppressive state?
Chugging is one way to get funds that can be used across the NGO
Alf0nse
Lately I've been wondering why the fuck charities don't just employ a full-time lobbyist or two instead of armies of these jokers. Instead of being yet another thing bleeding the poor dry (they're generally more generous), they could be tackling problems at the source, directly competing against the filth creating so many of the problems with their own lobbyists.
Or better yet, going with the highest ROI there is, and just buying the politicians like anyone else who's actually serious about changing the world to their liking.