One time I visited a Chase Bank location and asked them to float me a $1000 loan for 21 days at 2% interest and they declined. Apparently you can't just march in there and create company policy.

As a corollary, Chase cannot act as a gravity well (telling us how to do things) for social sector activism when they are clearly removed from our concerns.

Also, I need to buy groceries today but I'm not entirely certain that I want to wing it without a list. That's what I must do: Make a grocery list.

Thanks for bringing this to our attention, John! When I entered Chase Bank into Google News, the only online post that came up was on The Huffington Post - The NY Times didn't even register! Not being a regular reader of The Huffington Post, I never would have heard about this. Your sharing ROCKS!

I think it's unfortunate they messed up the contest and then messed up more by seeming to crawl into a shell and be disingenuous. That said, I think it is actually a really healthy thing that Chase was willing to use Facebook to crowdsource their corporate philanthropy. What a fantastic idea! My hope is they fix the mistakes, make it more transparent, make it better and bring it back!

John, thanks to you (and to Beth) for calling attention to the irregularities associated with the Chase Community Giving Campaign. I suspect that it would have gone largely ignored/unremarked upon had it not been for your efforts.

I respect a company's right to set parameters and limitations around their charitable activities. I may not agree with them, and I may choose not to participate based on what they are, but I do believe that it's up to the company (well, as long as it's legal).

It's also a best practice to clearly state those rules and conditions at the beginning of the contest, and not to change them part-way through. That way potential competitors can make an informed decision about whether or not to participate (Jeff, I appreciated your perspective as a board member of a participating agency - it was very insightful). When the decision process went behind-the-scenes and community members questioned that, all channels of communication shut-down. In such a vacuum (as Scott pointed out), speculation runs rampant.

Removed posts and comments from their Facebook wall? Really? Like no one was going to notice?

It's a shame - this could have so easily been avoided with a little planning and forethought. Even the flawed process could have turned into a healthy discussion with supporters, one that may have even earned their respect. It was a great concept that should have resulted in a win-win for both Chase and the finalists. Unfortunately it appears that Chase, instead of boosting it's image, will end up featured in upcoming case studies showing what NOT to do. #causewash (Steve, I LOVE this hashtag!)

Mickey,

You summed up the entire post beautifully! Thier lack of disclosure
and follow up have left folks with nothing to do but fill in the blanks.

John

should we reduce the # tag to #causewash removing 'ing' could prove crucial re: tweets! :)

Either way will work, I think.

lets use #causewashing on Twitter to keep this convo 'live'. also may be worth setting up an FB 'causewashing' group and Youtube channel. I know a lot of people who will actively participate in the convo. We need Beth Kanter in the loop and involved.

You're right. Beth commented above too, so I think she'd love to get involved.

John, great post. Any corp or brand thinking about leveraging 'cause marketing' for consumer product communication, needs to be prepared to embrace and encourage the participatory nature of 'social media' (let the crowd / tribe talk). Those that get it right will win big. Those that 'cause wash' with contrived and poorly executed concepts will pay a heavy price. I envisage Twitter playing a key role in all of this with highly creative 'user generated' # tags that ensures the voice of the people is amplified. I love this new 'consumer empowerment' paradigm. Disruption "BRING IT ON" :)

Rock and Roll! Yes - I see 2010 including more consumer / support wattage.

I applaud you for being forthright about your existing bias against Chase Bank. This distrust, no matter how widely shared, doesn't exactly prove nefarious actions.

Without a doubt, when Chase threw a dark veil over the decision process and locked down comments, they created a void that everyone is filling with their own suspicions and perceptions.

For a company with little social media presence, I don't expect much of a response from them. I would expect them to assume this will blow over - only 3 organizations complaining and 100 happy $25,000 winners. Seems like a small price to pay - although one I wouldn't advise my corporate clients to pay.

I think you're right on target about your prediction, Scotty.

I have a different perspective on this major fail whale.

One of the nonprofits that I volunteer as a Board member gave me an aggressive schedule of how they wanted me to promote their org for this contest using social media. They even asked me to use my personal Twitter account and blog for their promotions.

I refused and gave them a list of the reasons why I wouldn't. (Some of their tactics were just blatant misuses of social media to broadcast a message that favored Chase, whom I didn't trust.)

I then got a lecture of shirking my duties as a Board member and not aligning with their cause. After a round of tete-a-tete I encouraged them to use their own social media acumen for their campaign but to leave me out of it. Thankfully, this was in my last month as a Board member and starting January 1, I'm on the Advisory Board.

Now, they are reconsidering their actions and wishing they had not associated with this fiasco. I call it "death by association" as they lowered their credibility by the aggressive push for votes for a fundraising campaign mired in negative publicity.

Jeff - A classic case study of how desperate some (not all) non-profits are with voting opportunities like this one. Whenever, I've been in your shoes, I've asked (if I don't know already): "Are you guys able to pay your bills right now?" If they can't pay their bills, rubbing off scratch tickets is a terrible waste of their time.

Roger's comment reminded me of the discussions of whether philanthropy is really philanthropy if the donor gets anything out of it [other than the "warm fuzzies" of giving]. There are a lot of businesses trying to do well by doing good. Unfortunately, fiascoes like this just breed suspicion and contempt.

That's why I like @TysonFoods , Jeff. Their interest in Share Our Strength is a sincere one they've have for 10+ years.

Good often comes from guilt or the desire to improve public image. We wouldn't have free public libraries all over if it weren't for Carnegie. The issue here is continuing their shady dishonest practices in the midst of trying to clean up their image. Big PR fail here! They have sabotaged their own attempt to clean up their image.

"No, wait. OK. We've got the shotgun pointed right at our foot. Who'll pull the trigger this time?"

Apologies for the language, but I can't think of another word that really conveys the emotion:

What ASSHOLES!

Nicely worded! ;-)

You get a resounding "Amen" from this skeptic. Thanks for feeding this further.

You're welcome, Amy. I'm surprised not much was said about Chase's past as this campaign was being promoted.

"I saw this coming. Did you?" Yes, I did http://is.gd/5wT5E

I hope that 2010 brings an even greater voice to consumers,
so that these inept, unethical dinosaurs can be vanquished.

There were plenty of comments from "Fans" before the disqualification story broke. What irks me is that they haven't said a word - not even - "oops, we screwed up" or gave a valid reason for disqualifying the groups. The design of contest was not thought through -- and finally, the Facebook App was full of technical glitches and painfully slow.

I worked for corporations for 15 years and this sort of thing is par for the course. Obviously, from the other screw ups I mentioned, they've bred a culture of poor communication and planning.

Thanks for the hat tip!

I didn't trust them either when I first heard of this. Seemed suspicious.

Love your images and labels! :)