The irony is that charities (or if we are being politically correct then I should say VCO, as in voluntary and community organisation, a term usually reserved for organisations which are neither voluntary nor based in communities) really do need marketing in the true sense of the word.

Marketing in the sense that I understand is about working out what supporters or stakeholders really really want and then working out how you can give it to them. Too many charities decide what they think stakeholders should want and then proceed to blast it at them. This applies whether it is about the number of mailings supporters should receive, the type of press release journalists want to cover, or the pages and pages of riveting stories in the average newsletter members must want to read.

Ironically marketing is needed in charity services more than in most other areas, because good marketing can make sure that clients and beneficiaries get what they really need as a route to transforming their lives.

We may abuse the word marketing, but the real tragedy is when we abuse or ignore the enormously powerful process of marketing itself.

Joe Saxton is chair and founder of CharityComms. In his day job Joe is driver of ideas and co-founder of specialist research consultancy nfpSynergy

So why is the BBC website so often in people's top ten? Well one big factor is that an awful lot of us use the site every month - a staggering 17 million regular users in the UK and 30 million outside the UK! When I ask people what they like about the site, often people can't put their finger on it - they just like it and for many people that is the sign of a well designed website.

Whilst it's tempting to look at the £153 million a year budget and dismiss the site as in a different league from our own, I believe there are many areas we can take inspiration from as charities and for starters I'd like to suggest the following three:

The power of brands
A big element to the success of the BBC website is that we are already familiar with their brands. Those millions of pounds spent on Idents between programmes means that we know the BBC do news, sport, have eight TV channels and twelve national radio channels. That means despite typical pages on the BBC website having up to 100 links to click on, we know our way around the site intuitively because we already know the brands.

This same concept can be applied to our own websites. Does your website reflect your brand? Do you think about the different ways your audience sees and interacts with your organisation? If you think what the equivalent of your TV and Radio channels would be, it might take you in a very different direction with your website.

Integrated communications across different media
I love the fact that the BBC joins together its different media. If I watch television or listen to the radio, chances are I can then go to the website or use my mobile and find the same information there and hence choose the medium which suits me best. This is a major achievement for an organisation the size of the BBC!

Now clearly it would be unrealistic for most charities to provide the same degree of choice to their audiences. However the technology is often easier than you think and in my experience, it is the strategy behind your charity which limits the choices you give your audiences. As the BBC shows, the benefits of the integrated approach are huge and if you look at what some charities are now doing (for example Word Live from Scripture Union) then you will see that charities can make this work.

The importance of good headlines
My last point concerns headlines. If you look at the BBC homepage and news pages, you will see that each story has a maximum of six words in the headline, yet in those six words, you know exactly what that page is about. That's not easy to do!

Contrast this with many charity websites where words abound and yet it's still not clear what the page is about! Good copy writing skills are always top of my list for web editors!

So next time you visit the BBC website, why not take a moment to think what it is you like or dislike about it and what can inspire you to communicate in new and exciting ways through your website.

Jim Raymond is Commercial Director of Baigent Ltd, a digital agency specialising in websites, online fundraising and online strategies for charities.

One of the big driver's has been a real shift in the thinking about the benefits of e-campaigning. While the primary reason groups should e-campaign is the potential to change policy, there is also a growing acceptance that e-campaigning can help to recruit new supporters, define or re-define a group's brand, increase public profile, and raise money. And why not? If you're all about changing policy, you should also leverage the other benefits of e-campaigning at the same time. Just don't lose sight of the primary objective!

E-campaigns can convey a sense of outrage and urgency. By giving all of your supporters the opportunity to take action you will strengthen the relationship you have with them as well opening up opportunities to bring new people on board. Get your supporters to feel like they are part of your organisation rather than just campaigners - or donors - and it's more likely that they will stay with you.

Recent US benchmarking statistics (taken from NTEN's 2008 eNonprofit Benchmarks study) tell us that 14% of campaigners are likely to donate and 8% of donors are willing to campaign.

But there is a risk...

The one thing you shouldn't do is 'e-campaign because you can'! Like any other area of communications, you need start with good strategy and good planning. What's the point of investing resource in recruiting new supporters if you don't have an ongoing plan to keep them engaged? Will the campaign you're running really be helped by online activity? Is the structure of your online campaign 'ask' aligned with the objective - e.g. if you are trying a specific tactic to grow your list have you picked the 'right' issue?

Bottom line.... e-campaigning can deliver huge benefits across your organisation, but start with strategy and involve all of the decision-makers that can help 'join up' your online campaigning.

And finally...

Several years ago, e-campaigning was an after-thought for many organisations. It's all change now. One of the big drivers of investment in this area is the ability of the campaigns teams to get buy-in from other areas within their organisations. Build a good plan to bring marketing, media, web, and policy teams on board. Then keep them on board and make sure that they are integrated in your e-campaigning strategy and tactics.

And welcome to the exciting world of e-campaigning!

jonathan@advocacyonline.net

Jonathan Purchase is Head of Client Services and Support at Advocacy Online, a leading provider of e-campaigning technology and services.

As last month's CharityComms seminar was packed full of advice about celebrity management - I thought I'd share some of the speakers' top tips with blog readers.

1. Choose your celebrity carefully
Niall Cowley, Managing Director of Bright Young Things, explained: "Don't believe that anyone will do, just because they're famous. Find out who your beneficiaries relate to and make sure they have media currency...A good way to do this is to use the Red Pages." It's also much more meaningful to find a celebrity who identifies with your cause and has a real interest in what you're doing.

2. Ask your contacts for their celebrity contacts
Simon Carter, Assistant Director of Marketing and Communications at The Scout Association, said: "Ask all of your contacts, including your board and CEO, for their celebrity contacts...you'll be surprised how many turn up." Once The Scout Association got the support of celebrity Peter Duncan, they asked him for his celebrity contacts and also to help them "charm the big hitters."

3. Read celebrity biographies
The Scout Association was lucky to find a fantastic quote about the Scouts in Billy Connolly's biography. "We had had no luck with Billy's agent and then we found the quote and we were then able to use it," Carter said. Even if you aren't lucky enough to find a direct quote about your organisation you can still use celebrity biographies to find out what particular causes they identify with.

4. Think about your 'ask' and try to find ways of making it easy for celebrities to work with you
In some cases you might just want to ask for a signed autograph or quote, other times you may need more. The key to success is having a clear idea of what it is you want them to do and what they will achieve for you. Beatbullying wanted to get footage of a wide variety of celebrities, but rather than hire a video crew they gave celebrities their own video recorders to capture footage. They also accepted footage from celebs recorded on their mobile phones - this was convenient for them and also added to the genuine feel of the clips.

5. Be realistic about what you expect from your celebrity
"Peter Duncan has a life away from The Scout Association" Carter explained. "Don't ask for too much and try to find activities which your celebrity will find interesting."

6. The story must be able to stand alone without the celebrity
Cowley explained: "Celebrities amplify your story...they help you to make a bigger noise... but they alone do not make a story."

7. Spend time briefing your celebrity and give them real experiences which they can talk about to the media
Spending time briefing your celebrity and involving them in your projects allows them to be both prepared and able to talk about genuine experiences to the media.

To view presentations from the 30th July CharityComms seminar click here
Emma Wickenden, CharityComms Coordinator

Mike Childs, Head of Campaigns at Friends of the Earth, explained on a YouTube clip: "What YouTube does fantastically is enable us to get our message out unadulterated. Get the facts and truth out there...straight to people."

If you would like to know more about how Beatbullying became a hit on YouTube visit the CharityComms site. Or if you would like to find out how to apply for the Nonprofit Programme or get tips on how to use your not-for-profit channel click here.

Emma Wickenden, CharityComms Coordinator

So, as Joe Saxton says in the blog below, good proofreading is vital.

It's no good getting the words right if your document has mistakes in it. It's going to look unprofessional.

Here are 10 proofreading tips:

1. Pick your time of day.
This is different for everyone, but few people find after lunch a good time.

2. You need quiet.
Print out your work and take it to a room where you'll be able to read over it in peace.

3. Proof once for sense...
If possible, read what you've written out loud. You might not want to do this on a 100-page document, but it's ideal for a press release.

4. ...Proof again for technical things.
Do a second proofread for captions, headings, page numbers, fact checks and upper and lower case consistency.

5. Read from the bottom up.
Every sentence should make sense on its own. Start from the very last sentence and work your way up to the introduction so you're not getting caught up in the story.

6. Read beginnings and ends of lines carefully.
It's harder to spot a word that's been accidentally repeated at the beginning and end of a sentence.

7. Find things that work for you.
For example, you may want to break work up into sections, use a ruler to follow the lines or print out your work at 150% so it's not so hard on the eyes.

8. Check for second hand mistakes.
When checking your proofing corrections have been made by a designer, be on the look out for other errors introduced at the same time.

9. You cannot proof your own written work properly.
You won't see your own mistakes. At ngo.media we read and proof each other's work. So, if I've written something, I won't proof it.

10. Take a break.
Do your first proofread for sense. Take a break. Come back and you're bound to spot lots more mistakes.

Trina Wallace, is a writer at ngo.media, a copywriting agency for charities.

Sadly with age my skills have got no better. However I now have to accept that it matters. An un-proofed document from me runs the same reputational risk as an un-serviced aircraft - my meaning may be lost, the reader may be distracted by my mistakes, or my scintillating words felled like a runner with untied shoelaces.

There is one effective way I have found to correct my own work. To find a quiet room and to read aloud what I have written and focus on every word and nuance. It's no good reading things over in my head. My mind wanders, I skip sentences, my brain knows what it's meant to see but it finds other things to do. Reading aloud (or asking somebody to proof my work) is the only thing that works.

I tell you all this because bad as I am at the small details I know they matter. And that's true for every communicator. Small mistakes in any communication have a disproportionately destructive effect. They act like a sort of reputational chewing gum on the sole of a shoe. So a misspelt name, an out-of-date website, a publication with the wrong number or just a few sentences of jargon-filled turgid text will potentially ruin whatever message you wanted to get across.

Don't waste hours of hard work for the sake of a few minutes checking. It just isn't worth it - even if my brain and fingers don't always see it that way.

Joe Saxton is chair and founder of CharityComms. In his day job Joe is driver of ideas and co-founder of specialist research consultancy nfpSynergy

Clearly the web is an important part of building and maintaining that reputation these days and I hope I am preaching to the converted when I say that having a website is crucial. Not having one is like not having a phone number or not being listed in the charity commission as a registered charity.

But of course people need to be able to find it. It is critical that your web address (URL) is recognisably yours, whether you are known as your long name, initials or an acronym people must be able to find you by what they think you are called.

Finding you in a search engine is also key, and it is not difficult to make sure your site has the right description, title and keywords to get your site listed by how the public might search for you. Meta Tags may sound techie but they aren't, and if you haven't got them the best site in the world will not get listed.

But once people have found your site it is critical that they aren't immediately put off by out of date copy and old news. If you don't have the resources to update your site on a regular basis don't put time sensitive information on the homepage.

If nothing else gets done make sure you remove out of date events; there is nothing worse than visiting a site and seeing an event listed that ended months ago... it looks like a vacant shop, unused and unloved, and will cause huge damage to your reputation.

If you don't have lots of press releases and don't generate much news, don't put it on the homepage. We think it's a great idea to have, but if it isn't regularly refreshed it doesn't help make you look like the vibrant organisation you want to be seen as.

"Cut your cloth to fit your budget" was a phrase I grew up with, and in the case of the web it is better to build a site you have the time and resources to maintain than to spend budget on a flashy site which quickly looks out of date.

Sue Fidler, Director of Sue Fidler Ltd, providing e-consultancy for Charities.

Tell somebody that they have a great brand and they think that they are being compared to a commercial brand - like a can of Coke or a type of mobile phone. Tell somebody that they have a great reputation and they cannot dispute that this is a good thing. The importance of a good reputation is something that everybody can see matters.

Reputation is like a kind of organisational physical fitness. A good reputation makes people read your press releases, take your phone calls, read your mailings, use your services or approve your funding bids. In other words, reputation lets you do the same things you have already done but faster, quicker, better and more effectively.

In communications, reputation matters more than in most areas of a charity's life. When people are surfing the net the right reputation will make them visit your site. When people are looking at a policy report the right reputation will make people take your work seriously. In the media the right reputation will make a journalist read your press release or ring you with a query.

So every organisation should know who is responsible for building its reputation and external profile, who else has contributory roles in building (or potentially ruining) its reputation. While some organisations appear to be effortless in maintaining their reputation, most of us have to work an awful lot harder.

Joe Saxton is chair and founder of CharityComms. In his day job Joe is driver of ideas and co-founder of specialist research consultancy nfpSynergy.

Closer to home depending on the Government, local authorities or other public bodies for funding presents its own dilemmas.

So let's imagine your charity works in an area that is a high priority on the Government's agenda. In terms of service delivery your organisation is the bees knees and you've therefore been receiving substantial public funding in recognition of your great work.

Out of the blue, new policies are announced and your organisation thinks the Government has got it seriously wrong. The media are on to it and something of a furore is building. You are being asked to comment.

This presents something of a dilemma - do you keep shtumm and exclude yourself from an important debate on issues at the heart of your work or risk biting the hand that feeds you with stinging criticism of policy?

So how prepared is your charity to handle such sensitive requests from the media? How will you negotiate a line between your right to be critical of policy without endangering your funding? As a current affairs TV producer, I've often encountered reluctance on the part of charities and other organisations to criticise or even comment on the Government, local authority or other public body on which they are dependant for funding.

It doesn't have to be this way.

This is the one instance when more measured tones are appropriate. If you are a big enough key player, the media will be interested in your comments anyway, without you having to resort to the heightened language normally required to get that juicy quote in the papers or on the TV.

With the careful use of language, there should be no reason why you cannot enter public debate and challenge your Government or local authority. Focussing on your clients needs and relating them to case histories rather than a full frontal attack on the relevant Secretary of State and his/her Department's proposals is one way of showing how the policy direction may be wrong.

And the language you use may be the key. A clear truthful message about the effect on service delivery to your clients should not endanger your relationship with your funder.

Just sometimes, the situation merits you putting your head above the parapet in this way rather than ducking the issue.

David O'Keeffe is Director of the media training company Dreamcatcher Media. Tel: 0208 241 3746

Just back from giving a talk to lots of charity folk (mostly from communications/press/pr) about why they need to become more like news organisations.

By that I certainly don't mean ActionAid should try to become like News International. What I mean is that charities should do more reporting. Not PR. Not marketing and communications. On-the-ground, face-to-face, regular, consistent, fair, factual reporting.

I haven't space in this blog to go through my whole spiel but, in bite size chunks my argument is this:

- 'News', in its many and various forms, is immensely important for shaping our political outlook and directing social action. If you don't believe me then look at the effect blanket coverage of the China earthquake had on fundraising compared to the virtually non-existent coverage of Burma. Over $900m raised for Chinese earthquake victims (approximately 74,000 deaths to date). About $55m raised for Burmese cyclone victims (approximately 134,000 deaths to date) - source, The Times (22-5-08).

- News organisations are doing less on-the-ground reporting. The evidence for this will be familiar to those who have been reading this blog and from Nick Davies, Press Gazette, and the missives sent out by the NUJ

- News organisations (and the public) are relying more and more on other sources for their news . I'm sure you've already noticed that most of us are now getting 'news' from lots of places we didn't used to (this blog for instance). From the government, from commercial organisations (Property News anyone?), and of course 'citizen journalists', aka the public. According to OFCOM, for example, the government now spends over £100m a year producing newspapers and funding government 'news' outlets.

Problem is... most of these sources are erratic, they lack context, you don't know what their motive is for writing/photographing/recording their content, and there's little chance their news is informed by a sense of obligation to the public interest.

That's where charities come in.

Now charities have an agenda too of course. But they are also motivated by a sense of obligation to the public, have a keen interest in seeing injustice reported, are structured in such a way that they can report as part of their day job, and of course they're already 'on-the-ground'. Plus, since they tend to wear their agenda on their sleeve (often in brightly coloured neon), at least you know where their bias is coming from.

But, and it's a big but, charities have to understand that reporting is different from PR. They have to realise their audience is not just big media organisations anymore, it's also the public. And as such their communication to the public should be informed by the values that inform journalism, not the values that inform PR.

If they collect factual information, report it fairly, and contextualise it properly, they won't just start to fill the public information gap left by fast-departing news organisations, but will promote their own cause in a sustainable and ethical way.

There's no point complaining when a journalist completely misrepresents your charity.

The world doesn't revolve around your charity.

Just some of the comments from former Sun editor Kelvin MacKenzie at the Charity Communications '08 conference.

The controversial tabloid supremo certainly spoke his mind. He got everyone talking with his self-titled "rant".

Kelvin told the Charity Communications '08 audience not to read press coverage their charity received but to weigh it as it's the amount they get that's important.

And his advice to charity communicators on what to do if they're not happy with their organisation's media coverage was as direct: "Just get over it!"

"Editors are omnipotent. They don't have to be balanced," he concluded.

I was responsible for one of the roaming mics at the conference and was kept busy running around giving audience members the opportunity to respond to Kelvin's comments.

As conference organisers, we did brief Kelvin twice about the charity sector, communications and fundraising, which he apparently chose to ignore.

Feedback from delegates post-conference suggests some thought Kelvin was talking complete rubbish. They said his comments were offensive and irrelevant: he didn't know what he was talking about.

Others felt his words were a wake up call to those working in charity communications. That, as its former editor and a current columnist, Kelvin speaks for the Sun's 3 million plus readers. So, sadly, his thoughts are representative of a significant portion of the population and this is something charity communicators should bear in mind.

What do you think?

You can download Kelvin's keynote address here: www.ngomedia.org.uk .

Trina Wallace, a writer at ngo.media, a copywriting agency for charities.

First off it is considered rude to shout at people by CAPITALISING EVERYTHING, even the title - on screen it is better to use bold, underline or a different colour.

Highlight headlines, links and quotes by using indents, colours or bold, but do not use italics as they are very difficult to read on a PC screen.

Most important of all is the length of the copy. Use short paragraphs so the copy does not look too heavy on the screen, it is better to use short sentences and short paragraphs to make the copy readable.

Do not make the article too long. Give a precis and a link to the full copy. Even if you have a major professional article give people a taster so they can decide to click through to the whole.

Think about the writing style. Whatever your corporate style or brand, emails are usually more personal and slightly less formal than print copy or letters. Email is considered the second most “personal” form of communication behind text messages.

Some of the most successful are written by volunteers and beneficiaries telling their story. While that may not be possible for your email, very formal language and style looks out of place in an email newsletter.

And finally, whatever you do, make sure that the links work before you send out any emails. Everybody hates getting a Page Not Found error... it looks careless and unprofessional, damages the impression and dents the brand image.

And if you are sending out press releases by email, follow all the rules above, and remember to include the full links rather than hide them behind CLICK HERE. This will help the web editor add them to a site quickly without having to click through.

Sue Fidler