Wikipedia's Fundraising Miracle

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Wikipedia's Fundraising Miracle stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 01- 9-09 03:48 PM   |   Updated: 10-21-09 10:18 PM

What's Your Reaction?
Wikipedia

As 2008 came to a close, with charities and non-profits fighting to stay alive amid the economic crisis, Wikipedia pulled off a minor miracle. In a span of ten days, the Wikimedia Foundation raised $3 million, and in the process completely covered its operating budget for the 2008-2009 fiscal year.

Since November 5, the organization has raised $4.5 million, though the bulk of that came in late December when founder Jimmy Wales posted his annual appeal to the Wikipedia community. Add that to the $2 million in foundation grants and major gifts they'd received since July, and their entire $6 million annual operating budget has been met.

The achievement would be remarkable in ordinary times, but it's all the more impressive given the grim economic climate.

"We're over the moon happy," said Sue Gardner, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation. "This totally exceeded everyone's expectations."

Adding to the feat is the fact that the Wikmedia Foundation has undergone a near-total transformation in the last year, leaving St. Petersburg, Florida, where Wales lives, and moving the foundation to San Francisco.

"A year ago we didn't have an office, we had hardly any staff, we had no fundraising team, and then one year later we've had the most successful fundraiser we've ever had," Gardner said. "In that context, that the people who love Wikipedia would step up and support its operations is amazing"

Ironically, Gardner gives partial credit for the fundraising success to the recession.

"In this time of really dark economic uncertainty, people are thinking really carefully about the decisions they're making financially," she said. "When they were intentional, and sat down and thought. 'Who needs me most? Who do I most want to support?' a lot of them thought of Wikipedia."

Story continues below
advertisement

Roger McNamee, founding partner of venture capital firm Elevation Partners and a Wikipedia volunteer, credits some of the success to President-Elect Barack Obama.

"One of the great things about President-Elect Obama is he's giving America a reason to take responsiblity for the things that are important," he said. "I hope this is evidence that that new cultural imperative is taking over."

McNamee stressed that many people can take Wikipedia for granted, forgetting about the significant costs involved with operating the internet's fourth most-trafficked site.

"Wikipedia is one of those things where there's a danger of the tragedy of the commons," he said. "People take it for granted. But we are all responsible for this. In reality, the best things in life are not free."

And while the foundation has met its operating budget for the remainder of the fiscal year, Gardner explained that they are still seeking more money to protect Wikipedia from economic uncertainty.

"Nobody knows what's going to happen with the economy," she said. "It looks like it may be deepening, and sometimes theres a delay where people don't start feeling it for 6 months, a year, 18 months. So we do think it's important to have contingency funds."

In addition to its core operating costs, Gardner hopes to use the money to support the site's volunteer editors, through the annual WikiMania conference, and to reach out to broaden the base of Wikipedia contributors by making the site's editing interface more user-friendly.

"Jimmy Wales once said that the average Wikipedian is like a smart geek. It's true," she said. "The smart geeks are always going to be the heart and soul of what we do. But what I want to do is open up the doors and allow other people in and make it easy for them to come in. The goal is to make the whole editing system more user-friendly so we're not excluding the people as tech-centric as our core community."

Wikipedia Fundraising By The Numbers

136,000: number of donors
$35: average donation
16: number of currencies in which people donated
150: number of countries from which people donated
$6.5 million: total amount raised thus far
$3 million: amount raised in ten days in late December

As 2008 came to a close, with charities and non-profits fighting to stay alive amid the economic crisis, Wikipedia pulled off a minor miracle. In a span of ten days, the Wikimedia Foundation raised $...
As 2008 came to a close, with charities and non-profits fighting to stay alive amid the economic crisis, Wikipedia pulled off a minor miracle. In a span of ten days, the Wikimedia Foundation raised $...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
107
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)

Obama has changed the game in Internet fundraising

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:37 AM on 01/12/2009
photo

I believe it the other way around I think Obama is the first open source President. He was supported the same way and by the same peoples that supported open source project like Firefox, Wikipedia, VLC, Linux. A critical mass of peoples have learn from these open source project that if you want something done right you got to do it yourself or at least support those who do it right

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:00 AM on 01/12/2009

Long Live Wiki!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:42 PM on 01/11/2009
photo

Who were these idiots????

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:26 PM on 01/10/2009

I've whipped up 10 reasons not to donate to Wikipedia's fundraising efforts:

http://www.mywikibiz.com/Top_10_Reasons_Not_to_Donate_to_Wikipedia

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:10 PM on 01/10/2009

Such an incredible amount of money! Having run some small websites, I can hardly imagine why so much money was needed. Sure, bandwidth, servers, and office space, but $6 million?!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 AM on 01/10/2009
- dandypuddin I'm a Fan of dandypuddin 177 fans permalink
photo

It's for their foundation. Donations to causes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:53 PM on 01/10/2009

Wikimedia Foundation does not donate to any other causes. The $6 million are needed for server costs, office space, staff, &c. You can go to the website and see a break down of the annual costs.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:04 AM on 01/12/2009
- dandypuddin I'm a Fan of dandypuddin 177 fans permalink
photo

Not sure the importance of this story. Lots of charities out there, why the big Wiki headline Huffpo? Oh yeah, many of your posters use this as their sole source of information.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:38 AM on 01/10/2009
- Ramirez I'm a Fan of Ramirez 260 fans permalink
photo

I like Wiki and I contributed $20 bucks in this fundraising drive. When they asked their readers to pitch in with money I thought at first that was ridiculous. Then it hit me that if I use Wiki I have a responsibility to do my part to keep it running.

GasGrassOrAss. Nobody rides for free.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:19 AM on 01/10/2009
photo

Bingo!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:51 AM on 01/10/2009
photo


1. If you want to question the veracity of wikipedia, the first question you need to answer is "compared to what?" Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; it does not pretend to be a technical journal.

2. If you think there's an error, get in there and fix it; that's the whole idea.

3. You are visiting the fourth most popular site on the web and you are not being pestered by ads or requests for your personal information. Think about that.

4. A lot of talented people are trying to do something new and constructive, with their only compensation being the knowledge that they are helping others. Think about that too.

5. If you can't say something constructive, consider waiting until you can.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:03 AM on 01/10/2009
- skyshoes I'm a Fan of skyshoes 2 fans permalink

When I first started describing the web to friends in the "early days" I called it the worlds largest encyclopedia. You can "search" (Google came along a bit later) any term or word and come up with. stories, complaints and outright psycho lies about (almost) any information.

I now feel the same way about comments posted on articles... Hey Jimmy is Commopedia next. Hey I didn't know anything about Micropenis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micropenis before this great round of commentary. Thanks Superrobot

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:38 AM on 01/10/2009
photo

Here's my new favorite Wikipedia site:

http://www­.100bestwe­bsites.org­/alt/evmap­s/electora­l-maps.htm

That link provided others where I found out that Abraham Lincoln wasn't a Republican when he got elected the second time.

"The National Union Party was a political party in the United States from 1864 to 1868. It was an alliance between members of the Republican Party who backed incumbent President Abraham Lincoln and Northern Democrats (plus a few anti-Confederate Southerners such as Andrew Johnson) during and after the Civil War. Thus, for a brief period, the Republican Party ceased to exist.[1]"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1864#.22National_Union_Party.22_nomination

For quick historical reference, Wikipedia is hard to beat.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:10 AM on 01/10/2009
- BlackYowe I'm a Fan of BlackYowe 58 fans permalink
photo

I used to contribute allot to Wikipedia before they were so nasty to people. I still use it but find the little pinheads who get a rush out of pulling down your hard work very disheartening. I still contribute photography from time to time but no wrting.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:50 AM on 01/10/2009
- rogerze I'm a Fan of rogerze 4 fans permalink

When a read a reuters article it never cites any reliable sources.Which is why Wikipedia is better.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:02 AM on 01/10/2009

I love Wiki. I read about all of the U.S Presidents on Wiki. Love it, love it, love it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:54 PM on 01/09/2009

Now that you've educated yourself about the Presidents, it's time you learned about Wikipedia's versions of the 100 U.S. senators!

http://www.mywikibiz.com/Wikipedia_Vandalism_Study

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:01 AM on 01/10/2009
- SiberianRat I'm a Fan of SiberianRat 110 fans permalink
photo

Yeah, but that sort of thing is bound to happen--they can't catch everything immediately. I think Wikipedia is a fantastic tool for information sharing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:28 AM on 01/10/2009

"We're over the moon happy," said Sue Gardner, executive director of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Yeah, I'm sure she is. Nobody seems to realize (or care) that she budgeted $470,000 in salary for herself in 2009, along with her boy-wonder Deputy Director, Erik Moeller. You know, he's the guy who stood before a conference assembled in Berlin to tell them that "nonviolent child pornography does no harm". He was hired without Gardner posting a job description for the Deputy Director position, nor conducting a competitive candidate search for the post.

I wonder which 14,600 donors accounted for the Gardner/Moeller salary fund?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:17 PM on 01/09/2009
- Mavin1620 I'm a Fan of Mavin1620 9 fans permalink
photo

Please let me know how I can read their budget. Where is it posted? Who do I contact for a copy?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:37 PM on 01/09/2009

Annual plan, going forward:

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/File:FY_2008_09_Annual_Plan.PDF

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:43 PM on 01/09/2009

You know, something interesting about LAST YEAR's fundraiser...

They rallied all the troops, telling them, "We need your money to buy new servers and keep the bandwidth flowing. Look, here is our planned budget of $2,573,000 for Technology! Help us!"

Then, they ended up actually spending only $900,000 on Technology for the year. So... if Wikipedia can run on $900,000 worth of servers and bandwidth, why the $6 million budget?

Do the math, kids.

Volunteers basically "run" Wikipedia. So the Wikimedia Foundation staff exists for what? I'm thinking they exist for the purpose of raising funds to pay themselves.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:56 PM on 01/09/2009

Good for the Wikkis

Of course it is flawed, but this is one of those feel good collaborations of people from all around the world that can only be done now, in our time, on the internet. We don't know how it will evolve, but it is wonderful resource, especially the modern references that show up almost immediately about almost any event or person.

Those of you who don't check your sources and use W as your primary refences, do so at your own risk, but the linking and effort that has gone into this is a great place to start or just visit for more obscure viewpoints.

Cheers!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:08 PM on 01/09/2009
- derekc06 I'm a Fan of derekc06 23 fans permalink
photo

exactly! of course it's flawed! of course there are errors! just check the sources for yourself, as you should when anything else!

i don't understand why people aren't getting this...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:11 PM on 01/09/2009
photo

Yep, no encyclopedia, including Britannica, should be used as a primary source. While it's easier for the crap to get in, it easier for the crap to get out as well. And if you check the sources, it's all good.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:50 AM on 01/10/2009
Page: 1 2 3 Next › Last » (3 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect