Did your email server mangle this message? Read online here :)

📍What we're talking about this issue: 
9 ways to strengthen your feedback for better results

Photo by Lisa Sargent

Dear defender of good,

With holiday and annual appeals upon us, soon – or maybe even now – you’re going to be dealing with lots of reviews and edits, from now right on through the new year. 

Today’s edition of the Loyalty Letter (#10!) is here to help you edit better...

Editing Session with Lisa:
9 ways to (vastly) strengthen your feedback 

✍️ By Lisa Sargent
Fundraising copywriter

September 2024

Feedback. For nonprofit designers and fundraising copywriters (like me :)), it’s a way of life. 

For nonprofits too, as you bring those drafts of your appeal letters and other donor communications to your team and your board for review and approval. 

And sometimes it can feel like everyone has to weigh in – with advice that, if the changes are made, will ultimately weaken your story and suppress your results.

Today we’re going to look at some real-life feedback that Designer Sandie and I have received over the years, along with reasons the recommended edits will not serve to strengthen the end product or results.

Edit 1: If your edit requires that uneven page breaks get “repaired”...

When I talk about uneven page breaks, I mean the last sentence on each page of your appeal letter, whether it’s page 1 or page 2 or page 5. 

Nonprofits overwhelmingly want these sentences to end evenly, buttoning up neatly at the bottom of every page. 

But even if someone on your team recommends it, you don't want make that mistake. 

Here’s why: A completed sentence at the bottom of the page is like a stop sign for your brain. 

Even with a really good page turn, the sentence is completed – leaving your reader with one less reason to keep reading. The goal, until you get to the very end of your letter, is to keep your reader reading.  

Yes, uneven page breaks look awkward. 
Yes, it means readers have to turn the page in mid-sentence. 
Yes, it’s more like a letter from one human being to another. 

And these are ALL reasons to trust your copywriter and keep those uneven page breaks, well, uneven. (In an upcoming episode of John Lepp’s Direct Mail Clinics, we discuss this. You can sign up for the clinics here, free.) 

Edit 2. If your edit forces all copy to maintain perfect grammar and punctuation standards...

I’m asked all the time about my weird punctuation and grammar. Incomplete sentences. One word paragraphs. Commas for pauses, trailing ellipses... and more. 

And look: we need grammatical structure. We need words to be spelled correctly. We need most punctuation to be upheld. We need common word usage to be common to the folks reading the letter. 

But. 

You can never forget that if you are doing effective fundraising copywriting, you are writing for the conversation inside your reader’s head when they read: and that voice needs conversational punctuation, and an occasional departure from recommended grammar rules, to guide them.

Are you about to ask your writer to remove a comma or ditch an ellipsis? Read it in your head first. 

Chances are, they’re using that punctuation for emphasis. (Same with formatting, fyi... underlining, bold, italics, used non-rampantly, are meant to keep your reader reading and guide them to the parts that matter – super important for scanners.)

On LinkedIn I wrote about How to Write Like You Talk, and How to Use Your Inside Voice. Both free.

Edit 3: If your edit removes emotional or plainspoken copy to insert branding language...

Almost always, if you remove emotional copy to make room for copy that complies with your brand, it’s the wrong move. Why?

Because most brand language is broad. Generic. And often, focused on the organization. 

Emotional copy is about reaching your donor like a key to their heart, in a way that makes them want to pay attention now – and that will help them love and remember your brand better than any jargon ever can.

Same goes with edit 4.

Edit 4: If your edit inserts language that puts the focus on your organization over your donor...

Mostly what I mean by this is “we-based” copy. 

Our programs... our missions... our work. 

Don’t make this edit. 

Instead, keep the focus on your supporters and their generosity. 

The work they help make happen... they people they stand beside... the lives they touch. 

Keep in mind, when I use the term we-based this isn’t the “we of solidarity.” It’s not the you-and-me we, the we’re-in-this-together-we. (Several eons ago I wrote a piece for Pamela Grow on this – my copy includes Solidarity We all the time, and yours can too. But the Royal We? It’s got to go.)

Be on the lookout: Royal We copy often involves giant numbers. “Our programs help hundreds of thousands,” “We served 7.5 million people last year,” etc. Whenever possible, don’t let faceless numbers in. 

Edit 5. If your edit tries to resolve the story (same goes for happy photos)...

I’m going to say this with all the fire in my copywriter’s heart. 

If you really and truly love your donors, resist the urge to let anyone on your team edit your appeal into a happily-ever-after story.  

An appeal with a resolved story is not the best way to spark action.

But an appeal with an unresolved story?
 

That's a story your donor can be part of... a story they can give to now... a story they can help change or resolve or improve.

Allow your storytellers – your writers, your designers, your strategists – to find and tell the stories that need your donors to help complete the circle... those are the stories that make people want to give. 

Then save your happily-ever-afters for newsletters and email success stories.

Same goes for your photos, by the way.  Only happy, smiling faces in an appeal is not showing need. Especially if your copy talks about need and is contradicted by a happy photo. 

Edit 6. If your edit favors programmatic wording or puts features over benefits...

I once made this suggestion to a writer, who used the phrase “education classes at our day program” in an email appeal:

'Education classes in our day program' is an example of features over benefits and the Curse of Knowledge (see Chip and Dan Heath’s book, Made to Stick). You cannot assume a donor will know what these things are or why they matter. Instead, turn features into benefits: your beneficiary is learning the skills to build a new life, or something similar.

So: Don’t try and work in the official names of your programs everywhere if they’re loaded with jargon. 

 

Instead, say what your programs do... how your programs help. (Yes, you can use the name sometimes. But not in place of benefits-rich copy.)

Final three for today...

Edit 7. If your edit replaces tangible gifts with intangible ones...

I totally understand you’re worried about restricted vs. unrestricted gifts. 

But fixing that is as easy as saying, “Your gift will help provide 10 children with a school kit” or “Your gift could/can provide...”. 

Help, could, and can let you show donors they are helping give to real, tangible things, while still being unrestricted and transparent that there are other pieces of the work they will also support. 

 

(Note: you can also add copy to your letter, in warm human language, that says their gift will support all of the work.)

Edit 8: If your edit is based on personal likes and dislikes...

Don't. 

Instead, ask your creative team why they made the choices they made. 99.9% of the time, they have a definite reason for adding faux tape to the edges of the photos, or a blue handfont that deviates from your brand font. 

At one of my first copywriting gigs, the rule was: “Leave your ego at the door.” That rule still stands for me today.

Direct response is about what works, not our personal likes or dislikes.

Which brings me to our final common edit today, number 9...

Edit 9: If you artificially constrain length...

So common, this edit: “Make this a 2-page letter, please. No one reads long letters anymore.”  

Hear me now. 

Even if your focus group said that, it’s almost always not true. 

You want what people actually do. Not what they say they do.

And I can tell you this, based on real results: I write four- and six-page letters that outperform short ones time and time again, and I am not alone or special in my ability to do this: LOTS of other writers do too. 

Instead of artificially constraining length, if budget allows, let your letter be as long as it needs to be. 4 pages... 6 pages... still good, and often better.

Because here's the thing: great fundraising editors focus their time on looking for the real issues, such as:

Typos, obvs...

Clunky or unclear phrases... 
Glitches that bog down the reader with unanswered questions... 
Endless paragraphs... 

Overuse of adverbs...

Lofty prose...

Fancy design...

Copy that tries to 'educate' donors into giving...

Weak or tepid calls to action...

... They don't spin their wheels pushing back endlessly against what we know makes for truly effective, engaging copy and design.

You want to be that Great Editor: making every letter stronger, and better, with every review you send – and it’s my great hope today that this quick editing session has helped you on your way to doing just that.

Thank you so much for caring about effective fundraising... for reading today... and for being a Loyalty Letter subscriber. See you in October :-)

Write with great heart!  

Lisa ✍️

PS.  Got an editing question? Email it to me at lisa@lisasargent.com and I'll cover it when I can! Thank you!  :-) 

❤️ Not yet signed up? Word love awaits: Subscribe to this newsletter