I started a concerted campaign where we tried to get access to “celebrities” [...] two journalists and an artist have agreed to take the pledge
Anecdotally, one person who basically never heard of EA before came to our local group’s lunch about Giving What We Can on Jan.9th, and took the pledge in time for the drive—this might set a record for fastest turnaround for hearing about a thing and then committing to it!
That’s strikingly successful! Can you say a little more about these people and why they were so unusually receptive? Did they fit into groups of people typically receptive to EA? What was their attitude to charity before? What sort of contact did you have with the journalists and artist?
In addition, both EA London and EA Madison (my local meetup) organized local meetups to talk to people about the GWWC pledge and encourage people to take the pledge/Try Giving, with very positive results.
The journalists and the artist were all people who are familiar with EA already, and likely already give 10% or considerably more of their income to global poverty alleviation efforts. So the counterfactual benefit of their donations is low (but nonzero—commitment devices are great!), though we’re hoping that the public interviews, once they’re done/published, will help get people interested or excited about EA.
In a sense, most of the benefit will ultimately come in the upcoming months if not years, as they hopefully increase interest/investment in the EA movement and publicly give, encouraging more people among their audience to do so.
“Can you expand on these results?” I can’t speak too much for the London group, but the Madison meeting just generally felt very well. People talked about why they pledged, and it generally seemed very convincing to the non-pledgers in the audience. And like I said, somebody pledged who didn’t hear of EA before, which is strongly counterfactual (since if he did not come to this one, it might be months if not years before he hears about EA or came to another EA Madison meeting).
I’ve forwarded your comment to somebody who ran the London meeting. Hopefully they can provide more info!
That’s strikingly successful! Can you say a little more about these people and why they were so unusually receptive? Did they fit into groups of people typically receptive to EA? What was their attitude to charity before? What sort of contact did you have with the journalists and artist?
Can you expand on these results?
The journalists and the artist were all people who are familiar with EA already, and likely already give 10% or considerably more of their income to global poverty alleviation efforts. So the counterfactual benefit of their donations is low (but nonzero—commitment devices are great!), though we’re hoping that the public interviews, once they’re done/published, will help get people interested or excited about EA.
In a sense, most of the benefit will ultimately come in the upcoming months if not years, as they hopefully increase interest/investment in the EA movement and publicly give, encouraging more people among their audience to do so.
“Can you expand on these results?” I can’t speak too much for the London group, but the Madison meeting just generally felt very well. People talked about why they pledged, and it generally seemed very convincing to the non-pledgers in the audience. And like I said, somebody pledged who didn’t hear of EA before, which is strongly counterfactual (since if he did not come to this one, it might be months if not years before he hears about EA or came to another EA Madison meeting).
I’ve forwarded your comment to somebody who ran the London meeting. Hopefully they can provide more info!