Charities Rationalize Lying, Honest Charities Suffer

Many people working at charities want to do good. That's great! But unfortunately, this desire to do good makes it easy to rationalize dishonesty.

Think of it like this: if exaggerating a few marketing claims brings in more donations — and those donations allow the charity to save more lives — exaggeration can start to feel like the ethical choice. The alternative, after all, is fewer lives being saved by the charity.

However, there's a key problem with this: donations are a limited resource.

The Donor With $100

Consider a donor who is trying to decide where to donate $100. The donor finds two charities online:

Based on this, the donor donates $100 to Charity B, and Charity B is happy because now they have more money to help animals.

But think about what actually happened here — instead of an honest charity getting $100 to help animals, a dishonest charity is getting $100 to help animals.

This leaves us with an important question: is it better for the world if we fund honest charities, or dishonest charities?

Endnote

The problem also doesn't stop at impact claims. If a charity is willing to lie about those, they may also be willing to lie about other things — including whether donations go towards animals, or towards employee perks and executive salaries.

Lying doesn't just inflate one statistic. It destroys the ability of donors to trust what a charity claims.

To receive updates when we publish new articles, subscribe to our newsletter below for free.