Preventing a problem, like malaria, is often more effective than curing it, but it creates a marketing challenge. It's difficult to tell a compelling story about a child who *didn't* get sick. This "identifiable victim" bias means funds often flow to less effective but more narratively satisfying interventions.
Related Insights
The key insight in effective giving is not just comparing charities, but recognizing that most individuals can dramatically increase their positive impact by redirecting donations to highly effective opportunities they are likely unaware of, achieving up to 100 times more good with their money.
When evaluating persuasive messaging, separate the craft from the content. Highly effective marketing for a poor product isn't 'bad storytelling'—it's 'evil storytelling.' This distinction is crucial for understanding how misleading narratives can be successful and for building ethical ones in contrast.
Don't judge a charity's effectiveness by its website. An Indian charity, Bandhan, had a 90s-era website but an evidence-based program praised by Nobel laureates. Organizations excellent at impact delivery may be poor at marketing, presenting an opportunity for diligent donors to find undervalued opportunities.
Effective vaccines eradicate the visible horror of diseases. By eliminating the pain and tragic outcomes from public memory, vaccines work against their own acceptance. People cannot fear what they have never seen, leading to complacency and vaccine hesitancy because the terrifying counterfactual is unimaginable.
When a public health intervention successfully prevents a crisis, the lack of a negative outcome makes the initial action seem like an unnecessary overreaction. This paradox makes it difficult to justify and maintain funding for preventative measures whose success is invisible.
Diseases like Ebola and malaria, which primarily affect poor countries, lack market incentives for vaccine R&D. The Ebola vaccine only progressed because it was briefly on a U.S. bioterrorism list created after 9/11, highlighting how market failures require creative, sometimes accidental, incentives to overcome.
One of five timeless marketing principles is that humans are wired to avoid pain more than they are to seek gain. Marketing that speaks to a customer's secret worries—a missed goal, a clunky process, or looking stupid—will grab attention more effectively than messages focused purely on benefits.
A charity like Make-A-Wish can demonstrably create value, even exceeding its costs in healthcare savings. However, the same donation could save multiple lives elsewhere, illustrating the stark opportunity costs in charitable giving. Effective philanthropy requires comparing good options, not just identifying them.
Founders often chase severe, 'shark bite' problems that are rare. A more sustainable business can be built solving a common, less severe 'mosquito bite' problem, as the market size and frequency of need are far greater.
Unlike efficient markets, the charitable sector often rewards organizations with the best storytelling, not those delivering the most value. This lack of a feedback loop between a donation and its real-world impact means incentives are misaligned, favoring persuasion over proven effectiveness.