# Contradiction can damage your credibility

- Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2011/12/21/contradiction-can-damage-your-credibility/
- Published: 2011-12-21T08:02:26+00:00
- Author: Kevin Baughen

**What a week of message contradictions we’ve noted at Bottom Line Ideas…**

First there was research from Charities Aid Foundation (CAF) which showed [Britain to be the fifth most charitable country in the world](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2076373/Generous-UK-jumps-No-5-world-charity-league-153-nations.html)(
up from eighth last year apparently). The same research also reported that nearly
80% of us give regularly to charity, second only to the Thais. Then we saw the [British Government veto any further support](http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/dec/14/uk-bailout-eurozone-crisis)
to the IMF in support of specific Euro-zone bailouts – our European cousins perhaps
not feeling our generosity quite so much.

This reminded me of the [research from a few weeks back](https://www.fundraising.co.uk/news/2011/12/12/number-million-pound-gifts-drops-individuals-still-main-source)
which showed that the only people giving less to charity in these tough economic
times seem to be the richest people in the UK. Oh, and [bankers bonuses were announced](http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-11-29/london-bankers-bonuses-shrinking-amid-eu-crisis-survey-says.html)
which were just a tad higher than the public owners would have liked.

## Advertisement

I heard [Piers Morgan](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piers_Morgan) deride the practice
of Fleet Street phone hacking at the [Leveson enquiry](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-16259941)
and then watched with incredulity as he refused to offer details of how he had been
party to personal information obtained from similar activities… even though his 
newspaper was never involved in such practices…

A major PC manufacturer’s help line cut me off three times whilst I was on hold 
listening to awful music and a looped message insisting that my call “was important
to them; please continue to hold and we’ll be right with you.”

And my favourite contradiction of this week was a discussion I joined on[ Linkedin](http://www.linkedin.com/groups/Seasons-Greetings-vs-Happy-Christmas-887297.S.82120254?qid=32160da5-0f35-4e2f-895b-85acbbdb37e1&trk=group_most_popular-0-b-ttl&goback=.gmp_887297)
about whether it is offensive to wish everyone a ‘Merry Christmas’ given the festivities
are based in Christianity. The majority of the forum agreed that it is generally
perceived as a statement of goodwill from one party to another and really ought 
to be accepted in the manner the sentiment is intended. But there were stories from
marketers and fundraisers who had received complaints from various ethnic minority
groups about how insensitive and presumptive a “Merry Christmas” can be followed
by complaints that it was wasteful for charities to print up multiple versions of
festive cards.

The overall point for us in all of these cases is that the voice concerned has simply
undermined its own credibility due to the inconsistency between their viewpoint 
and their behaviour. Donors, volunteers, customers and the public are not stupid.
No really, they’re not (reality TV aside).

If your personal or organisational brand’s words are not consistent with your actions,
your audiences simply won’t believe you. No credibility = no right to ask for money,
support or custom. And certainly no right to ask for individuals to repeat those
actions. How consistent is your brand with your actions?

And if, like me, you’ll be celebrating at the weekend, I wish you all a very Merry
Christmas and a relaxing New Year. (Please don’t complain)