Now that Mayor Dean Fortin and Victoria Coun. Shellie Gudgeon have successfully introduced a review of canvassing bylaws, the conversation around professional canvassers is heating up.
Defenders of chugging (a portmanteau of the phrase 鈥渃harity mugging鈥�) argue that it鈥檚 a cost-effective way for charities to raise money, while those who are more critical of the practice, such as Gudgeon, worry about complaints that canvassers are too 鈥渁ggressive.鈥�
While much of this concern is being sung to the tune of 鈥淲on鈥檛 someone think of the tourists?鈥� it鈥檚 an issue that most Victorians are eager to weigh in on as well.
I鈥檝e been on both sides of this debate. In my younger days, I was indeed a canvasser, though I was never a paid employee; I volunteered to go door-to-door, a distinction that may or may not be relevant. Nowadays, I鈥檓 one of those shame-faced individuals who feigns checking her watch or rifling in her purse to avoid making eye contact with any one of the cheerful, dedicated canvassers who dot our downtown streets.
I liked canvassing when I did it 鈥� although it was hard, often unrewarding work 鈥� because I felt that my charity was a worthwhile one. Most of them are.
So I voice my distaste for chugging with compassion for the people who are doing it, and the understanding that it is often vitally important for charities to explore all possible avenues for funding. Times are tough, especially for non-profits, and these are causes that matter.
Indeed, charities say face-to-face fundraising is more cost-effective than online or TV advertising. Charities also like canvassers because they can put a human face on issues in a way that phone calls or email solicitations rarely can.
Furthermore, as a 乌鸦传媒 editorial pointed out last Saturday, increasing regulations around street solicitation will inevitably lead to subjective judgment calls and countless frustrations for bylaw officers. It may even unwittingly affect attitudes toward other forms of street solicitation, such as panhandling.
Yet I find chugging to be frustrating in a way that panhandling is not. Perhaps it鈥檚 because of the obvious distinction that one group of people is being paid to interrupt you, while the others have no other place to go and few other ways to earn. Perhaps it comes down to a difference in style: Most panhandlers rarely make the same demands on your time and commitment 鈥� even those who actively engage and interact with you 鈥� than the typical canvasser does.
I鈥檝e never met a canvasser whom I would call 鈥渁ggressive.鈥� Intrusive might be a better word, and yet I can forgive even that, because their causes are good ones, dang it, and raising awareness is important.
No, what frustrates me about chugging is that it violates the most important aspect of charity giving: research. Nobody should be pressured, or even encouraged, to donate without doing their due diligence.
Several summers ago, my date and I were stopped (quite politely) by a canvasser. Fearful as I was of coming across to my date like an uncouth anti-environmentalist, I voiced interest in the canvasser鈥檚 cause. At every juncture where I would have normally excused myself, I instead waded further into the conversation, until I realized that he wanted me to sign up my credit card for monthly donations.
Right now. No thanks. Are you sure?
Yes 鈥� but can I take a brochure and think about it? Well, yes I could, but he really would like it if I signed up now. And so on.
I didn鈥檛 blame him 鈥� he was just doing his job 鈥� but it鈥檚 worth remembering that canvassers are paid to solicit donations, not simply raise awareness. This can get in the way of the steps we need to take to make donations responsibly, such as researching the charity from an external source, assessing its goals and objectives, and donating because we feel good about it. We may not be able to accomplish this in a hurried roadside conversation with a paid representative.
It would be damaging to charities to prevent them from soliciting donations on the street, or from going door to door. But I also believe that the only way for individuals to feel good about their donations is to engage in a giving process that is responsible, eager and informed. And I鈥檓 not sure chugging encourages that.
