Tim Høiland
27Jan/12Off

Repaso: The future of aid; US military in Latin America; GOP & Hispanics; 100 best employers; faith-work issues; and Accord Network videos

1. The future of aid
Reuters AlertNet has a really cool multimedia feature running right now with stories, videos, polls, infographics and more exploring the future of humanitarian aid. I could spend hours exploring everything there.

2. New US military bases in Latin America
The Just the Facts blog (focused on Latin America and US foreign policy toward the region) has a Google Map showing all the new military bases the US built in Latin America in 2009-10, paid for with money from the counternarcotics budget. Seeking to curb the drug trade may be necessary, but given the region’s history (and US military involvement behind the scenes and otherwise), this is something worth keeping an eye on.

3. The GOP and the Hispanic vote
Jeb Bush, former governor of Florida and current brother of W, has an op-ed in the Washington Post, encouraging Republicans to consider how they might earn the Hispanic vote - something none of the GOP front-runners seem particularly interested in doing:

[W]e need to think of immigration reform as an economic issue, not just a border security issue. Numerous polls show that Hispanics agree with Republicans on the necessity of a secure border and enforceable and fair immigration laws to reduce illegal immigration and strengthen legal immigration. Hispanics recognize that Democrats have failed to deliver on immigration reform, having chosen to spend their political capital on other priorities. Republicans should reengage on this issue and reframe it.

4. 100 best companies to work for
Yesterday I went to hear Christopher J.H. Wright speak on the topic of “Saints in the Marketplace.” In a nutshell, he emphasized the fact that God created work, that he audits it, governs it, and redeems it. I’ll post full thoughts on the talk next week, but in the meantime, here are some great examples from Fortune of businesses that create great places to work. When thinking Christianly about business, this certainly isn’t the only indicator to look at, but it's one worth highlighting and affirming for sure.

5. Faith-work distortions and possibilities
Lukas Naugle, who I recently met over a cup of coffee here in Phoenix to discuss business and the common good, has an essay in Comment about the integration of faith and business, and some of the common pitfalls of those trying to connect the two. It’s a great read, and a hugely important topic, specifically taking a look at two books on the subject.

[I]t can be tricky for an average businessperson to figure out how he or she should do business for the glory of God and the common good. Folks who run into this problem exist in many places—I have met them over coffee, investment pitches, and at conferences. Of course, there are some very positive stories and examples out there, but those who haven't gained a full-orbed view of the integration of faith and business are still the majority, and they come in various shapes and sizes. Here are some of the faith-work Frankenstein's monsters I've met.

6. Accord Network’s forum videos now online
The Accord Network, serving Christian groups working in the fields of relief and development, has posted videos from a number of the presentations at its Developing Excellence Forum, held last November in Baltimore. Main session speakers include Scott Todd (Compassion International, 58: Campaign), Peter Greer (HOPE International), and Tony Hall (former US ambassador). Additionally, videos from the Transformational Development Summit, sponsored by my friends at Eastern University, include Bryant Myers (Fuller Seminary, World Vision International), Stephan Baumann (World Relief), and others. It’s a wealth of good stuff.

Repaso is intended as a thought-provoking compilation of news and commentary from the past week related to the intersections of faith, development, justice and peace. As always, I welcome your thoughts on any of the links and ideas in this roundup!

[Photo credit: cnrc.navy.mil]

31Oct/11Off

Marketing, ethics, and the self-sufficiency of God

Last night I tweeted this from The Onion: "Let's admit it, NGO marketing/comms folks... we kinda had this one coming: http://onion.com/dvDsgY"

As someone working in the field of relief and development, I wrestle with the ways NGOs represent their work and the ways we go about getting funding to keep that work going. Do the very noble ends (serving the poor, saving lives) really justify the often less noble means? Do vivid photos of starving children really serve anyone? Do mass mailings that most people just throw in the trash justify the cost of production, both as a percentage of donor money and in terms of environmental degradation, something that has a devastating effect on the very poor these organizations purport to serve? Those are just a couple of the questions I wrestle with.

In regard to the first question, about the ethics of using emotionally compelling but ethically troubling images, I'm grateful for the work of the International Guild of Visual Peacemakers, a group of photographers and videographers "devoted to peacemaking and breaking down stereotypes by displaying the beauty and dignity of various cultures around the world." For those producing visual content, they offer an ethical code. And for those of us who consume visual content (all of us), they invite us to sign a charter for visual peace. The creative, talented, compassionate folks at IGVP are doing important work that I hope will continue to shape how NGOs, businesses, and independent communicators reflect the dignity of their subjects.

Within the faith-based sector, which is more narrowly where I happen to work, we're not immune to these ethical concerns. If anything, we need to be extra vigilant, given the way spiritual guilt can so easily be used to manipulate. I've been reflecting on these things for a while now, but just this morning while eating breakfast and reading The Knowledge of the Holy by A.W. Tozer, I came across this passage that brings the matter home for us in theological terms. His language is a bit old-fashioned, and he refers specifically to "missionary appeals", but what he says is true of faith-based humanitarian and social justice pleas as well:

Probably the hardest thought of all for our natural egotism to entertain is that God does not need our help. We commonly represent Him as a busy, eager, somewhat frustrated Father hurrying about seeking help to carry out His benevolent plan to bring peace and salvation to the world, but, as said the Lady Julian, "I saw truly that God doeth all-thing, be it never so little." The God who worketh all things surely needs no help and no helpers.

Too many missionary appeals are based upon this fancied frustration of Almighty God. An effective speaker can easily excite pity in his hearers, not only for the heathen but for the God who has tried so hard and so long to save them and has failed for want of support. I fear that thousands of younger persons enter Christian service from no higher motive than to help deliver God from the embarrassing situation His love has gotten Him into and His limited abilities seem unable to get Him out of. Add to this a certain degree of commendable idealism and a fair amount of compassion for the underprivileged and you have the true drive behind much Christian activity today.

The key word in that passage, I think, is need. God does not need our help. He invites us to join him in his work, and we do so in response to the love and grace we have received. When we pray, "Your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven," we may find him moving us to act accordingly. But guilt won't do it. It won't last. Rather, we can serve the poor with a quiet trust in a loving God, a God who will do his thing whether we're part of it or not.

Be still, and know that I am God. I will be exalted among the nations, I will be exalted in the earth! (Ps 46:10)

What would our marketing look like if we believed that?

14Sep/11Off

Three cups of deceit

Five months ago, scandal engulfed a guy from Montana named Greg Mortenson.

He'd made a name for himself through a book called Three Cups of Tea, which is his story of accidentally becoming one of the world's most inspiring humanitarians. Through the book, which remained on the New York Times bestseller list for four years, Mortenson inspired tens of thousands -- if not millions -- of people to support his nonprofit organization, the Central Asia Institute. He even managed to get himself nominated on more than one occasion for the Nobel Peace Prize. President Obama himself donated a hundred grand to the cause.

Then came April of this year, when 60 Minutes aired a report suggesting that this seemingly unanimous enthusiasm might have been misguided, citing allegations from well-known writer Jon Krakauer and others that some of the most impressive and inspiring stories in Three Cups of Tea were either grossly exaggerated or completely bogus, and that Mortenson was responsible for appalling misuse of his organization's funds. Here's the 60 Minutes segment, in case you'd like to get up to speed that way:

Mortenson responded to CBS with a short statement and a longer statement, and the CAI board issued a response to the accusations as well; you can read them for yourself if you'd like. I didn't blog about any of this at the time, partly because deep down I wanted to believe Mortenson was being falsely maligned (honestly, who didn't love Three Cups?), but also because about a million other bloggers suddenly took it upon themselves to publicly crucify him, rendering my two cents a bit redundant.

Recently, however, with Borders going out of business and selling books at steep discounts, I came across Krakauer's 70-page exposé Three Cups of Deceit, and decided to give it a read. For those who have seen the 60 Minutes report, the gist of the accusations come as no surprise. Krakauer arranges the book into three sections which are, broadly speaking, the three problems he sees with Mortenson and Three Cups. First, the problem of fabricated stories presented as fact. Second, the problem of lack of financial accountability. And third, the problem of lackluster results in the places where Mortenson claims success.

The accusations do seem fairly damning, and I don't think that Mortenson's or CAI's responses sufficiently defuse them. So in the midst of profound disappointment and disillusionment it's only natural to want to demonize the man, to throw out your copy of Three Cups, and to distance yourself by pretending you never liked it in the first place and would never fall for such deception. But I think there are at least three big lessons we can all learn from this.

First, it is good to be reminded of the need for organizations and their leaders to be held accountable. Charity Navigator is one of the leading nonprofit watchdogs, and while it isn't perfect (it failed to flag CAI's shady accounting ahead of time), it has been evolving to become a more accurate measure of financial accountability and program effectiveness. There are good places to put your money to use for the common good, so please resist the two extremes: either donating on a whim just because someone asked you to, or refusing to donate at all because scandals like this exist.

Second, it is good to be reminded of the seduction of power and money, to which none of us are immune. Mortenson discovered a formula for pulling on people's heartstrings, for enlarging his personal bank account, and yes, for helping a lot of people at the same time. Mixed motives are hardly foreign to any of us, so while it does seem that Mortenson has engaged in manipulative, greedy, and deceptive behavior and has taken advantage of people's generosity and goodwill in the process, we simply cannot say that we'd be immune to these temptations were we in his shoes.

Third, and finally, it is good to be reminded that we live in a messy world full of complicated people and conflicting reports, and that a nuanced perspective is almost always helpful. Krakauer himself is quick to affirm the good that Mortenson has done -- and the good he has done is considerable -- and that is perhaps what I most appreciate about the book. While obviously first and foremost an exposé, Three Cups of Deceit demonstrates that for those confident in the facts, we can afford to be honest about the good, the bad and the ugly. And that's what separates Krakauer, a true journalist, from so many bandwagon bloggers: in lambasting a man who misled people through looseness of facts, it's all too easy to disqualify our critiques by doing the same.