There’s now a facebook page for anyone outraged by the Chase Community Giving situation. Join us and let your voice be heard if you believe the only fair contest is one in which charities compete on their merits, and not their money!
Advertisements
I commend your openness on this site for opinions that arent yours only – while i tried to post a comment on another site ( from one of the founders of this site, and it was rejected)
Everybody definitely has to find her or his own way with her or his blog comment policy. I try to leave things I don’t agree with – I figure each person can evaluate the comments left and decide for him or herself if they are valid or applicable. That said, I don’t tolerate abuse.
While the facebook page above is a group effort, this blog is mine alone. It has been, for the short period of its existence (I started it in January), about what my life is like with severe ME/CFS. It’s a consciousness-raising project, mostly, since so few people know much of anything about my disease.
see below,,,,this is what kohls had to say,,,,
Doris Hajewski of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel writes:
A Kohl’s Corp. contest that gave a total of $10 million to 20 schools nationwide inspired intense campaigning, leading to questions about whether the well-intentioned competition was fair.…
“It wasn’t fair,” said William Henk, dean of Marquette University’s College of Education, said of the raffles and international voting. “It was probably creative. But it doesn’t seem like it was a fair thing to do.”
Kohl’s said the raffles and the votes from outside the U.S. were in compliance with contest rules.…
So here’s the original article that quote came from, right?
I think it’s interesting how this encapsulates the current situation as well. Perceived unfairness by other contest participants, but a corporate sponsor who has written and/or interpreted the rules in such a way that they avoid weighing in on “fairness.” The difference here is that Kohl’s, as you note, actually comes out and says the “creative” methods were okay with them. Chase hasn’t…but their silence is sort of an endorsement, is it not?
United Lubavitcher Yeshiva was disqualified from that contest. What they appear to have done differently than the schools who were not disqualified was run a raffle.
What I find most interesting about the Kohl’s Cares thing is that after the 2010 contest, they haven’t had another. My guess would be that they were unhappy with the “creative” vote-getting strategies netting them bad press, and decided it was better to not give away money than to buy themselves bad press with it.
at the kohls contest, 18 of the 20 winners has ipad etc raffles, including the catholic and jewish schools.
United Lubavitcher Yeshiva and Darby public school was disqualified from that contest because of fraud. not b/c of any contest
it wasn’t the raffles simply b/c as stated 18 of the winners all had raffles and kohls said it was fine to have them.
They got DQ b/c they engaged in fraudulent means of obtaining those votes.
So what was the fraud that caused the disqualification?
macro and bot voting
I know how macros work in applications like Word, but how does that work in a contest? I’m not that technically inclined, but it sounds like you are.
if you guy keep going this way, you might just convince Chase to go the same way as Kohls,
If you do care, and i think you guy do.
Stop attacking chase, stop attacking the Organizations that used “creative” methods for obtaining votes and just send and email/letter to chase that they need to be more clear in the future so that it is a equal playing field for all.
You guy are just attacking eveyone and it isnt doing much for no one.
A raffle was not cause or disqualification in the Kohls contest. One clarification the comment posted above from Kohls came out after the contest was over and I only saw it on that internet article/blog. That statement was never posted on their FB contest wall (similar to the one that is running right now on Chase). They never, ever made a public comment during the contest. They never to my knowledge, answered any questions from posters if the raffles were legal or not. A lot of different schools wrote on the FB wall they had obtained permission from Kohls, but no one could confirm that. Parents from Darby (public school) were the most outspoken after being disqualified and claimed they had been dq’d because the majority of their votes came in the early a.m. and they were ding’d for that. What they neglected to ever mention was their site showed massive photos of the same person with different names. In the Kohls contest, you could see photos of every person who voted. Also someone posted on FB an advertisement from a parent from Darby seeking massive voting services in China. They also had another link which showed the parent was a parent supporter of the school. The Darby supporters on FB then claimed this was someone acting on their own behalf and not the school. The mayor of Los Angeles went on local television before the end of the contest telling people to vote for the school. So, Darby claimed that was the reason for the huge amounts of votes. Also, one clarification Kohls let you vote 5 times for the same school so those massive votes really can be divided by 5. The Christian schools that used incentives were from several different Christian faiths not just Catholic.
Thanks for the additional info, Kate. Sounds like this sort of contest is pretty fraught.
Here are quotes from the Hillel Academy Facebook page that have since been deleted. I took screen shots though and could provide them if they are helpful:
“After the contest began, we were informed that Chase had changed the rules and we were not allowed to give away prizes. We have not given away any prizes and will not be doing so….”
“… we actually posted this with permission of Chase in the beginning of the campaign. Midway through the competition, Chase decided to change the rules for the entire competition. We’d removed all ads (as of May 20th per Chase communication).”
It’s, of course, not true that they removed all ads. The free camcorder ad was up all the way through the end of the contest.
What I find interesting about the posts from Hillel is that they claim that Chase initially gave them the ok to do the raffle and then told them to take that down. It’s interesting for two reasons: Chase apparently doesn’t think raffles are a problem (would have been nice to inform everybody of this policy). And Hillel was in violation of the changed directions re the raffle from Chase.