[Foundation-l] Fundraising & Networking updates

[Kul Takanao Wadhwa]

Simon,

There are a lot of issues we need to examine here (including carefully
analyzing what we have doing up to this point) but I appreciate the
input. Believe me, we are going to take a look and investigate all
the possibilities here. Please keep the comments coming...thanks.

--Kul

Kul Takanao Wadhwa
Head of Business Development
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.
kul at wikimedia.org

simonpedia wrote:
> No, I think it should be a little more considered than that.
>  
> Look at (say) IBM’s page. Like most large companies, it will have someone
> from their PR teams looking at Wikipedia articles, if not initiating them.
> Although I see the need to have these types of companies (and products)
> peppered throughout Wikipedias to complete it, it seems strange to many of
> my friends in the media that there would not be a way for the foundation
> and/or its community to be rewarded, as every other publisher would insist
> upon. 
>  
> Advertising is dangerous amongst media which is ‘owned’ by contributors, as
> we know. But (excuse my terminology) panhandling to contributors/users seems
> a pretty hard road to plough, especially as they do most of the work. I’m
> just mentioning one obvious response which my old friends in the media
> business responded with when I asked for their ideas. They may only have
> around 140 years experience between them, but it seemed a reasonable concept
> for making projects sustainable as the Foundation begins to professionalize.
> 
>  
> Personally, I’m surprised someone from the WMF wouldn’t have just gone to
> one (or a few) of the big computer companies and said, “46m. x 2
> international eyeballs/month (and rising). Give us (say) $5M for the one
> year’s sponsorship (in cash or contra)”. What’s that? 2 x 30 sec, spots on
> one country’s superbowl? Sooner or later, if you think like a private
> publisher, this, or something like this, is about the only way forward. If
> you think like a public one, it’s a bit different. HYPERLINK
> "http://wikieducator.org/Talk:Community_networks#lqt_thread_973"http://wikie
> ducator.org/Talk:Community_networks#lqt_thread_973
>  
> It’s funny from my friends’ perspective, cause the old joke is “content is
> there to separate the ads”. WMF stuff is the antithesis of Fox-like content,
> with the 8th(?)largest group of interactive sites in the world. Yet it seems
> there is no understanding of what they are worth. Hopefully that will change
> as Kul gets his feet under the desk. Regards, simon 
>  
>  
>  
>> I can't see how it could become problematic. By creating a company or
>> product template all it does is allow a company to say "we support the
> WMF",
>> while knowing full well that they can't lie due the beady eyes and open
> edit
>> policy around here. It allows them an easy way to take from the
> advertising
>> account rather than the feeble donation account. It also gives their
>> PR/advertising teams a reason to take interactive stuff more seriously
> than
>> they do with the overrated and costly broadcast media.
>  
> I can't see many companies paying just to get a "we support the WMF"
> notice on the article about them. What I thought you were suggesting
> was removing the logos from all company articles unless they pay us -
> that's a very different thing, and completely fails NPOV, which is one
> of our most important policies.
> 
>  
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition. 
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.9/1238 - Release Date: 22/01/2008
> 8:12 PM
>  
> _______________________________________________
> foundation-l mailing list
> foundation-l at lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l