sociological
review
polish
ISSN 1231 – 1413
1(229)’25
DOI:10.26412/psr229.05
BARBARA CYREK
DSW University of Lower Silesia
JENNA PELTONEN
University of Turku
Online Fundraising and Social Divisions
Abstract: The global village of networked relationships implies the digitalization of community activities. An ex-
ample of cultural mobilization that has recently migrated to the Internet is fundraising. Contemporary fundraising
platforms enable financing usually combined with communication: asynchronous or quasi-synchronous. Support-
ing specific goals, individuals or groups can be a tool for building a multiplatform social identity—in particular
thanks to the possibility of sharing information about fundraising and discussing them in interactive media. Digi-
talized financing is gaining dynamics, which can become a practice of building social divisions and fueling hatred.
Against the background of Social Identity Theory, this article focuses on distortions of fundraising culture. Draw-
ing on examples from Finland and Poland, this article takes up the characteristics of the negative dimension of
fundraising.
Keywords: donations, Social Identity Theory (SIT), fundraising, negative fundraising
Introduction
Online fundraising may be individual in nature, but it may also take the form of a kind
of “general mobilization” of the community, posing an interesting example of social
mobilization. Digitally mediated social relationships can be sustained through the gifting of
money when the platform is focused on fundraising or when there are no (or very limited)
opportunities for gifting other types of goods in the online community (Skågeby 2010;
Harvey et al. 2017).
While generally positive and based on good and selflessness, modern online fundraising
may also be used to create situations of conflict and amplify existing ones. The use of
online fundraising for strengthening social divisions may derive from the competitiveness,
discrimination or aiming at achieving political goals.
The aim of this article is to characterize the problem of using fundraising for fueling
antisocial behavior and strengthening social divisions, against the background of the So-
cial Identity Theory (Tajfel and Turner 1979). The theory aims to explain social factors
that drive intergroup behaviors, particularly those involving prejudice and discrimination.
Based on multiple case studies from Finland and Poland, we present three negative effects
of fundraising. Two of them are aimed to financially support the beneficiary, third, which
we name “negative fundraising” aims at communication value rather than economic value.
90 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
Fundraising as Identity Building
Social Identity Theory (SIT), introduced by Tajfel and Turner (1979), suggests that people de-
rive part of their self-concept from the social groups to which they belong. The process starts
with social categorization for understanding and identifying groups, which helps to simplify
social environments but may lead to bias and prejudice. Then, individuals identify themselves
as members of particular groups—one can belong to many different groups. Finally, individu-
als self-categorized as members of social groups compare their groups to others. At this stage,
one’s own group is often favorized due to the bias. Competing interests, including competing
for limited resources, may intensify the feeling of hostility (Ashforth and Mael 1989). Social
identity affects and is affected by intergroup relationships (Abrams 2001).
The studies so far have introduced SIT in explaining fundraising effectiveness (Drezner
2018; Maclean et al. 2015; Touré-Tillery and Fishbach 2017). It is proven, that fundraising
engagement increases when donors social identity is mirrored in solicitation efforts
(Drezner 2018). Synthesizing elements of donors’ social identity with the fundraisers is
recognized as way to optimize fundraising capabilities (Gold 2023). However, studies so
far have focused on positive aspects of fundraising when applying SIT. The bias, prejudice
and hostility that can derive from social identity haven’t been studied within the field of
fundraising so far. This article attempts to fill that gap.
Method
We have conducted a multiple case study. In our research we have adopted definition from
Seawright and Gerring (2008), who defined case study as analysis of a small numbers of
units, conducted in order to understand a population of cases. We conducted qualitative
analysis in our study. The goal to understand a broader set of congruous units makes our
multiple case study instrumental (Stake 2005). Following the assumptions of case study
approach (De Vaus 2001: 220), in our study the unit of analysis is a decision that caused
mobilization on fundraising platforms. Authors have chosen decisions from their countries,
as the local context was important for understanding each case. Each author has chosen and
initially elaborated several controversial decisions supported and counteracted with online
fundraising. At first stage of exclusion, decisions for which fundraisers were no longer
available online (even in an archived form) were excluded, in order to provide highest
credibility of the study. The remaining cases were then discussed by authors and upon
agreement four of them were included for further examination and comparison. Because
the study was aimed at distortion of fundraising culture, the inclusion was based on most
extreme cases (Seawright and Gerring 2008). Each case was analyzed from the perspective
of how it was depicted in the fundraisers (on fundraising platforms), using critical discourse
analysis, suitable for analysis of such topics as media discourse, political discourse, racism,
nationalism and ethnocentrism (Blommaert and Bulcaen 2000; van Dijk 2015). We used
bottom-up coding with in vivo codes in first cycle and more abstract categories in second
cycle of coding, each author coded material in their native language. The results were then
discussed and elaborated in a narrative form.
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 91
Further in the text, examples are provided with original spelling (any censorship was
original as well) and all translations were made by the authors. Additional references were
added in brackets ‘[ ]’ whenever needed.
To provide better understanding, background is provided for each decision and each
case is described along with chosen fundraisers set up for this occasion: their goals,
descriptions and donations they gathered. Then, the results of the cross-case analysis are
presented.
Case: Women’s Strike in Poland
Background
On October 22th 2020, Polish Constitutional Tribunal has decided that predicted fetus’
disability or incurable illness is not a constitutional reason to permit abortion, due to the
constitutional protection of human dignity (Trybunał Konstytucyjny 2020). This decision
led to massive protests, called the Women’s Strike. Right-wing media reported on the need
to protect churches from protesting women.
Fundraisers
In December 2020, the fundraiser “Actions and activities of the Women’s Strike” (Lempart
2020) ended, raising over 1.5 million PLN (157% of the intended goal) with 13,627 do-
nations. Donors used the fundraiser to publish their words of support. However, donations
were also used to criticize or insult the political and ideological opponents:
“The fight will not end! Get the hell out of here with religious fundamentalism. Freedom of choice is not ‘extreme
views,’ imposing your values on someone is an extreme.”
“Fuck these PiS whores”
[PiS is the abbreviation for Prawo i Sprawiedliwość, the Law and Justice party]
Such comments referred not only to the reproductive right but to whole right-wing
government:
“Take care, I am always ready to support!!! Together we will chase away this locust—the president [of the party]
and his puppets.”
“Let’s not give up! The geezers will lead us out of the EU and into Putin’s hands….”
Comments like these reflect the belief in the division between in-group and out-group.
Within the framework of SIT, the term “in-group” denotes the group with which an
individual aligns their identity, whereas “out-group” refers to groups with which they do
not associate their sense of self (Tajfel and Turner 1979). The pursuit of positive self-esteem
drives individuals to seek a favorable distinction for their in-group in comparison to relevant
out-groups (Billig and Tajfel 1973; Leonardelli and Toh 2015).
Some donations referred to other fundraisers (set up by right-wing organizations),
criticizing them:
92 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
Let the Women’s Strike have the necessary resources, and the ONR fundraiser, which Zrzutka.pl does not want
to throw out—get lost. And ZERO commission for zrzutka.pl.
Such statements declare that fundraising platform should not get any commission,
because it allows for raising money for political opponents. Criticism of the platform for
allowing “right-wing” fundraisers also appeared in the described below official appeals to
block these fundraisers.
In response to the Women’s Strike protests, the Polish right-wing association Sto-
warzyszenie Roty Marszu Niepodległości (2020) started a fundraiser for the National
Guard, established to protect churches from protesters. The fundraiser was entitled “Sup-
port the defenders of churches against leftist desecration! We are building the National
Guard!” and main picture stated: “we defend the values of our civilization.” This fundraiser
reached 1157% of the assumed goal (347,259 PLN) thanks to 4424 donors. The description
stated that
After the Constitutional Tribunal ruled in favor of unborn children, the far left gone furious. They decided to take
their anger out on Christians. […] We also warn against all kinds of FAKE NEWS generated by the extreme left.
Such description equates the fight for reproductive rights with extremism of views. In
the fundraiser, the Catholic Church was portrayed as the one in need, requiring protection.
Support for this protection was framed as resulting from values of civilization, attacked
by far left. Such framing fits in social categorization and comparison proposed by SIT: in-
group (Church) is portrayed in superlatives and out-group is posing a threat to the values.
This discourse was also observable in donations.
Donors used both nicks and comments to publish their views. The nicks such as “F..k off
the leftists” indicated hate towards people with opposing political views. The nick “Pervert
Slayer” is an interesting example of how donating may be a tool for identity building:
the protesters of Women’s Strike are considered leftists and thus, perverts (perversion is
here a departure from the accepted cultural norms—implicitly right-wing: heterosexual
and patriarchal) and donor finds themselves the slayer of those perverts, although it is not
unequivocal whether donating is perceived as act of slay or it is “additional activity” that
slayers do.
People used fundraiser to support its goal, sometimes even pointing out the passivity
of the church:
Thanks Guys and Girls! It’s good that you are fighting against selfishness, stupidity and stupid madness. If
everyone destroys churches, the effect will be that people will kill each other. This is what stupid selfishness
and consumerism lead to, thinking only about yourself. It’s a shame that priests and bishops don’t support you.
The Church is dying because of the hypocrisy of believers.
This may suggest that some donors find themselves an active defenders of the Church,
while others—passive ones—are accused of hypocrisy. The in-group is then not a Church,
but an inner circle.
Donations were also used to indicate the hostility of the out-group, aiming to destroy
the identity and values of in-group:
For the sake of freedom and democracy, the values that leftists are trying to destroy, I am donating this symbolic
amount. Good luck.
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 93
Yet, it is worth noting, that the fundraiser was also used to criticize the initiative of the
National Guard:
God will defend himself. And the Police is responsible for protecting monuments, not troglodyte militias.
Therefore, financial support came with written disapproval.
This fundraiser was reported as violating the law. The movement Akcja Demokracja
(Action Democracy) appealed to Zrzutka for closing the right-wing fundraiser, stating that:
We believe that the Zrzutka.pl was created to spread goodness, not to create a platform for organizing far-right
militias. As we understand it, Zrzutka.pl also does not want to be associated with the promotion of violence and
hatred, nor to make money on their promotion. (jk 2020)
Despite request to remove the fundraiser, the platform responded that running
a fundraiser does not mean they provide support for the organizer, and that a fundraiser
for the National Guard does not violate the law (jk 2020).
Case: Extinguishing Hanukkiah with Fire Extinguisher
Background
On December 12th 2023, member of Polish Sejm (Parliament) Grzegorz Braun used fire
extinguisher to extinguish hanukkiah (Hanukkah menorah) in the Sejm’s building. In
consequence, the Marshal of the Sejm has decided to punish him with withdrawal of half
of the salary for three months and the entire allowance for six months.
Fundraisers
In December 2023, after Grzegorz Braun used a fire extinguisher to put out Hanukkah
candles, fundraisers for him were created, and people collected over 200,000 PLN (p.mal
2023), although the platform Zrzutka closed the fundraisers, considering them to be in
violation of its regulations. In a statement published on Facebook, Zrzutka declared,
that closed fundraisers violated the following regulation: „It is unacceptable to organize
fundraisers related to praising, supporting or propagating hatred, violence, discrimination,
terrorism, fascism or other totalitarian systems, publicly praising crimes or offences or
violating the personal rights of third parties” (zrzutka.pl 2023).
One of the main fundraisers, named “Christmas support for the children and wife of
Grzegorz Braun!” (Wielgucki 2023), fulfilled its target (50,000 PLN) in 100%, gathering
839 donations and 36 comments. Its description states that the goal of the fundraiser is to
provide not for Braun but for his family, called “unwitting victims of political wars and
politically correct pressures” (Wielgucki 2023).
Donors used both nicks and comments to state their opinions and support. For example
nick “the only Pole in Sejm” may suggest that Grzegorz Braun is considered by the donor
as the only true Pole in Sejm, implicitly defining “Polishness” as actions against Judaism.
Applying the SIT framework, this could be a hint of how the donor categorized Poles as
the in-group, and Jews as the out-group.
94 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
One donor named themselves “anti-Roman,” and in Polish cyberspace “Roman” is often
used instead of “Jew” to avoid algorithmic overseeing. Other nicks such as “bravo!” or
“Merry Christmas” were also reflecting support for Braun and his family. Some nicks also
were used to insult Marshal of the Sejm.
Comments were as well used to wish Braun’s family “Merry Christmas,” but also
to insult or criticize Zrzutka for blocking previous fundraisers, which was considered as
blocking right-wing political views:
“f*** you “zrzutka” for blocking previous fundraisers. I hope your Christmas tree will burn and your wife give
birth to a nigger🎄🔥🙊”
“I would like to thank Mr. Braun for spreading information about what religious ceremonies are taking place in
the Sejm. I hope that the zrzutka service will stop blocking alternative political views.”
Donors also communicated the need to save Poland from Judaism:
We will be able to defend our Homeland with Grzegorz Braun. Long live Free Poland!
Such comments reflect the hostility towards categorized out-group of Jews, which are
perceived as the threat to Poland.
On the other hand, donations were used to criticize Braun’s actions:
I admire Mr. G. Braun’s erudition, but I do not approve of the action in the Sejm. You can demonstrate your views
in a different way so as not to endanger the safety of others. I am convinced that the effect of the demonstration
got out of control. I think Mr. Braun will say so.
Again, financial support was given to express dissatisfaction with the actions of the
beneficiary.
In retaliation to the fundraisers for Grzegorz Braun, the fundraiser “Let’s light a new
Hanukkah candle” (Fundacja To się uda 2023) was created in December 2023. It only raised
8% of the target, gathering 216 donations. Here as well, donors used nick to manifest they
support or criticism. One donor named themselves “patriot” while other—sending smallest
possible amount—entered the insult toward organizers in the place for the nick.
The comments section was used by donors to insult Grzegorz Braun. Some suggested,
that their donation was given not to support the goal but rather to act against Braun’s
supporters:
Just to piss off the braunists.
Therefore, the hostility towards out-group is pointed out as more engaging factor than
the favor for in-group.
Beside the fundraisers politically involved, common citizens started their own fundrais-
ers for their own goals, stating that it’s better to provide for them than for politicians. In the
descriptions of this fundraisers, organizers convinced that if one has to choose between
supporting political manners or helping regular citizens, they should choose to support the
latter. One of many examples could be the fundraiser “Not for Braun, Kamiński andWąsik,
better for cows,” which called donating for politically involved fundraisers the “support for
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 95
pathology promoted in media” (Poszywała 2024). One donor posted that “Better for cat
than for a madman!”, indicating that people should not prioritize economical support for
politicians and implicitly suggesting, that engaging in both matters is not an option.
Case: “I do 2013” in Finland
Background
In Finland, Equal Marriage Law came into effect in 2017, making the same-sex marriage
possible. This law had been into making for over 10 years. After years of the bill getting
repeatedly rejected in the Finnish Parliament, a citizens’ initiative “I do 2013” [orig. name
Tahdon 2013] was launched to push the bill through (Finnish Parliament 2006; 2009;
Kronman 2015). This gathered more support than any other citizens’ initiative has ever
done in Finland and 100,000 signatures was achieved in only one day (the required support
for parliamentary consideration was 50,000 signatures). Overall, the initiative gathered over
166,000 signatures, a record that hasn’t been broken yet. (Kansalaisaloite.fi 2013) After
massive campaigning, particularly visible in social media, the Equal Marriage Law was
finally accepted by Finnish Parliament in December of 2014.
In January of 2015 the “Real marriage” [orig. name Aito avioliitto] association was
founded to repeal the new equal marriage law before it was coming to effect. The “Real
marriage” association campaigned to overturn the law to keep the marriage traditional,
between a man and a woman. They got 106 000 signatures in the six months that they
gathered signatures for the citizens’ initiative to repeal the new law. (Aito avioliitto
2015) The counter-initiative was taken into consideration in the Finnish Parliament, but
in February of 2017 the counter-initiative was repealed (Tikkala 2017). The new Equal
Marriage Law came into effect in March 2017.
Fundraisers
In Finland crowdfunding is only possible for non-profit organizations, associations and
foundations, whereas private individuals or businesses can use only small-scale money
collection campaigns that require a permit (Police of Finland 2024). An association, “Tasa-
arvoinen Suomi Ry” [Translates to “Equal Finland association”] was founded to support
the “I do 2013” campaign and initiative. “I do 2013” gathered money for the campaign
through the association by collecting membership fees and by selling merchandise, such as
t-shirts and canvas bags (Tahdon 2013; 2013a). The campaign used careful branding and
productization to make it recognizable and interesting (Järviö 2018: 78). Several businesses
and celebrities also supported the campaign and its visibility with creative and playful
ideas. Among various events there was for example charity concerts and several restaurants
provided signature cocktails and desserts carrying the name of the campaign. A walk-in
tattoo day was held where heart tattoos symbolizing the campaign were offered. (e.g. Järviö
2018: 75, 84–87; Tahdon 2013; 2013b; 2013c)
The campaigning was particularly active on social media, especially on their Facebook
page, “Tahdon2013”, where updates, information and videos were frequently shared.While
96 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
comments have been moderated, traces of arguments and hate speech can still be found.
Many of the comments remaining are replies to deleted comments and the tone reveals past
conflicts, where the equal marriage is defended from hateful comments, e.g. comparing it
to incest or pedophilia:
How does incest have anything to do with this? Is there some weird slippery slope theory that says accepting
gay people and their right to get married would also lead to pedophilia, incest, and marrying sheep? (Facebook
comment, 25.3.2013)
The debate heated especially in 2015 when “Real marriage” was gathering their
support and it collected required signatures for their counter-initiative hoping to overturn
the approved law. The controversy over the law was also widely covered in the media
(MTV 2015).
The “Real marriage” association also collected money for the campaign through selling
memberships and merchandise (Aito avioliitto 2021). Their Facebook site, “Avioliitto on
naisen ja miehen välinen liitto” (Marriage is between a man and a woman) contains a lot
of discussion over the matter, the page overall seeming less moderated:
“We don’t want this monstrosity in Finland!!! Man and woman, period!!!!” (Facebook comment, 18.6.2015)
“People are accepting all sorts of sicknesses… we should be protecting our children from this, like Russia does at
least… the West is way too ‘tolerant’ for allowing stuff like this… disgusting.” (Facebook comment, 14.12.2014)
The tone of the posts was also more aggressive and negative, while “I do 2013” used
a positive tone on the campaign and outlets despite the importance and the sensitive
nature of the matter. The comments of the “Real marriage” Facebook page often centered
on general condemnation of homosexuality. Religious themes where also often present.
Considering this discourse through the lenses of SIT, wemay notice that donors’ statements
reflect the sense of belonging to an in-group and shared values, but also that self-
categorization is the source of their self-esteem (Losh and Nzekwe 2017).
Case: “The Right to Be” in Finland
Background
The Finnish transgender law was updated in 2023 to provide more equality for gender
minorities, “improving the realization of the right to self-determination, personal integrity,
non-discrimination and the right to private life,” as Finnish Government stated in their press
release 3.3.2023 (Ministry of Social Affairs and Health 2023).
The old lawwas last updated over 20 years prior in 2002 and it was deemed outdated, but
the reform of the law got delayed for years. The old law was problematic as it for example
required a psychiatric diagnosis before gender minorities could receive legal gender
recognition, and it also contained a requirement of sterilization for gender reassignment
surgeries. This was widely criticized by human right organizations and the European Court
of Human Rights (European Parliament 2017; Amnesty International 2023).
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 97
The Government led by PrimeMinister SannaMarin had included the reform of the law
in the government program and the reform began in 2020, but due to COVID-19 pandemic
it was further delayed (Yle News 2022a).
“The right to be” [orig. name. Oikeus olla] was a citizen’s initiative that was introduced
in April 2021 to support the new law’s successful passage and it presented new bill
proposals to be included in the new law. Trans ry -association supported and campaigned for
the initiative. “The right to be” initiative gathered over 68,000 signatures and was sent into
parliamentary consideration in September 2021. While the bill proposals of the initiative
were not accepted as presented, the governmental proposal of the law was pushed forward.
The most notable change between the bills proposed in the initiative and the final version of
the law consisted of children’s rights, as the new, reformed law did exclude children from
legal gender recognition. (GenderGP 2023)
“Real marriage” association campaigned against the reformed trans law and sent their
opposing statement to be taken into consideration during the process (Aito avioliitto 2022).
As with Trans ry, “Real marriage” was also very active on social media. While “Real
marriage” shared their arguments against the law on their social media channels, Trans
ry also participated in countering these claims and concerns on their own social media
accounts.
After first taken the law into consideration in September 2022, parliament accepted it
in February 2023 and the law came into effect in April 2023 (Finnish Parliament 2022; Yle
News 2022b).
Fundraisers
Trans ry—association was founded in June 2020, its purpose being to support the
fundamental rights and human rights of gender minorities (Trans ry 2020). In 2021 Trans ry
campaigned for “The right to be” citizens’ initiative, bringing it visibility, updating actively
on the progress of the law and participating in societal discussion and defending the law and
gender minorities. Trans ry has stated in their bylaws that the association funds its mission
with (to name a few examples) donations, public events, membership fees as well as with
lotteries and fundraising campaigns. (Trans ry 2020)
“Real marriage” association has collected funds to support their initiatives since their
battle against “I do 2013” campaign and the equal marriage law. “Real marriage” association
protested against this citizens’ initiative and the reform of the trans law as well. The asso-
ciation fund their work with collecting membership fees, selling merchandise and through
fundraising, having received amoney collection permit fromNational Police Board. They’ve
collected money with the permit for organizing public events, producing prints, translating
writings, articles and videos, communication, campaigning for citizens initiatives and con-
ducting surveys and polls (Police of Finland 2021; Aito avioliitto 2020). On their website
the organization has summed up that the money collected will be used to support initiatives
and activities advancing the values of the association, as listed in their bylaws:
Rules of the Association, Section 2: Purpose of the Activities:
The purpose of the association is to promote and strengthen the status and significance of marriage between
a man and a woman as a genuine, special, natural, and permanent institution in Finnish society and legislation.
98 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
Additionally, the association aims to promote the child’s right to know both of their parents and to be cared for
by them throughout their childhood whenever possible. The association also seeks to support the development of
a healthy gender identity in children by encouraging the growth of boys into men and girls into women, reinforcing
the natural differences between genders, and ensuring that children have a family model with both a father and
a mother, even in adoption situations. (Aito avioliitto 2020)
On their Facebook -page, “Avioliitto on miehen ja naisen välinen liitto,” the association
has disclosed that their resistance against the new trans law is based on the idea that the new
trans law would “weaken the safety of women, equality, women’s sports, freedom of speech
and to the national defense” (5.1.2023). These were popular arguments used throughout the
process in different social media outlets. Trans ry, as well as the official Instagram-site of the
initiative “The right to be” frequently countered commonly raised claims and shared fact
posts about gender minorities and about the importance of the new law. (e.g. Transyhdistys
2021). While the initiative was promoted in Facebook and Twitter as well, Instagram was
especially actively used by Trans ry and the initiative also had its own Instagram account,
“oikeusolla.”
The most popular comments of the “Real marriage” supporters that have received most
likes on the “Real marriage” Facebook page do not often focus on the law in question, but
rather expressing personal opinions about transgender people:
The consequences would truly be harsh😢😢😢😢😢😢. This should never be accepted, not now, not ever
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏. A man is a man, period. A boy is a boy, period. A woman is a woman, period. A girl is a girl,
period. And that’s how it has been and how it will always be, no matter how much those smart-head trans people
want to change it… (Facebook comment, 5.1.2023)
Hate speech is very visible in the comments. These comments often deny the existence
of gender minorities, portray transgender people as mentally ill, or express “concern” on
how everyone will change their gender after the law and howwomen’s locker rooms will fill
with perverted men claiming they’re women. Transgender people were deemed “unnatural”
and “against God” in countless comments, e.g.:
This is against nature, something that God does not approve. (Facebook comment, 13.1.2023)
Let’s return to the Bible and study what the HolyWord of God says. Otherwise, all kinds of misleading winds will
take over. The Bible is clear: God created man and woman. We should not tamper with God’s creation. (Facebook
comment, 13.1.2023)
These examples reflect the polarization in society, often linking into a growing divide
between conservative and liberal values. Change also almost always includes resistance.
Changes can be seen as a threat for own personal and religious beliefs, as well as a threat to
societal stability and family structures. Promoting equality and human rights is important to
any society and the general support for advancing the rights of sexual- and genderminorities
have increased in Finland after the “I do 2013” campaign.
Cross-case analysis: The negative dimensions of fundraising
Social and political divisions—“us vs. them”
Fundraising election campaigns is a trend that has already received a lot of attention
in social sciences (e.g. Corrado 2014; Ellis et al. 2017). However, a relatively new
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 99
phenomenon in studied countries is the use of fundraising as a tool for immediate response
to current political events. In light of this trend, the term „politicized fundraise” was coined
in Poland (JM 2024).
On regular basis, online fundraising is an act of charity aimed to help someone in
need. However, we now face the phenomenon of distortion of the fundraising culture. In
a certain small fragment of the digital environment, fundraising campaigns become a tool
for reinforcing the “us versus them” divisions—supporting some is not only not supporting
others, but often the fundraiser for some is an action against others. This division reflects
the SIT in-group/out-group relations, often based on bias and prejudice.
This division is reflected both in the descriptions of fundraisers and in the messages
published by donors (including their nicks). Creating a ”politicized fundraiser” for the
purpose of a specific political or social activist formulates the opposition of the needy-
oppressor, in which the beneficiary is presented as the wronged one, while opponents
(political or ideological) become the wrongdoers in this narrative. Creating a fundraiser
becomes a manifesto of the need for social mobilization in order to oppose the “Other,”
who, if threatens the beneficiaries, can also threaten their supporters and “people like them.”
Therefore, the out-group is perceived as hostile, which impose hostility towards them.
The socio-political divisions reinforced by fundraising are based on an “us versus them”
opposition, where supporting a given person, group or idea is the same as acting against
another. In the case of fundraising platforms, a “war on fundraisers” is observed. It is often
difficult to assess whether a given initiative is spontaneous or a seemingly spontaneous
political action aimed at strengthening social divisions and stirring controversy. After all,
achieving the fundraiser goal may be a signal that a given initiative has the support of
citizens. Thus, deleting and blocking fundraisers in the discourse of “us versus them”
division is presented as an action of censorship by the opponent and an attempt to stop
social mobilization.
Discrimination—“them instead of us”
Fundraising can also lead to social divisions based on the “them INSTEAD OF us”
principle, which takes into account the limited resources of donors. In this case, fundraisers
are not perceived as organized for conflicting purposes, but negative consequences result
from the fact that not all goals can be achieved. Meer (2017) found no evidence that giving
to a particular charity is reduced by the presence of inducements to give to others, yet his
study was based on similar fundraising projects. The “them instead of us” rule applies to
projects with little or no similarities. The inability to provide help to everyone in need raises
questions about the hierarchy of goals. Social divisions can arise and grow stronger when
there is no agreement on this hierarchy. The hostility therefore results from the competition
for scarce resources (Ashforth and Mael 1989).
To better illustrate this mechanism, we will use the symbols A and B, where A is a goal
considered higher in the hierarchy of values, and B is considered lower. In the face of limited
resources of the community that can help achieve the financial goals of fundraisers, some
organizers and donors suggest that we should first support the goals that are important to
them (A). Thus, anyone who supports collections for other goals (B) becomes a warrior
100 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
in a cause that is not the most just, while they could prioritize most valuable goals (A).
Such an attitude does not necessarily suggest that others (B) should not be helped (as is
the case with political divisions, for example), but helping them should be secondary, e.g.
one may support less important goals (B) once most important (A) are achieved. People
supporting such collections (B) are sometimes attacked for their hierarchy of values, both
in the descriptions of the collections (A) and in the content of the donations (A and, less
often, B). In the SIT framework, those with other hierarchy of values are then identified as
out-group.
Generalizing on the basis of the analyzed cases, we can state that discrimination can
arise with any differences, such as citizenship (helping immigrants instead of compatriots),
gender (helping men instead of women or helping trans-women instead of cis-women),
family situation (helping the childless instead of families), age (helping the elderly
instead of children) or species (helping animals instead of humans). This problem is
deeply rooted in the system of values, but it is directly related to economic constraints.
This limitation of resources causes a kind of competition among the recipients. The
economic nature of this problem minimizes the phenomenon of “negative fundraising”
described below, i.e. financing in order to humiliate or criticize the beneficiary—economic
value takes precedence over symbolic value due to the fact that money is a scarce
resource.
The negative fundraising—communication value over economic value
Contributions do not necessarily mean support. As already mentioned, donations enable
literal communication thanks to the possibility of publishing text messages along with
the money. Donation can be an opportunity to criticize the fundraiser or make fun of
the beneficiaries (Kozyra 2024). In such a case, a donation that would be interpreted as
a gesture of support or identification on a symbolic level becomes a tool of mockery and
criticism on a literal level. However, regardless of the message sent with the donation,
the economic benefit of the recipient is a fact. We name this phenomenon “negative
fundraising,” i.e. financial support combined with disapproval. This term is build upon
Jas’ (2020) term “negative audience,” coined to explain the phenomenon of livestreaming
audience interacting with streamers with disapproval. Although negative audience acts to
criticize the streamer, the actions (comments, chats, shares) are in favor for the criticized.
The samemechanism comeswith “negative fundraising,” which benefits for the fundraising
goal, but comes with disapproval or mockery. By using the platform’s tools, the donor
incurs a financial cost in order to express criticism or ridicule. In turn, the beneficiary, in
exchange for the economic benefit, suffers an image loss associated with the need to accept
public criticism or ridicule.
General Discussion
Online fundraising may be conducted not only for good purposes, but can also have an
antisocial dimension. This may result, for example, from unawareness of the consequences
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 101
(e.g. supporting far-right social initiatives), being manipulated (e.g. by descriptions of
fundraising or comments from people and institutions sharing them) or frustration caused
by economic constraints.
Fundraising platforms are a space for digital giving. This space is not communicatively
hermetic—comments on fundraisers can be published both in the donor’s nick or the
content of the donation, but also outside the platforms, whether in professional or social
media. Supporting one goal instead of others may be used as a tool to build a social identity
and identify the in-group of supporters of common values. Thanks to the multi-platform
environment, such identity may be strengthened by sharing fundraisers on one’s profile
among different social networking sites.
Starting a fundraiser on a fundraising platform is an act of announcing social
mobilization to achieve a common goal. The beneficiary of the fundraiser is therefore
indicated as someone in need. In the case of social and political divisions, indicating
someone in need also involves indicating those who caused their situation. The growing
trend of organizing fundraisers in response to current political events, referred to in this
article as the “war on fundraisers,” suggests that fundraising is becoming a political tool,
used not only to mobilize the community, but also to frame current events within a specific
discourse, indicating which enemy to mobilize against. Shutting down fundraisers by
platforms is perceived as an attack on this mobilization and an attempt at censorship, which
leads to further misunderstandings and elevates the discussion to a higher level: debates on
the freedom to manage one’s own money. More and more often, fundraisers for political
and social purposes are accompanied by counter-fundraisers, so that public support can be
measured by the amount of money raised. Economic value becomes a symbol of support,
in accordance with the principle of “us versus them.”
The exception to this rule is a phenomenon called in the article the “negative fundrais-
ing.” Since modern fundraising involves the possibility of (mainly) text communication,
fundraising can be a way to verbally express disapproval on the fundraising page by send-
ing a donation. Thus, through economic support, a negative attitude is expressed towards
the organizer or beneficiary of the fundraiser (or other supporters). However, regardless of
the nature of the message or its absence (messages in donations are optional), the benefi-
ciary always gains an economic benefit.
Negative fundraising places the communication value of a donation above its economic
value, and the latter is particularly important in implementing the principle of “them instead
of us.”
Conclusion
In the article, we have analyzed extreme cases of fundraisers strengthening social divisions.
Using the Social Identity Theory, we have attempted to fill the gap on how social identity
may lead to social divisions through fundraising. We have indicated, that fundraising can
cause social divisions due to the inability to meet the goals of all fundraisers. Thus,
fundraising may become a field for revealing various forms of discrimination, when
criticism towards out-group is more important than support towards in group—even at
102 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
the cost of financial support for the opponent. Social divisions may also derive from
desperation, in the fight for the limited resources of the funding community.
References
Ab r ams, D. 2001. Social Identity, Psychology of, in: N. J. Smelser & O. B. Baltes (eds.), International
Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Elsevier: Amsterdam&NewYork, pp. 14306–14309.
A i t o av i o l i i t t o. 2015. In English. https://aitoavioliitto.fi/english/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
A i t o av i o l i i t t o. 2020. Yhdistykselle uusi rahankeräyslupa. https://aitoavioliitto.fi/tiedotteita/yhdistykselle-
uusi-rahankerayslupa/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
A i t o av i o l i i t t o. 2021. Tietoa meistä. https://aitoavioliitto.fi/tietoa meista/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
A i t o av i o l i i t t o. 2022. Lausuntopyyntö luonnoksesta hallituksen esitykseksi laiksi sukupuolen vahvistamisesta
sekä siihen liittyvien lakien muuttamisesta. https://aitoavioliitto.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/aito-avioliitto-ry-
antoi-sosiaali-ja-terveysministeriolle-stm-lausunnon-translakiluonnoksesta/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
Amne s t y I n t e r n a t i o n a l. 2023. Finland: New gender recognition law ‘a major step towards protect-
ing trans rights.’ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2023/02/finland-new-gender-recognition-law-
a-major-step-towards-protecting-trans-rights/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
A s h fo r t h, B. E. & Mae l, F. 1989. Social Identity Theory and the Organization, Academy of Management
Review 14(1): 20–39. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.1989.4278999
Av i o l i i t t o o n n a i s e n j a m i e h e n vä l i n e n l i i t t o (n.d.). Home [Facebook page]. Facebook.
https://www.facebook.com/avioliitto (Access: 31 August 2024).
B i l l i g, M. & Ta j fe l, H. 1973. Social categorization and similarity in intergroup behaviour, European Journal
of Social Psychology 3(1): 27–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420030103
B l ommae r t, J. & Bu l c a e n, C. 2000. Critical Discourse Analysis, Annual Review of Anthropology 29: 447–
466. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.29.1.447
Co r r a d o, A. 2014. Fundraising Strategies in the 2012 Presidential Campaign, in: J. A. Thuber (ed.),
Campaigns and Elections American Style. New York: Routledge, pp. 105–136. https://doi.org/10.4324/
9780429495380
De Vau s, D. 2001. Research Design in Social Research. London: SAGE Publications.
D r e z n e r, N. 2018. Philanthropic mirroring: Exploring identity-based fundraising in higher education, Journal
of Higher Education 89(3): 261–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2017.1368818
E l l i s, W. C., R i p b e r ge r, J. T. & Swe a r i n ge n, C. 2017. Public Attention and Head-to-Head Campaign
Fundraising: An Examination of U.S. Senate Elections, American Review of Politics 36(1): 30–53.
https://doi.org/10.15763/issn.2374-779X.2017.36.1.30-53
Eu r o p e a n Pa r l i amen t. 2017. Parliamentary question: Forced sterilisation of transgender people. https://
www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-8-2017-007687 EN.html (Access: 31 August 2024).
F i n n i s h Pa r l i amen t. 2006. Bill 170/2006 vp: Laki rekisteröidystä parisuhteesta annetun lain kumoa-
misesta ja avioliittolain muuttamisesta. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/Vaski/sivut/trip.aspx?triptype=Val
tiopaivaAsiakirjat&docid=la+170/2006 (Access: 31 August 2024).
F i n n i s h Pa r l i amen t. 2009. Bill 31/2009 vp: Laki rekisteröidystä parisuhteesta annetun lain kumoa-
misesta ja avioliittolain muuttamisesta. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/Vaski/sivut/trip.aspx?triptype=Val
tiopaivaAsiakirjat&docid=la+31/2009 (Access: 31 August 2024).
F i n n i s h Pa r l i amen t. 2022. Translain uudistaminen. https://www.eduskunta.fi/FI/naineduskuntatoimii/kir
jasto/aineistot/kotimainen oikeus/LATI/Sivut/translain-uudistaminen.aspx (Access: 31 August 2024).
Fu n d a c j a To s i ę u d a. 2023. Rozpalmy nową świecę chanukową. https://zrzutka.pl/chanuka (Access:
28 February 2024).
G e n d e rGP. 2023. Update: Government in Finland Finally Decides to Change its Outdated Trans Law.
https://www.gendergp.com/finland-plans-to-change-its-outdated-trans-law/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
Go l d, J. 2023. Nonprofit Fundraising and Social Identity, Engaged Management Review 6(2): Article 1.
https://doi.org/10.28953/2375-8643.1110
Ha r vey, J., Sm i t h, A., & Go l i g h t l y, D. 2017. Giving and sharing in the computer-mediated economy,
Journal of Consumer Behaviour 16: 363–371. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1499
J a s, M. 2020. Patostreaming—ciemna strona internetu. Analiza zjawiska na wybranych przykładach, Media
Biznes Kultura 8(1), 169–180. doi: 10.4467/25442554.MBK.20.012.12422
ONLINE FUNDRAISING AND SOCIAL DIVISIONS 103
J ä r v i ö, N. 2018. Polkuja suomalaiseen tasa-arvoon? Kansalaistoiminta, Tahdon2013 ja translaki. Doctoral dis-
sertation, University of Helsinki. https://helda.helsinki.fi/items/0f2bbe9c-6c33-4bde-8027-925ba8564
27d (Access: 31 August 2024).
j k. 2020. Akcja Demokracja chce usunięcia zbiórki na Straż Narodową. Zrzutka.pl nie widzi ku temu
podstaw. https://www.wirtualnemedia.pl/artykul/akcja-demokracja-chce-usuniecia-netowej-zbiorki-na-
straz-narodowa-zrzutka-pl-nie-widzi-ku-temu-podstaw (Access: 28 February 2024).
JM. 2024. Nie tylko Braun. Czarnek ogłasza zbiórkę dla rodzin Kamińskiego i Wąsika. https://www.bankier.pl/
wiadomosc/Nie-tylko-Braun-Czarnek-oglasza-zbiorke-dla-rodzin-Kaminskiego-i-Wasika-8676267.html
(Access: 28 February 2024).
K a n s a l a i s a l o i t e . f i. 2013 Kansalaisaloite tasa-arvoisesta avioliittolaista. https://www.kansalaisaloite.fi/fi/
aloite/192 (Access: 31 August 2024).
Ko z y r a, A. 2024. Zbiórka dla rodzin M. Kamińskiego i M.Wąsika. Internauci zakpili z osadzonych. https://
www.polsatnews.pl/wiadomosc/2024-01-13/zbiorka-dla-rodzin-m-kaminskiego-i-m-wasika-internauci-
zakpili-z-osadzonych/ (Access: 28 February 2024).
K r o nman, K. 2015. Kohti tasa-arvoista avioliittolakia. Thesis, Vaasa University of Applied Sciences.
https://www.theseus.fi/handle/10024/92241?show=full (Access: 31 August 2024).
L empa r t, M. 2020. Akcje i działania Strajku Kobiet. https://zrzutka.pl/mrsynp (Access: 28 February 2024).
L e o n a r d e l l i, G. L.&Toh, S.M. 2015. Social Categorization in IntergroupContexts: ThreeKinds of Self-Cate-
gorization, Social and Personality Psychology Compass 9(2): 69–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12150
Lo s h, S. C. & Nz e kwe, B. 2017. Social Identity Theory, in: B. S. Turner et al. (eds.), The Wiley&Blackwell
Encyclopedia of Social Theory. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/
9781118430873.est0809
Mac l e a n,M., H a r vey, C., Go r d o n, J., & Sh aw, E. 2015. Identity, storytelling, and the philanthropic journey,
Human Relations Journal 68(10): 1623–1652.
Me e r, J. 2017. Does fundraising create new giving?, Journal of Public Economics 145: 82–93. https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jpubeco.2016.11.009
M i n i s t r y o f S o c i a l A f f a i r s a n d He a l t h. 2023. Press release: Act on Legal Recognition of Gender enters
into force on 3 April 2023. https://valtioneuvosto.fi/en/-/1271139/act-on-legal-recognition-of-gender-
enters-into-force-on-3-april-2023 (Access: 31 August 2024).
MTV. 2015. Avioliittokiista jatkuu: “Näillä perusteillamyös kolme ihmistä voisivat olla avioliitossa.” https://web.
archive.org/web/20160628181355/https://www.mtv.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/artikkeli/avioliittokiista-jatkuu-na
illa-perusteilla-myos-kolme-ihmista-voisivat-olla-avioliitossa/5232902 (Retrieved from Internet archive:
4 September 2024).
p .m a l. 2023. Zbiórka pieniędzy na Grzegorza Brauna. Poseł Konfederacji otrzyma 200 tys. złotych. https://www.
rp.pl/polityka/art39593381-zbiorka-pieniedzy-na-grzegorza-brauna-posel-konfederacji-otrzyma-200-tys
-zlotych (Access: 28 February 2024).
Po l i c e o f F i n l a n d. 2021. Money collection permits. Aito avioliitto (RA/2020/1087). https://poliisi.fi/
rahankeraysluvat (Access: 31 August 2024).
Po l i c e o f F i n l a n d. 2024. Crowdfunding and money collection campaigns. https://poliisi.fi/en/crowdfunding-
and-money-collection-campaigns (Access: 31 August 2024).
Po s z ywa ł a, K. 2024. Nie na Brauna, Kamińskiego iWąsika, lepiej na krowy. https://zrzutka.pl/cdu4kx (Access:
28 February 2024).
S e aw r i g h t, J. & Ge r r i n g, J. 2008. Case Selection Techniques in Case Study Research: A Menu of Quali-
tative and Quantitative Options, Political Research Quarterly 61(2): 294–308. https://doi.org/10.1177/
1065912907313077
Sk å ge by, J. 2010. Gift-giving as a conceptual framework: framing social behavior in online networks, Journal
of Information Technology 25: 170–177. https://doi.org/10.1057/jit.2010.5
S t a ke, R. E. 2005. Qualitative Case Studies, in: N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (eds.), The Sage Handbook of
Qualitative Research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks & London: SAGE Publications, pp. 443–466.
S t owa r z ys z e n i e Ro t y Ma r s z u N i e p o d l e g ł o ś c i. 2020.Wesprzyj obrońców kościołów przed profanacją
lewactwa! Budujemy Straż Narodową! https://zrzutka.pl/kj5t56 (Access: 21 July 2024).
Ta h d o n 2 0 1 3 (n.d.). Home. [Facebook page]. https://www.facebook.com/tahdon13/?ref=embed page (Access:
31 August 2024).
Ta h d o n 2 0 1 3. 2013a. Perinteet kunniaan! [Facebook page]. https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=46689161
3379663&set=ms.c.eJwFwYENACAIBLGNTPDw4PdfzLZ1UxZMlNOa229hRD9myQZr.bps.a.46391
9453676879 (Access: 31 December 2024).
Ta h d o n 2 0 1 3. 2013b. Tahdon juoman ja jälkiruokaa! http://www.tahdon2013.fi/uutiset/tahdon-juoman-ja-
jalkiruokaa/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
104 BARBARA CYREK, JENNA PELTONEN
Tahdon2013. 2013c. Turussa leimauduttiin suurella sydämellä. http://www.tahdon2013.fi/uutiset/turussa-
leimauduttiin-suurella-sydamella/ (Access: 31 August 2024).
Ta j fe l, H. & Tu r n e r, J. C. 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict, in: W. G. Austin & S. Worchel
(eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations. Monterey: Brooks/Cole, pp. 33–48.
T i k k a l a, H. 2017. Eduskunta hylkäsi lakiehdotuksen avioliiton rajaamisesta naisen ja miehen väliseksi—katso
miten kansanedustajat äänestivät. https://yle.fi/a/3-9466111 (Access: 31 August 2024).
To u r é -T i l l e r y, M. & F i s h b a ch, A. 2017. Too far to help: The effect of perceived distance on the expected
impact and likelihood of charitable action, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 112(6): 860–
876. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000089
Tr a n s r y. 2020. Trans ry:n säännöt. https://files.transry.fi/saannot syyskuu 2020.pdf (Access: 31 December
2024).
Tr a n s y h d i s t y s (n.d.) Home. [Instagram page]. https://www.instagram.com/transyhdistys/ (Access: 31 August
2024).
Tr a n s y h d i s t y s. 2021. Tässä vähän vastauksia yleisiin olkiukkoihin. [Instagram page]. https://www.instagram.
com/p/CPGuOmHtqiY/?img index=1 (Access: 31 December 2024).
Tr y b u n a ł Kon s t y t u c y j ny. 2020. Planowanie rodziny, ochrona płodu ludzkiego i warunki dopuszczalności
przerywania ciąży. https://trybunal.gov.pl/postepowanie-i-orzeczenia/wyroki/art/11300-planowanie-ro
dziny-ochrona-plodu-ludzkiego-i-warunki-dopuszczalnosci-przerywania-ciazy (Access: 20 July 2024).
Va n D i j k, T. A. 2015. Critical Discourse Analysis, in: D. Tannen, H. E. Hamilton, & D. Schiffrin (eds.), The
Handbook of Discourse Analysis. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 466–485.
Wi e l g u ck i, P. 2023. Świąteczne wsparcie dla dzieci i żony Grzegorza Brauna! https://zrzutka.pl/73zgyr
(Access: 28 February 2024).
Y l e News. 2022a. Marin at Pride march: New trans law to Parliament in September. https://yle.fi/a/3-12521046
(Access: 31 August 2024).
Y l e News. 2022b. Long-awaited trans lawmoves forward. https://yle.fi/a/3-12635170 (Access: 31August 2024).
z r z u t k a . p l. 2023. Oświadczenie Zrzutka.pl dot. zrzutek na rzecz Grzegorza Brauna. [Facebook page]. https://
www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=771415155025626&set=a.489430233224121 (Access: 28 February
2024).
Biographical Notes:
Barbara Cyrek, (Ph.D.) is an assistant professor in the field of social communication and media studies at the
DSW University of Lower Silesia, Wroclaw, Poland. Her research is focused on online communication in the
algorithmic environment.
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3270-6548
E-mail: barbara.cyrek@dsw.edu.pl
Jenna Peltonen is a doctoral researcher in digital culture at the University of Turku, Finland. Her research focuses
on social media cultures, particularly on how crises are addressed on social media in the 2020s.
ORCID iD: 0009-0007-2368-9671
E-mail: jehelin@utu.fi