In an era where storytelling and personal narratives have become the currency of attention, platforms like GoFundMe have turned into powerful tools for raising funds in disasters and personal times of crisis. However, the model these platforms use perpetuates a system called “Extractive Empathy,” where emotionally charged stories are leveraged to elicit donations inequitably without addressing systemic causes. While this approach can provide immediate relief, it often comes at a hidden cost to the broader philanthropic landscape.
Definitions:
Empathy (noun)
em·pa·thy | ˈem-pə-thē
The capacity to understand and share the feelings of others: The ability to be aware of, sensitive to, and vicariously experience another person's emotions, thoughts, and experiences without them explicitly expressing them. Empathy involves putting oneself in another's position, connecting emotionally and intellectually. It can be seen as a skill that can be developed through experiences and habits.
Coined by German philosopher Robert Vischer in the 19th century as "Einfühlung," meaning "esthetic sympathy." This concept was later promoted and expanded by psychologist Theodor Lipps and eventually translated into English as "empathy" by Edward B. Titchener around 1909.
Extractive Empathy (noun)
The strategic use of emotionally compelling personal stories to elicit strong empathetic responses from donors. This practice focuses on generating immediate financial support by prioritizing emotional impact over actual community needs. It involves repeatedly leveraging vivid and often distressing narratives to monetize empathy, reinforcing biases and resulting in temporary fixes rather than promoting sustainable, long-term social solutions.
Coined by Whole Whale 2024 to explain issues with donation-based crowdfunding platforms.
Concepts within Extractive Empathy
Network-Driven Privilege
About: refers to the disparity in funds raised by different campaigns, often due to differences in access to wealthier networks and the ability to craft compelling narratives.
Application: Network-driven privilege demonstrates how extractive empathy disproportionately favors those with more significant social capital. While the platform relies on empathy to drive donations, the impact skews towards those with wealthier connections, leaving marginalized individuals at a systemic disadvantage. This dynamic not only highlights the uneven playing field but also reinforces the role of social privilege in determining financial support.
Context: A study by Cookson, Gallagher, and Mulder highlights a glaring disparity in the benefits reaped from crowdfunding platforms like GoFundMe (Money to Burn: Crowdfunding Wildfire Recovery ). High-income individuals leverage their expansive networks to raise approximately 25% more funds than those from lower-income groups. This “network advantage” enables wealthier beneficiaries to tap into broader and more financially capable connections, increasing both the quantity and size of donations. Additionally, wealthier individuals are more likely to have campaigns launched on their behalf by network advocates, adding to the existing inequity.
The data:
Both graphs below suggest that higher-income households receive more proceeds on GoFundMe campaigns, both in absolute terms and relative to their property losses, compared to lower-income households. This aligns with a potential critique that GoFundMe proceeds may be influenced by income levels and network wealth, possibly favoring those with higher incomes.
Both graphs suggest that higher-income households receive more proceeds on GoFundMe campaigns, both in absolute terms and relative to their property losses, compared to lower-income households. This aligns with a potential critique that GoFundMe proceeds may be influenced by income levels and network wealth, possibly favoring those with higher incomes. (Source: Money to Burn: Crowdfunding Wildfire Recovery )
Compassion Fatigue
About: The emotional exhaustion that results from repeated exposure to distressing narratives, leading to a decreased capacity to empathize and contribute.
Application: The overuse of emotionally charged stories in crowdfunding can contribute to compassion fatigue, reducing the public’s willingness to support causes over time.
Context: BackersHub explains that storytelling is a key strategy in crowdfunding campaigns, designed to connect emotionally with potential donors. However, this repeated use of emotionally evocative stories may lead to compassion fatigue, where individuals become desensitized to repeated appeals for help (BackersHub, n.d.).
Narrative Inequality
About: The unequal amplification of certain stories over others, often due to biases or societal stereotypes, skewing public perception and resource allocation.
Application: Extractive empathy exploits this inequality by promoting stories that align with prevalent biases, resulting in an uneven distribution of donations.
Context: The Investor Group emphasizes that crowdfunding campaigns that tell emotionally compelling stories are more likely to succeed. This focus on emotional appeal can lead to the prioritization of narratives that evoke the most sympathy rather than those that accurately represent the individuals’ needs and circumstances (The Investor Group, n.d.).
Poverty Porn
About: The practice of exploiting individuals’ suffering to evoke sympathy and donations, often at the cost of their dignity and autonomy.
Application: Crowdfunding campaigns that rely on extractive empathy often tread close to poverty porn, using exaggerated or dehumanizing depictions of hardship to maximize emotional impact.
Context: “Poverty porn” refers to the portrayal of impoverished individuals in a way that exploits their situation to elicit sympathy and financial support from donors. This practice has been critiqued for its dehumanizing impact and the perpetuation of harmful stereotypes. Christine Glaros, in an article for Philanthropy Without Borders, discusses how poverty porn has been a topic of ethical debate since the 1980s and highlights ongoing concerns about its use in nonprofit marketing and fundraising (Why does “poverty porn” still exist? – Philanthropy without Borders, Glaros, 2020).
Band-Aid Solutions
About: Short-term fixes that provide temporary relief without addressing underlying issues, leading to recurring problems.
Application: Extractive empathy focuses on immediate responses to emotionally charged stories, leading to band-aid solutions that fail to tackle the systemic causes of these crises.
Context: A study on Oxfam’s use of imagery in its press releases revealed how even well-meaning organizations can fall into the trap of using exploitative visual representations to garner support. The study highlights that this approach often emphasizes immediate relief efforts at the expense of addressing root causes, thereby reinforcing band-aid solutions (Poverty, porn, and the picture: Exploring representation of exploitative media through the case of Oxfam, Mascovich, 2017).
Biases Amplifying Extractive Empathy
Affinity Bias
About: The tendency to favor people who share similar characteristics or backgrounds, which influences decisions on who to support.
Application: Crowdfunding campaigns often receive more support from donors who identify with the campaign creator’s story, reinforcing the use of extractive empathy to appeal to similar individuals.
Confirmation Bias
About: The tendency to favor information that aligns with one’s existing beliefs or experiences.
Application: Campaigns that play into prevailing narratives or confirm widely held beliefs about social issues are more likely to succeed, perpetuating extractive empathy.
In-Group Bias
About: A preference for members of one’s own community or social group, leading to unequal support for those outside of that group.
Application: Extractive empathy appeals to in-group biases by tailoring narratives to specific audiences, resulting in uneven support for different campaigns.
Availability Heuristic
About: The tendency to overestimate the importance of information that is readily available or emotionally salient.
Application: Crowdfunding platforms capitalize on this heuristic by promoting the most emotionally charged and vivid stories, reinforcing extractive empathy.
Stereotype Bias
About: Preconceived notions about certain groups influence decisions on which stories to support and amplify.
Application: Extractive empathy often leverages stereotypes to craft narratives that are easily digestible and emotionally resonant but at the cost of reinforcing harmful generalizations.
Understanding Donation-Based Crowfunding Platforms
While platforms like GoFundMe, valued at ~$600M in 2017, offer a powerful means of rallying support during crises, their reliance on extractive empathy poses systemic challenges to nonprofits. The platform’s fee structure of 2.9% plus $0.30 per donation monetizes people’s hardships and others’ desire to help. This model becomes particularly problematic when considering that all funds raised—even those exceeding stated needs—are given to the fundraiser, potentially incentivizing emotional manipulation to maximize donations.
| Platform | Total Fees | Focus Areas | Key Features | Platform Size/Impact | Status |
| GoFundMe | 2.9% + $0.30 per donation | General personal & charitable causes | – Guarantee protection- 0% platform fee- Largest market share- Strong verification system | – Over $15B raised- 100M+ donors- Active in 19 countries | Active |
| Fundly | 7.8% + $0.30 (4.9% platform + 2.9% processing) | Personal causes & nonprofits | – Mobile app focus- Blog integration- No success fees- Custom branding | – Over $330M raised- Smaller user base- Primarily active in US | Active |
| YouCaring | Historical: 2.9% + $0.30 | Compassionate causes & medical | – Lower fees (historical)- Focus on medical & memorial- Community-driven | – Raised $1B before acquisition- 8M+ donors (historical) | Acquired by GoFundMe (2018) |
| GiveForward | Now FundRazr: 5% + payment processing | Medical expenses | – Healthcare partnerships- Direct bill pay- Support coaches- Medical focus | – Raised $200M+ before acquisition- Now part of FundRazr ecosystem | Acquired by FundRazr (2017) |
| Facebook Fundraisers | 0% for personal causes | Birthday & personal causes | – Zero fees- Built-in social network- Birthday reminders- Easy sharing | – $5B+ raised- 2B+ potential users- Limited to Facebook users | Active |
| CaringBridge | Donation-based operations (no fee per fundraiser) | Health journeys | – Journal updates- Care calendar- Health focus- Privacy controls | – 300K+ active users- 2B+ site visits- 30+ years operating | Active |
| HelpHopeLive | 5% fee | Catastrophic medical expenses | – Tax-deductible- Medical verification- Trustee oversight- Challenge grants | – $150M+ raised- Focus on US market- 40+ years operating | Active |
The combination of extractive empathy and profit-driven platform mechanics creates a troubling dynamic:
- The platform benefits financially from amplifying emotional distress through its percentage-based fee structure
- Fundraisers are incentivized to craft increasingly dramatic narratives, knowing they’ll receive all funds regardless of actual need
- Donors, moved by compelling stories, may contribute more than necessary without awareness of where excess funds go
- The system perpetuates itself through success stories that highlight extreme cases rather than addressing systemic issues
The Legitimate Role of Personal Fundraising
- Provides rapid emergency response when traditional systems are too slow
- Enables community support during unexpected crises
- Fills gaps in existing safety nets
- Creates meaningful connections between donors and recipients
- Offers dignity through choice in how funds are used
A Balanced Solution: The Overflow Model
Rather than just criticizing personal fundraising, we can improve the system through structured overflow donation routing. This approach maintains the benefits of personal crisis funding while contributing to longer-term solutions.
How It Works:
- Campaigns set verified funding goals based on documented needs
- Once the goal is met, additional donations are automatically split:
- 10% goes to the original recipient (acknowledging that needs may expand)
- 90% is directed to verified organizations working on systemic solutions
- Donors are clearly informed of this split before contributing to exceeded goals
As a society, we must critically examine not only how we engage with crowdfunding but also the ethical implications of platforming and monetizing human suffering. While these platforms can provide vital emergency support, their current model risks deepening existing inequalities, perpetuating biases, and reinforcing temporary fixes—all while extracting profit from the process. Moving forward requires reimagining how we can foster genuine community support systems that prioritize sustainable solutions over emotional exploitation and ensure resources are distributed based on actual need rather than narrative appeal.
References
- BackersHub. (n.d.). The Power of Storytelling in Your Crowdfunding Campaign. Retrieved from https://backershub.com/the-power-of-storytelling-in-your-crowdfunding-campaign/
- Glaros, C. (2020, March 9). Why does “poverty porn” still exist? Philanthropy Without Borders. Why does “poverty porn” still exist? – Philanthropy without Borders
- Mascovich, M. A. (2017, May). Poverty, porn, and the picture: Exploring representation of exploitative media through the case of Oxfam.
- NCBI. (2023). Crowdfunding and health inequities. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6882318/
- The Investor Group. (n.d.). Telling Your Story: The Key to a Successful Crowdfunding Campaign. Retrieved from https://theinvestorgroup.com/insights/telling-your-story-the-key-to-a-successful-crowdfunding-campaign/
- GoFundMe Is a Boon for Disaster Survivors. Especially the Wealthy Ones. – The New York Times
- Money to Burn: Crowdfunding Wildfire Recovery