影音使團在1月12及13日主辦、來自不同單位的基督徒演藝人一同參與的「驚世大海兆」籌款晚會，經結算後為南亞海嘯災民籌得港幣301,600，款項已於日前送交救世軍。
救世軍目前繼續在斯里蘭卡、印尼及印度的災區展開重建房屋的工作：斯里蘭卡方面，預計可在未來半年為1500個受災家庭提供全新居所；印尼方面，已計劃修建500間房屋以及學校、醫療中心等社區設施；印度方面，則在沿海城市幫助漁民修復漁業。另外該會亦在各災區為小朋友提供教育及康樂活動，也為災民提供衛生知識。
影音使團已將籌款晚會製成VCD，售價$50，扣除成本的款項將繼續撥捐救世軍用於南亞海嘯災後重建工作。
（www.christiantimes.org.hk，時代論壇每日快拍，2005.5.3）
To 懷疑:Nothing wrong with M & M
I fully agreed that M & M has nothing wrong. Almost all organizations need money in order to run their ministry.
The whole point of the article is what 懷疑 stated: about their 操守 and ask them to 交待清楚.
There is nothing wrong to have sales and fund raising, I agree to that. It is only a matter of how to do them.
Honestly, on the contrary, I think many other organizations should learn from ME regarding the way they do the ministry (not every way but some of their ways) such as how to use their resouces in multiple ways, how to build one ministry upon another, how to build momentum of a certain event or ministry, how to raise support from church leaders, how to arouse the interest among the general public, all these are good. There are always things that are good in a person or in an organization. There are also things that we can learn from each other.
As 懷疑 said in the comment that since ME 吹捧 the numbers, results, especially their deficit and their funding and that is why we have this model or impression of ME.
I also appreciate the staff of ME who risked their lives to make the movie "The Days of Noah", their testimonies are genuine and touching. Again, it is the way they promote the movie that cause the criticism.
懷疑
我想知, 影音籌款 或 銷售有何不對?
他們也是以奉獻收入為主的機構.
我想「影音」的問題不是籌款 / 花費, 他的問題在操守而已.
福音機構要人支持, 必定以其事工行頭, 有成果, 並再帶出另一事工. 以持續進行, 並與時並進.
不要逢「影音」也反, 逢「影音」也壞疑.(當然, 我們也可叫他們交代得更清楚)
影音使團的專長是media, event 及 人生熱線. 他們以這作籌款 / 事工行頭, 並有甚麼不對, 故我不覺得M & M 有何問題. 你也不會希望「影音」去開老人院, 開設託兒所吧!
但, 影音對吹捧數字, 成果, 特別是負債, 獻金 等. 特別在意. 又或者, 是「我們」對這特別在意, 因而形成了現時的「影音」行銷模式.
Let us see the figures
Money, money again, I began to see the M & M (Media and Money), they are like twins.
For the money that ME raised in the meetings, is that the gross "income" or "net"? I believe it is "net" as it presented. Then, I need to ask what is the "gross" and what happen to the "gross - net" portion, how is the allocation of it?
For example, they might have raised double what they have told the public because the other half is for the production cost of the meetings, then how much is the production cost, how much among the production cost will go to ME as administrative expenses?
Another question, for the VCD, selling for $50, that is a very high mark up. For doing charity, I don't think people mind but again we need to know how much will go to ME and how much will go to the victims. Make it known to the public please.
$50 is not much, but for 10,000 copies (I am just assuming a figure and not saying that they are producing 10,000) of VCD, then it is a lot. If one item is like that, what about the profit from other items?
We can always say a certain item is for this and that and we can always say we will deduct the production cost and then 100% of the remaining will go to the victims. Yeah, right? How much will that be?
Say for example, if the actual production cost for the VCD is $5, ME can say $20 for the production cost since they need $15 to cover their administration cost. For 10,000, it will be $150,000 income for ME. Is it $15, who knows? Why $15, who knows?
Will we ask this for all other organizations? We won't, but ME has been very high profile in fund raising and money making in the past years, almost without any exception. Fund raising appeal will be out before and after any projects. Crying out for their deficit all the time, their high profile has actract the attention and deserve the attention.
We can't say that if we ask them, then we need to ask all. This is not a good rule to follow at all. Can we search every tourist that come to Hong Kong if we search one? No! But, does that mean we can't search anyone that is suspicious, again No! ME has become very suspicious in the past years and I think they deserve the questioning from the Christian public.
