影音使团在1月12及13日主办、来自不同单位的基督徒演艺人一同参与的「惊世大海兆」筹款晚会，经结算後为南亚海啸灾民筹得港币301,600，款项已於日前送交救世军。
救世军目前继续在斯里兰卡、印尼及印度的灾区展开重建房屋的工作：斯里兰卡方面，预计可在未来半年为1500个受灾家庭提供全新居所；印尼方面，已计划修建500间房屋以及学校、医疗中心等社区设施；印度方面，则在沿海城市帮助渔民修复渔业。另外该会亦在各灾区为小朋友提供教育及康乐活动，也为灾民提供卫生知识。
影音使团已将筹款晚会制成VCD，售价$50，扣除成本的款项将继续拨捐救世军用於南亚海啸灾後重建工作。
（www.christiantimes.org.hk，时代论坛每日快拍，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.
