Turning tweets into clean water – $2 at a time

Let’s face it, the economy isn’t exactly making people feel like giving $25,000 to charity in one check. But can hundreds of people, giving $2 a pop have the same impact?

I had sort of a grab bag of items this morning… so let’s skip right to what is the middle section of my video segment.

Local blogger and Twitter-driven entrepreneur, Laura Fitton, was able to use the power of the ‘microsharing’ platform to make a difference. Fitton, who goes by the Twitter name @pistachio, decided for Christmas and her birthday that she would launch a monthlong push to raise money for Charity:Water.

The logic was simple – if somehow each of her Twitter followers donated just $2, she could raise $25,000 – enough for Charity:Water to drill permanent wells for 5 villages in Africa. She hooked up with a Cambridge, Massachusetts firm that specializes in ‘microgiving’, Tipjoy. Tipjoy and investment firm Betaworks agreed to match donations up to $10,000, and she was off.

So far, the project has raised more than $24,000 total – and even though her birthday has passed (a belated “Happy Birthday, Laura!!”), you can still donate at her website, Pistachio Consulting, or through Tipjoy.

I couldn’t spend more time on this on-air – but there was one other point I wanted to note. Not just is the ‘microgiving’ platform a good way to get people engaged on a level they can feel comfortable with, but from an awareness standpoint, getting a bunch of people to give small amounts is exponentially better than me writing a big check in my home (if I could write big checks right now).

How many people visited Tipjoy or Charity:Water because of this, whether they donated or not? How many retweeted any of the posts asking for money, and got their friends to think about it? Every second that someone spends thinking about clean water – and the fact that Charity:Water says a $20 donation can give someone 20 years of it – is an added benefit.

And that is engaging a community in a way not as easily measured in cash flow.

Alright, while I’m at it, here are the other items from the segment.

On the Gatehouse Media v. New York Times Co. lawsuit, over the Times Co. using automated tools to grab stories from Gatehouse’s “Wicked Local” sites. The stories were then used on Boston.com’s ‘Your Town’ local sites:

The two companies settled the case just before trial, with the Times agreeing not to use those automated tools, but Gatehouse saying that human bloggers at ‘Your Town’ and elsewhere should still feel free to link to the website. But because it’s a settlement, the concern over a legal precedent has been avoided. But it’s still a case that sets a tone for the future of linking. Take a look at how both sides (Wicked Local and boston.com) reported the story, and follow more on the day’s events from the Nieman Journalism Lab.

And dude, where’s my confidential information?

This one got a buzz in the newsroom – the story of a New Zealand man who picked up a used mp3 player in Oklahoma, brought it home to New Zealand, and when he plugged it into the computer, discovered it still contained information on a number of U.S. service personnel, including some social security numbers. TV One New Zealand broke the story – the station now says the Pentagon has pledged an investigation into whether the documents in the mp3 player were from the Department of Defense.