Is Change.org open to actionable litigation?

posted at 10:05 am on July 25, 2011 by Kevin McCullough
[ Blogosphere ]   

Spend any time on the “social change” petition-generating website Change.org and you get inundated with two unmistakeable observations. They are efforts largely being pushed by hard left activists–and they are likely to be setting themselves up to some massive lawsuit realities.

At least if they continue to engage in actions similar to that of one of their “organizing managers” Joe Mirabella (pictured center).

Acting on the whimpers of Western Washington University Student Ben Crowther, Joe Mirabella has taken to trumpeting the “evils” of a common technological device known as a “give-back” that allows portions of a person’s online purchases to be dedicated to a LEGITIMATE 501c3 of the person’s choice.

(Organizations organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, testing for public safety, literary, or educational purposes, or to foster national or international amateur sports competition, or for the prevention of cruelty to children or animals are eligible to file Form 1023 to obtain recognition of exemption from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code.)

Acting on the “hate activism” that caused TOMS shoes to apologize for letting its founder be simply interviewed by Focus On The Family, Crowther and Mirabella decided to attack Focus on a deeper level, ultimately hoping to destroy the number one family counseling resource center in the world.

In doing so they began to troll retailers that participate in online buying incentive programs commonly referred to as “affiliate programs.”

Here’s how they work:
The retailer knows that operating brick and mortar stores is far more costly than taking an internet order and shipping the requested item. Those also understand the benefit of working with legitimate charitable organizations, churches, ministries, charities, schools, etc.

So instead of using the full marketing budget on outdoor or television marketing they’ve moved their models to “lead based incentives” where if an organization will send them qualified leads for purchases, they are willing to do something “good” by giving back a portion of that constituent’s purchase to the 501c3 of the buyers choice.

The point being that it is the BUYER’S choice as to where the giveback goes to… NOT THE RETAILERS’.

Several of these online purchasing programs exist, and the hundreds of retailers have given givebacks to literally hundreds of thousands of legitimate 501c3 charities.

After the TOMS shoes kerfuffle, Crowther and Mirabella discovered that one of these programs had been titled “Christian Values Network.” It was not still labeled as such when they began their crusade, and even one of the “spokespeople” they tied to the organization had been dismissed nearly four years previous.

In other words – Crowther, Mirabella, and Change.org – did knowingly publish false information about the relationship of the retailers to Focus On The Family, the giveback program as it operated, the way in which givebacks were generated, and even the identity of the organization.

See the retailers pay the givebacks to the organization (formerly CVN – now called the Charity GiveBack Group) and it is in the accounting of CGBG that the amount given to each Charity is determined. So the retailer never gives a gift directly to any of the 501c3s.

In essence Change.org has engaged in aggressive, untruthful behavior that is seeking to damage the ability of thousands of legitimate charities from doing the work they have been deemed tax-eligible to by the United States Federal Government.

And they – Ben Crowther, Joe Mirabella, and Change.org should all be held accountable for the damages they are doing not just to those charities, but to the millions of lives that are dependent upon the work of these charities – from getting basic marriage and family counseling, all the way to feeding the hungry and housing the homeless.

Blowback