See also Lonely Planet’s Editorial Guidelines (separate document).
Lonely Planet readers are interested in connecting with the destination in meaningful ways. In many cases readers are interested in volunteer opportunities and how they might contribute to organisations working with people in need in the destinations they are visiting. Including this information in our products is editorially justified, but we must be careful to abide by Lonely Planet’s Editorial Guidelines, which state:
We must not endorse or appear to endorse any organisation, its products, activities or services. This includes charities, hotels, everything. We can review organisations, products and services and give a strong, informed opinion on what we think of them, but this is different from, for example, endorsing the good work of charities.
In many countries, charitable status brings benefits such as tax exemption.
Consider the overall balance of content and subject matter relating to charities. In particular, giving prominence to one particular charity – by including it in the highlights of a book or by making it the subject of a boxed text – may be regarded as an endorsement and should generally be avoided. However, if a review of a particular charity can be editorially justified as being of great interest to the traveller and is written in such a way that cannot be interpreted as an exhortation to donate, a case can be made to include it as a feature.
Organisations presented as a list where options are provided is fine. A single organisation listed in one chapter could be problematic. Consider including other organisations to provide options. If there are no others that can be included, consider including a cross-reference to other charities elsewhere in the book, eg volunteering text in Directory, or to Lonely Planet’s Volunteer: A Traveller’s Guide.
Consider the overall impact of the language and ensure language remains objective and sticks to the facts about what the organisation does. Avoid effusive language such as ‘worthy’ to describe the organisation. Use factual (rather than encouraging) language and third person rather than second person, eg ‘You can go on turtle-saving expeditions…’ or ‘Go on a turtle-saving expedition…’ would be better phrased as ‘Volunteers go on turtle-saving expeditions…’
Avoid singling out Lonely Planet readers as potential or past donors, eg ‘Lonely Planet readers can donate at the office’ or ‘Donations from Lonely Planet readers in the past have funded the purchase of stationery for hundreds of school students…’ Avoid inappropriate references urging donations.
Consider whether including the organisation as a POI is editorially justified. Does the text support its inclusion; is there enough information to explain to a reader why it’s worth visiting?
Some destinations include a lot of information about how people can be involved in volunteering or helping those in need, eg India. Consider whether the volume of content is editorially justified in the destination.
In politically sensitive destinations, avoid including charities with overt political views or that encourage political activism.