Other than the fact that you can easily copy/paste your request and that it's super easy, the picture and title tell you all you need to know.

I couldn't find a quote for this.

-Me, 2024

Epistemic status (Optional): 

This is not based on other people's experience doing this. If you have (or haven't), please let me know how I can improve this article! (people keep downvoting my posts without telling me why, and it's a mild inconvenience for me, and my content isn't as good because of it.)

In addition, the extent to which this article has been peer-reviewed so far is:

1. It was edited in accordance with Robert Cousineau's comment.
2. Nothing else.

Notably, the message of this article is a concept, something that is less research-based and, therefore, is less prone to research errors.

I checked the grammar of this article with Grammarly.

So what's the idea?

The idea is to reach out to public entities^[1], asking said public entity to ask [the people who view their content] to donate to your thing. The effect of a mention is roughly proportional to how many people view their content^[2], so it makes sense to aim for more popular entities in your requests.

Pros:

1. You can easily copy/paste your request since the outcome is largely independent of who you're requesting a mention from, and the format for contacting a public entity is much less case-specific and is usually done by sending a simple email.  (Of course, you can personalize the request, and it might increase your odds, but it also might take longer.)
2. Even if viewers don't donate, at the very least, they will know about your cause.
3. The process of asking entities for a mention might be more enjoyable and easier than applying for funding.
4. It likely doesn't require the entity to spend any money on it, meaning a mention would likely have little to no cost for them. This makes it more likely to work than doing unsolicited grant proposals, which are costly for donor institutions.
5. In addition, this way, the money donated would have otherwise just gone to the people viewing the content, whereas when applying for funding, the money would have otherwise gone to a different institution.^[3]
6. In addition, since you are not competing with others for a mention, they are more likely to say yes to you, since they don't have to choose between you and 200 other people.
7. It might help said entity's PR.^[4] (This also could be a bad thing, but don't mention that to them!)
8. Money would go to your cause.^[4]
9. Other pros that I am not currently aware of. (If you are aware of any more, please let me know!)

Cons:

1. It might be less professional to have a source of funding be a [YouTube video or something along those lines.]. It also might associate your thing with their thing.
   1. This could (at least partially) be mitigated by only reaching out to more professional entities that you would be okay with being associated with your thing.
2. It could potentially harm their public brand, as well as yours, as your email might come across as spam-like^[5], and their mentioning you might come across as out of place and weird to be in their content.
   1. This could (at least partially) be mitigated by trying to come across as less spam-like and by only reaching out to entities whom you think [them mentioning you wouldn't harm their brand].
   2. It might actually be positive to ask entities to mention your thing if it would harm their brand, if their brand is bad. (Note: if their brand is bad, they probably would be less willing to mention your thing.) (e.g., if FakeEvilCorpNews mentioned Non-EvilThing, it would harm their brand as an evil news channel, making some evil people not listen to them.)
3. Similar to how it could harm your brand, it could harm the brands of things associated with what you want funding for. (e.g., Veganism, Effective Altruism, GMOs, AI safety regulation)
4. Other cons that I am not currently aware of. (If you are aware of any more, please let me know!)

One last thing:

I suggest providing some evidence that [what you're requesting funding for] is legitimate in your "request text," since it would likely otherwise be seen as spam mail.

1. ^{^}

    (e.g.,  media personalities, podcasts, comedy news channels, etc.)

2. ^{^}

   This is because, for each additional person who views the content, there is some expected amount of money they donate to your cause. In addition, that expected amount changes depending on how many [people who view their content.]

3. ^{^}

   This also means that making an emotional appeal is more morally acceptable, since it doesn't [give you an unfair advantage in a procedure to determine which institution should have the funds], since there are no other institutions.

4. ^{^}

   I would suggest pointing this out in your "request text." (The thing you copy/paste and maybe customize a little from entity to entity.)

5. ^{^}

   In addition, they might make content painting you in a negative light for doing so. This could (at least partially) be mitigated by  only reaching out to entities that seem less likely to do this.