It seems we're not ready for this. We should be. This is the 168th Fundraising Writing Newsletter. If you find value here, please tell a fundraising friend. (Your fundraising friend can ​subscribe here for free.)​

​

​

Tuesday, April 29, 2025

Hi [FIRST NAME GOES HERE],

Brett here:

11 months ago, I wrote here about my prediction of an AI backlash soon — within 1 year, I said.

Though we're not quite at a full year, I think I can safely say my prediction deserves a grade of D: barely passing. There's a lot of evidence that most people are not happy with where AI developments seem to be leading us... but we're not to the point of a unified backlash. Yet.

I still think a backlash is coming, and it could have a significant impact on your fundraising.

So I'm writing on this subject again. Consider it an update. Whereas 11 months ago, I thought "AI backlash soon," now I think "AI backlash imminent." I.e., sooner than a year; by the end of 2025.

If you're interested, I recommend you read my original piece here (which was easily one of our most widely read newsletters of all time).

I don't want to recap everything I said there, so if you decide not to read the original piece linked above, just know that you're skipping a bit of context regarding my qualifications on this subject and my reasons for concern.

Rather than rehash all that, this new piece is focused on updating the original piece. Let's call it "a sequel."

Fundraising impact: AI backlash imminent?

Since this time last year, several new, more powerful AI models have been released, including Claude 3.7, DeepSeek, GPT 4.5, Gemini 2.5, and o3.

You don't need to know about any of that to understand the following 7 headlines/tweets (a small sampling of what I've been tracking) that should give you a sense of why I think and AI backlash is imminent.

1. Here's an April 24th headline from Kevin Roose, New York Times journalist and co-host of the Hard Fork podcast: (Note: I'm writing this on April 24th.)

"~15% chance that Claude or another AI is conscious today" — sounds backlash-worthy.
​

2. Here's an April 23rd tweet from David Sacks, Chair of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology:

"Improving Education Through Artificial Intelligence" — sounds backlash-worthy.
​

3. Here's an April 22nd tweet from the Future of Life Institute:

"racing to build AGI, with no idea how to control it" — sounds backlash-worthy.

​

4. Here's an April 15th tweet reply from Sam Altman, co-founder and CEO of OpenAI, which made ChatGPT:

"you never know" — sounds backlash-worthy.

​

5. Here's an April 6th tweet from a Spanish artist who uses AI to create some of her art:

​Click here to watch the video. AI imagery and video are improving rapidly — seems backlash-worthy.

​

6. Here's a March 19th tweet from a Berkeley student studying Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences:

"day long work will be automatable by end of 2027" — sounds backlash-worthy.

​

7. Here's a March 14th tweet from Jack Clark, a co-founder of Anthropic, the AI company that made Claude:

"something is about to jump out... upon society" — sounds backlash-worthy.
​

Again, all of the above represents a small sampling of the AI news I've been reading daily. And there are plenty of important issues I have not touched upon: environmental impact, copyright/IP theft, liability, data security, deep fakes, automated AI weaponry, and so much more.

In my view, most people are very upset about at least one AI-related issue — with good reason. AI is advancing at an unprecedented rate. It's a different class of tech. It's fast spreading through most of our infrastructure. It's more than just a "tool," which makes it both more promising and more chaotic. I believe we can only endure so much AI chaos before the backlash comes.

I see the stage we're at right now as a pre-backlash "simmering."

I think the "boiling" over into full backlash looks imminent.

My takeaways remain no more than questions.

I wish I had answers.

I have only questions.

I believe we need to ask questions to arrive at good answers. I'm hoping you'll consider the following questions, add your own questions, and discuss with your colleagues.

"Punting" the issue so as to worry about it later surely would not go well. So let's not do that.

These are my questions . . .

1. "If donors ask us what our AI policy is, how will we respond?"
   ​
2. "Do we believe any aspects of AI are unacceptably problematic?"
   ​
3. "Is it okay for us to use AI images or video? If so, under what constraints?"
   ​
4. "Is it okay for us to use AI copy? If so, under what constraints?"
   ​
5. "Is it okay for us to use AI tools that are integrated into platforms such as Canva, Google Docs, or Microsoft Word?"
   ​
6. "Are some AI companies or platforms more problematic than others?"
   ​
7. "Is it okay to allow an AI to access our donor data and other proprietary information?"
   ​
8. "Do we need legal to review any of this?"
   ​
9. "If an AI backlash comes tomorrow, how might what we are doing with AI today appear to donors?"
   ​
10. "What's the right thing to do?"​
    ​

What about you? Does your org have an AI policy?

I'd love nothing more than for AI to swoop in like a superhero, prove the doomers wrong, save society from collapse, cure all diseases, extend human longevity, and make life for all creatures fairer and more just.

But ignoring red flags is not a good strategy. And I'd hate for your org to be caught flat-footed by ignoring AI red flags and not positioning yourself well with a thoughtful AI policy ahead of any backlash.

Until next time: May we all work together to figure this out ahead of time!

Grateful,

PS: None of this was written by AI. 🤗