From Quantification to Donor Appreciation: Post-Humanitarianism and Discursive Strategies of NGO Legitimacy on Social Media

Abstract

Approaching legitimacy discourses through the lens of post-humanitarianism, this study examines discursive legitimacy strategies in international NGOs’ social media communication. The findings identify seven strategies through which NGOs negotiate legitimacy via an ambivalent assemblage of palatable pity, institutional branding, and compensatory discourses. While these strategies do not reflect a wholesale adoption of post-humanitarianism, they reveal complex, layered attempts in which NGOs simultaneously mobilize multiple logics of legitimation. In doing so, they produce problematic articulations of humanitarian subjectivities and aid relations, while mediating depoliticized claims to legitimacy. Overall, the study calls for critical reflection on legitimacy construction within digital humanitarian communication.

Keywords

NGO humanitarian communication nonprofit communication legitimacy social media post-humanitarianism

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Atack

(1999). Four criteria of development NGO legitimacy. World Development, 27(5), 855–864.

Bashri

(2022). Organizational legitimacy and communication on social networking sites: A case study of Sadagaat and the Hawadith Street Initiatives in Sudan. In Sorce

(Ed.). Global perspectives on NGO communication for social change (pp. 145–159). Routledge.

Boltanski

(1999). Distance suffering: Morality, media and politics. Cambridge University Press.

Borchgrevink

(2020). NGOization of Islamic charity: Claiming legitimacy in changing institutional contexts. Voluntas, 31(5), 1049–1062.

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101.

Briones

Kuch

Liu

Jin

(2011). Keeping up with the digital age: How the American Red Cross uses social media to build relationships. Public Relations Review, 37(1), 3–43.

Calhoun

(2008). The imperative to reduce suffering: Charity, progress, and emergencies in the field of humanitarian action. In Barnett

Weiss

T. G.

(Eds.), Humanitarianism in question: Politics, power, ethics (pp. 73–97). Cornell University Press.

Chalmers

A. W.

Shotton

P. A.

(2016). Changing the face of advocacy? Explaining interest organizations’ use of social media strategies. Political Communication, 33(3), 374–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2015.1043477

Choudry

Kapoor

(2013). Introduction: NGOization: Complicity, contradictions and prospects. In Choudry

Kapoor

(Eds.), NGOization: Complicity, contradictions and prospects (pp. 1–23). Zed Books.

10.

Chouliaraki

(2004). Watching 11 September: The politics of pity. Discourse & Society, 15(2–3), 185–198.

11.

Chouliaraki

(2006). The spectatorship of suffering. Sage Publications.

12.

Chouliaraki

(2010). Post-humanitarianism: Humanitarian communication beyond a politics of pity. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 13(2), 107–126.

13.

Chouliaraki

(2013). The ironic spectator: Solidarity in the age of post-humanitarianism. Polity.

14.

Chouliaraki

Stolic

(2017). Rethinking media responsibility in the refugee ‘crisis’: A visual typology of European news. Media, Culture & Society, 39(8), 1162–1177.

15.

Chouliaraki

Vestergaard

(2022). Introduction: Humanitarian communication in the 21st century. In Chouliaraki

Vestergaard

(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of humanitarian communication (pp. 1–22). Routledge.

16.

Cooper

(2019). Reporting humanitarian disasters in a social media age. Routledge.

17.

Deloffre

M. Z.

Schmitz

H. P.

(2019). International NGO legitimacy: Challenges and responses. In Davies

(Ed.), Routledge Handbook of NGOs and International Relations (pp. 606–620). Routledge.

18.

Dencik

Allan

(2017). In/visible conflicts: NGOs and the visual politics of humanitarian photography. Media, Culture and Society, 39(8), 1178–1193. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163443717726865

19.

Dhanani

Kennedy

(2023). Envisioning legitimacy: Visual dimensions of NGO annual reports. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 36(1), 348–377.

20.

Dimitrova

Ozdora-Aksak

(2023). What a difference context makes: Comparing communication strategies of migration NGOs in two neighboring countries. Journal of Borderlands Studies, 38(6), 939–956.

21.

Dimitrova

Heidenreich

Georgiev

T. A.

(2024). The relationship between humanitarian NGO communication and user engagement on Twitter. New Media & Society, 26(5), 2514–2534.

22.

Dogra

(2012). Representations of global poverty: Aid, development and international NGOs. I.B. Tauris.

23.

Dumitrica

(2021). Integrating social media in NGO strategic communication: Lessons from Dutch NGOs’ communication practices. In Sorce

(Ed.), Global perspectives on NGO communication for social change (pp. 73–89). Routledge.

24.

Edwards

Hulme

(1996). Beyond the magic bullet: NGO performance and accountability in the post-cold war world. Kumarian Press.

25.

Elhosary

(2025). Vulnerability or resilience tweets? A comparative analysis of media outlets versus non-governmental organizations visual representations of the 2023 Morocco earthquake survivors. International Communication Gazette, 87(3), 238–265.

26.

Elvira-Lorilla

Garcia-Rodriguez

Romero-Merino

M. E.

Santamaria-Mariscal

(2024). The role of social media in nonprofit organizations’ fundraising. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 53(6), 1353–1380. https://doi.org/10.1177/08997640231213286

27.

Enghel

Danielsson

(2019). Bad news: Seeing communication for and about development through an expose of Swedish aid to Zambia. The Journal of International Communication, 25(2), 254–274.

28.

Eyben

Guijt

Roche

Shutt

(Eds.) (2015). The politics of evidence and results in international development: Playing the game to change the rules? Practical Action Publishing.

29.

Fang

(2021). From Charity to Justice: How NGOs can revolutionize our response to extreme poverty. Palgrave Macmillan.

30.

Figenschou

T. U.

(2020). Public sector communication and NGOs: From formal integration to mediated confrontation? In Luoma-aho

Canel

(Eds.), The handbook of public sector communication (pp. 259–272). Wiley-Blackwell.

31.

Forbes (2021). America’s top 100 charities. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/lists/top-charities/?sh=2538a6795f50

32.

Gayle

(2018, June 15). Timeline: Oxfam sexual exploitation scandal in Haiti. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/jun/15/timeline-oxfam-sexual-exploitation-scandal-in-haiti

33.

Gordon

N. S.

Trammel

(2016). Social media, women, and empowerment: The uses of social media platforms by WNGOs in Jamaica and Brazil. In Robinson

Schulz

Dunn

(Eds.), Communication and information technologies annual (Vol. 12, pp. 93–130). Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

34.

Guo

Saxton

G. D.

(2018). Speaking and being heard: How nonprofit advocacy organizations gain attention on social media. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(1), 5–26.

35.

Hall

Schmitz

H. P.

Dedmon

J. M.

(2020). Transnational advocacy and NGOs in the digital era: New forms of networked power. International Studies Quarterly, 64(1), 159–167.

36.

Ihm

(2019). Communicating without nonprofit organizations on nonprofits’ social media: Stakeholders’ autonomous networks and three types of organizational ties. New Media & Society, 21(11–12), 2648–2670.

37.

Ihm

(2022). How individuals use nonprofit organizations’ social media pages: Understanding functions of and networks from individual posts for social change. Public Relations Review, 48, 102252. doi: 10.1016/j.pubrev.2022.102252

38.

Keating

V. C.

Thrandardottir

(2017). NGOs, trust, and the accountability agenda. The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, 19(1), 134–151.

39.

Kim

M. D.

(2022). Advocating “refugees” for social justice: Questioning victimhood and voice in NGOs’ use of Twitter. International Journal of Communication, 16, 719–739.

40.

Kim

M. D.

(2025). Determinants and challenges of NGO social media communication: Explaining tensions around “looking cool” for social change. International Journal of Communication, 19, 1448–1467.

41.

Krippendorf

(1989). Content analysis. In Barnouw

Gerbner

Schramm

Worth

T. L.

Gross

(Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Communication (Vol. 1, pp. 403–407). Oxford University Press.

42.

Lang

(2013). NGOs, civil society and the public sphere. Cambridge University Press.

43.

Lee

S. Y.

Lim

J. R.

Shi

(2022). Visually framing disasters: Humanitarian aid organizations’ use of visuals on social media. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 101(3), 749–773.

44.

Lewis

(2014). Non-governmental organizations, management and development (3rd ed.). Routledge.

45.

Lister

(2003). NGO legitimacy: Technical issue or social construct? Critique of Anthropology, 23(2), 175–192.

46.

Lovejoy

Waters

Saxton

G. D.

(2012). Engaging stakeholders through Twitter: How nonprofit organizations are getting more out of 140 characters or less. Public Relations Review, 38(2), 313–318.

47.

Makuwira

J. J.

(2014). Non-governmental development organizations and the poverty reduction agenda: The moral crusaders. Routledge.

48.

Malkki

L. H.

(1996). Speechless emissaries: Refugees, humanitarianism, and dehistoricization. Cultural Anthropology, 11(3), 377–404. doi:10.1525/can.1996.11.3.02a00050

49.

Nandy

(1983). The intimate enemy: The loss and recovery of self under colonialism. Oxford University Press.

50.

Neuendorf

K. A.

(2018). Content analysis and thematic analysis. In Brough

(Ed.), Advanced research methods for applied psychology: Design, analysis and reporting (pp. 211–223). Routledge.

51.

Nikunen

(2019). Media solidarities: Emotions, power and justice in the digital age. Sage Publications.

52.

Nonprofit Tech for Good. (2019). Global NGO technology report 2019. Funraise & Nonprofit Tech for Good.

53.

Ongenaert

Joye

Machin

(2023). Beyond the humanitarian savior logics? UNHCR’s public communication strategies for the Syrian and Central African crises. International Communication Gazette, 85(2), 1–27.

54.

Ossewaarde

Nijhof

Heyse

(2008). Dynamics of NGO legitimacy: How organizing betrays core missions of INGOs. Public Administration and Development, 28(1), 42–53.

55.

Powers

(2016). NGO publicity and reinforcing path dependencies: Explaining the persistence of media-centered publicity strategies. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 21(4), 490–507.

56.

Scott

(2014). Media and development: Development matters. Zed Books.

57.

Schwarz

Fritsch

(2015). Strategic communication practice of international nongovernmental organizations. In Holzhausen

Zerfass

(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of strategic communication (pp. 459–480). Routledge.

58.

Suchman

(1995). Managing legitimacy: Strategic and institutional approaches. Academy of Management Review, 20(3), 571–610.

59.

Thrall

A. T.

Stecula

Sweet

(2014). May we have your attention please? Human-rights NGOs and the problem of global communication. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 19(2), 135–159.

60.

Vestergaard

(2014). Mediatized humanitarianism: Trust and legitimacy in the age of suspicion. Journal of Business Ethics, 120(4), 509–525.

61.

Walton

O. E.

Davies

Thrandardottir

Keating

V. C.

(2016). Understanding contemporary challenges to INGO legitimacy: Integrating top-down and bottom-up perspectives. Voluntas, 27(6), 2764–2786.

62.

Wang

Yang

(2020). Dialogic communication on social media: How organizations use Twitter to build dialogic relationships with their publics. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, Article 106183.

63.

Wilkins

K. G.

(2016). Communicating gender and advocating accountability in global development. Palgrave Macmillan.

64.

Wilson

(2011). “Race”, gender and neoliberalism: Changing visual representations in development. Third World Quarterly, 32(2), 315–331.

65.

Yanacopulos

(2022). Development. In Chouliaraki

Vestergaard

(Eds.), The Routledge handbook of humanitarian communication (pp. 39–53). Routledge.

66.

Younis

Rzepa

(2019, June 20). One in three worldwide lack confidence in NGOs. Gallup. https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/258230/one-three-worldwide-lack-confidence-ngos.aspx