So more than ten years later, the ice bucket challenge is back – supporting mental health instead of ALS. But can it work for both? Potentially, though the wider benefit still firmly belongs to ALS.
Over the last week, ice bucket challenge content has made a return in social media, 11 years after its original hey day.
The social media challenge, where individuals doused themselves with an ice bucket, donated to ALS research and nominated others to do the same has come back due to University of South Carolina student-run organization called MIND, (Mental Illness Needs Discussion), raising money for mental health.
Can the ice bucket challenge have a comeback like Y2K fashion and flashmobs? More importantly, can it be used to support other causes?
Well, in a way it already has. While the best known use of the challenge was to support ALS, it originally started in another form amongst golfers trying to support pet charities.
ALS adopted and refined it further into a viral moment, raising $115m in 2014 alone and a reported $220m overall. In addition to its financial, a 2024 report into its long term legacy showcased an increase in awareness, research grants and government / NGO support towards the cause. The benefit of the ice bucket challenge was more than a donation, it was a new level of prominence for ALS. The cultural conversation and awareness created by it built on top of competitors and gave a continued presence for the charity.
However, copycats didn’t share in that level of success. While adaptations had short term awareness, such as 4.4m views of Matt Damon using toilet water for water.org, the long term impact was left to the most prominent cause.
What does this mean for the new version? Though short term potential is strong, it faces a challenge to put a long term stamp on the moment and will additionally face copy cats if it continues to grow.
Charities can share a trend, but those who come to it later have to acknowledge they’re borrowing instead of creating. No matter how long exists between popular trends, the long term benefit belongs to who came first.
