Interesting question. It depends on your theory of giving. I think that people often are susceptible to emotional appeals. The Red Cross can raise a lot of money when there are disasters in other parts of the world. It is clear that there is a desperate need and people respond to that.
Closet to home, the needs are less clear. It’s interesting. Poorer people seem to give more than middle class people, perhaps because they are closer to people in need and can see it more clearly. I think that people tend to want to help those who seem to be clearly in need, and that means you need to see the need in their faces. TV is one way to see that. Meeting people in need is another way.
I give money to the charities I know. I know what the need is. Most of them are local in one way or another. Either they are local organizations, or they are national organizations that work on a problem that someone I know has faced.
Charity is personal. Since we spend more time locally, we are more likely to give to local needs. But if we are exposed to needs outside our area, we are just as empathetic and just as likely to give to help folks who are far away from us.
There is no “should” to where we donate. There is no “should” to donating, period. We give because we choose to, and we give where we choose to. There are no rules about charity. It is a personal thing. If we wanted there to be rules, we’d tax people and support public services for the needy.
Oh. Wait. We already do that.