the survey and the author obtained the information, then it is speculation on whether there is a correlation between the two or not. Without additional data points it is equal probability that there is or isn't a correlation between the two.

While studying at VT I took a course in political science, psychology, and sociology that focused on setting up experiments/testing hypothesis within the particular disciplines. Surprisingly the 3 professors hammered home these common points:

1. Reduce bias which can include any bias the experimenter (or author in this case) may have on the subject matter
2. Eliminate the possibility of a false positive
3. Ensure the results/data points are objective as possible

I am not suggesting that the author needed to do a full experiment before writing the article. However, if the author wants to be completely objective when writing an article, then the author will conduct mini-like experiment (even a mental one) to ensure any personal bias is not clouding the presentation of facts in the article. If the experimenter doesn't reduce biases in the "experiment," then it can result in a false positive.

I do believe the author believes the protest is the primary (and maybe the only reason) for the drop in donations. Also, I believe the author's purpose was to convince the reader to reach the same conclusion. Given the lack of additional data points, it appears to me that the author may have allowed personal bias to cloud the article. Without additional data points we will never know if there is a correlation or this is a case of a false positive.