Within academic research, more and more scholars reveal the ambivalence of NGOs—the sometimes constructive, sometimes destructive role they play in solving societal problems. In this paper, we present a discourse analysis that illustrates how NGOs’ campaigning may undermine their reputation and advocacy function. We conclude that such discourse failures are frequently not merely an accidental by-product, but rather a not-intended consequence of deliberate NGOs’ campaigns. By applying ideas from political economy, we make particular note of probable discourse failures when campaigns attempt to deal with complex issues in an environment rife with wide-spread prejudices and where the NGO’s work is transparent. We present collectively institutionalized commitments for NGOs and commitment services enforced by political organizations as instruments that are suitable for increasing public accountability of the NGO sector. In conclusion, we argue that further research can benefit from systematically analyzing the interdependencies between discourses and institutions.