I think a lot of people will be interested in giving right now, and you can influence your friends by sharing a favourite charity or talking about your own donations.

However, I would also caution all of us to "read the room" as this situation evolves. A lot of our friends will be suffering from losing jobs or loved ones and it might sometimes be harmful to ask them for charity donations.

Personally, I think the Centre for Health Security might be a pretty good bet, as they genuinely are doing prominent COVID-related work, but were also already an excellent donation opportunity from an x-risk/longtermist perspective (in my view, based largely on Founders Pledge's recommendation and Open Phil's donations, rather than separate new info of my own). So I'd guess that CHS passes the "related to COVID" test for non-EAs.

CHS may fail the "doing something tangible and easy to understand" test. If you think that'd be an issue for your networks, maybe the best option from Sanjay's post would be Univursa Health or Development Media International (just based on my impression after reading that post - I have no prior knowledge of Univursa).

I would also be cautious about just trying to point out to non-EAs that non-COVID things will be especially neglected, as they may find that reasoning callous or misguided if their first exposure to it is during this crisis. But you could try to first suggest what the best donation opportunities that are COVID/pandemic-related are, and then point out in a very non-pushy way how other things may be especially neglected right now, and thus especially valuable to donate to. Sort of like an intellectual point that they can take or leave, with you having first accepted and respected their starting point of interest in COVID specifically.

This is roughly what I plan to do in a Facebook fundraiser for CHS. Inspired partly by your question, I wrote up my planned text for the fundraiser, my rationale for it, and my open questions here.

Note: I lean towards longtermism. For people more convinced by arguments for other cause areas such as global health and development or animal welfare, I think there's probably more of a real tension between (a) trying to gently steer people interested in supporting work on COVID towards more effective donation opportunities, versus (b) recommending what you truly think is at least highly effective.

But maybe (not sure) this would be a time for just doing (a) anyway, given that there's a lot of scope for that right now. This could be based on moral uncertainty, or could be a sort of moral trade with longtermists. Alongside this, such people could personally continue to donate their resources to whatever they think is highest value.