Introduction
Over the past
few centuries media has grown to serve as an extremely influencing source of
information. Individuals are
influenced through movies, television, music, and magazines. From a very early
age individuals are taught from alcohol advertisements that partying and
drinking leads to popularity and a happy life. This ideal lifestyle has played
a major role in causing the percent of youth’s who use substances to
increase. In order to reduce the
amount of youth’s partaking in alcohol and substance use many campaigns have
been created. One of the major
campaigns, the National Youth Anti-Drug media campaign, fought to educate
individuals about drug use, prevent youths from beginning using drugs, and to
encouraging individuals who already use drugs to stop. The National Youth
Anti-Drug Media Campaign grew and created another branch known as the Above the
Influence campaign.
Above the
Influence campaign, ATI, was founded in 1998 and focuses on reducing the
percent of teenagers who participate in drug and alcohol use. Above the
Influence is said to influence teenagers to, “live above the influence of drugs
and alcohol and reject the use of any substance that gets in the way of their
goals in life” (8). The campaign works at both the national and local level,
attempting to teach youths across the nation. ATI uses a variety of sources to
gain awareness such as social media networks, television commercials, magazine
ads, and working together with youth groups such as the Boys and Girls Club.
Through their various advertisements Above the Influence campaign exemplifies
to teenagers what it is like to be under the influence and the extreme
consequences that can occur. Unfortunately although the campaign has a positive
goal, there are many flaws within the structure of the campaign that harms the
strength of its effectiveness.
Poor Framing
How an argument is formed and supported will directly affect
the level of support it receives.
The values and images that are associated with the message will either
cause someone to support it or not. Above the Influence has framed their core
position to not use alcohol or drugs around the value of health. Compared to
values though such as freedom and autonomy, which America was built upon, most
individuals recognize health as a weak core value. In efforts to support this
value they use many visual advertisements that represent the health risks
associated. Above the Influence made a mistake using this value because health
is not considered a strong value outside of the public health world. In the Above the Influence
campaign, teenagers would prefer to risk their health in order to save their
freedom.
Poor use of
models: Health Belief Model and The Theory of Planned Behavior
Although group level models often show
more success than individual based models, Above the Influence campaign is
based around two individual level theories, The Health Belief Model and the
Theory of Planned Behavior. The Health Belief Model, HBM, one of the oldest
individual health behavior theories, takes into account four factors; perceived
susceptibility, perceived severity, perceived benefits of an action, and
perceived barriers to taking that action. (6). The Theory of Planned Behavior,
a revised version of the Theory of Reasoned Action, also looks at why a person
performs certain behaviors. Both The Health Belief Model and the Theory of
Planned Behavior assume that people act rationally; that if they know the risks
of a behavior they would choose to perform healthier actions. Unfortunately,
people do not act rationally, and following these theories weakens the Above
the Influence Campaign.
Above the Influence campaign believes
that if teenagers are aware of the risks of drug and alcohol use, they would
not want to experience the consequences, and will therefore not participate in
drug and alcohol activities. There are many flaws with this idea. First, the
majority of teenagers are already aware of the risks of alcohol and drug use
before they try it; therefore the Above the Influence commercials are not
exposing them to anything they are not already aware of. Secondly, Above the Influence assumes
that if people are knowledgeable about the risk they will feel susceptible to
them, but that is false as well. According to an article by Neil D. Weinstein,
“among negative events, the more undesirable the event, the stronger the
tendency to believe that one’s own chances are less than average” (11). A third
flaw of using these models is that Above the Influence campaign is acting at an
individual level: “The HBM primarily focuses on individual decisions and does
not address social and environmental factors” (6). This is a major problem,
especially when the target population is teenagers because social norms are
considered extremely important. People want to fit in and feel that they belong, and socially
it has been taught that drinking and smoking is the way to fulfill that.
Finally, the Health Belief Model and the Theory of Planned Behavior also
assumes that people act rationally, when that is not true. Teenagers do not
stand at a party and weigh the pros and cons of having a beer or smoking from a
bong, but rather they act spontaneously and hope that their actions followed
the social norm and allowed them to fit it with their peers.
In order to
truly reduce the percent of teenagers that use alcohol and drugs social norms
must change. The media must stop portraying movies and commercials where all
the popular students are drinking and partying. Constantly being surrounded by
those images only reinforce the idea that drinking is cool, and “living above
the influence” means a lack of
popularity and being an outcast in social circles.
Triggers
psychological Reactance
No individual
likes feeling that their freedom is being taken away, and when it is they must
react in order to save their freedom. While the Above the Influence Campaign’s
purpose is to reduce drug and alcohol use in teenagers, there are many factors
to the campaign that actually trigger psychological reactance, and cause a
boomerang affect. One factor is in
the campaign’s advertisements. How a campaign advertises its purpose is
crucial, and many factors determine its effectiveness. For instance, who delivers information
is essential in determining how responsive the population receiving the message
will be. Research has shown that individuals respond better when they can
relate to the person delivering the message.
Above the
Influence does not follow this concept and delivers very important information
through extremely un-relatable sources. For example many of their ads and
commercials have animals telling people not to drink or smoke. In one
commercial a girl’s pet dog comes into the kitchen and tells her not to smoke
because she isn’t the same when she does, the girl does not respond and the dog
goes to play outside. In no way can teenagers watching the
commercial relate to a talking dog. Delivering information through a source
that people cannot relate to is one way psychological reactance will be
triggered. When similarity is not there, the perceived risk to losing freedom
is higher. This boomerang affect
can also be due to an overexposure of alcohol and drug use. According to
research, ““ a sample of anti-marijuana public statement announcements used in
national anti-drug campaign in the U.S produced immediate effects opposite to
intended by creators of this campaign on the youth’s attitudes to marijuana” (2)
.
Poor use of
social marketing
With media having a growing effect on society, social
marketing has become a major factor in how public health interventions spread
their message. Social marketing
often uses three strategies to encourage individuals to change a behavior;
shame, fear, and guilt. By using these negative appeals, “the instigators hope
that by creating discomfort people will be motivated to act (or not) to
decrease the feeling of discomfort” ( 1 ). Above the Influence commercials are
designed to express these negative appeals. For example the “Human Puppet” commercial shows a girl who is
passed out from drinking and people from the party are writing on her face and
treating her like a puppet. People
in the background are speaking negatively about the girl and how it was wrong
of her to get that drunk. Although this commercial is meant to make people feel
embarrassed about getting into situations similar to that, which does not
always occur. This will not work because “individuals do not feel ashamed unless they care what others think
about them” (1). Teenagers care
more about what their peers think rather than their parents, so although their
parents may think they should be ashamed of their actions, their peers approve
of it. Above the Influence commercials also
focus on instilling fear in teenagers. By showing the worst case scenarios in
many commercials the campaign hopes to scare people away from alcohol and
drugs. This does not work with the
teenager population though, because teenagers believe they are invincible and
although other people may experience negative consequences, it will not happen
to them.
In
a study performed on 226 college freshmen to test the effect of anti-marijuana
ads, it was proven that the opposite effect of what was intended actually
occurred. The study also showed that after watching the commercials, they felt
that message delivered was weak.
“Past anti-drugs media campaigns in the U.S have been criticized for
exaggerated use of fear-based arguments and some factual inaccuracies,
practices that some researches warned might backfire by enforcing attitudes
opposite to intended by the campaign creators” ( 2 ). Above the Influence is one of the many media campaigns that
overuse the concept of instilling fear of severe risks. For instance one
commercial has a grandmother with a tube in her throat because smoking caused
her to have cancer. Although this is meant to trigger negative emotions
research has found that, “Many
felt that even when they take notice of marketing campaigns, they would ‘switch off’ from the message because of the negativity
depicted within the message and any subsequent call to action” (1). Rather than
focuses on these negative emotions, Above the Influence would have benefited
from other forms of advertisements.
Comparison to other current campaigns
Although Above
the Influence has good intentions, its overall layout and execution of the
campaign have proved to make it not as strong as a campaign as it hoped. Other
campaigns, such as Florida’s “truth” campaign, were able to be successful
without triggering psychological reactance and causing a boomerang affect. The
“truth” campaign which focuses on decreases tobacco use in youths, avoids
advertising a negative stigma associated with drug use. Through their advertisements they allow
individuals to relate to their message in order to reduce the level of threat
to their freedom. While ATI
has proven to have a boomerang effect, “early evaluation results indicate that
the truth has been successful in changing tobacco-related beliefs, attitudes,
and intentions to smoke among teens nationwide” (4). If future anti-drug campaigns wish to be successful, they
should follow in the footsteps of the “truth” campaign rather than of the Above
the Influence campaign.
New campaign
overview
I would like to propose a new intervention called the
“YES” campaign. This intervention has the same underlining purpose as Above the
Influence and seeks to decrease the amount of teenagers who drink and use
drugs. This new program is called the Yes campaign in order to promote a
positive outlook on sobriety: say yes to your future, yes to playing sports,
yes to happiness. This campaign would target children ages 10-15, in order to promote
the idea and benefits of being sober before the pressure of drinking is even
mentioned. It is easier to stop
individuals from starting a behavior rather than make people change their
behavior. The “Yes” campaign will follow in the
footsteps of Florida’s “truth” campaign, in the aspect of how it relates to the
target population. The “Yes” campaign will focus on decreasing psychological
reactance, giving the target population a sense of identity, and supporting
values they find important.
Decrease
Psychological Reactance
The structure of the campaign’s
commercials and advertisements are designed to decrease psychological
reactance. In order to do this, the target population should be able to relate
to the campaign. According to an article by Paul J. Silvia, “similarity should
decrease the negative force toward resistance by influencing perceptions of the
degree of threat. Similarity and liking profoundly affect social perception-
people interpret the actions of liked others in positive, flattering ways” (10).
In order to make the target population relate to the campaign, promoters of the
“Yes” campaign will be peers so people do not feel threatened as well as older
students and role models in order to increase attractiveness and appeal of the
“Yes” campaign. For example, in
most schools the football players are considered the most popular kids in
school. In movies they are advertised as having the most girls and the most
friends, and everybody admires them. By having a football player and other
athletes stand up for the “Yes” campaign and express all the natural hard work
they did and the benefits they have seen, people will admire them and want to follow in their footsteps. Sharing
personal stories will allow these young teens to realize that their dreams and
goals are reachable. According to an article by Neil D. Weintstein, “previous
personal experience with an event increases the likelihood that people will
believe their own chances are greater than average” (11). Knowing that their neighbors,
friends, teammates, etc., achieved their goals will allow other individuals to
see that their own goal is reachable as well.
To further reduce the level of psychological
reactance, spokesmen of the “Yes” campaign will never say do not do drugs, but
rather will promote the positive outcomes they have reached without partaking
in those activities. The “Yes” campaign will better implement the social
marketing theory by not triggering negative emotions such as shame, guilt, and
fear. By not showing disapproving
opinions on specific behaviors and looking down upon the target population,
individual freedom will not threatened, and teenagers are less likely to rebel.
By having peers share their
experiences both at schools and through the media, other individuals will
practice the habits they observe.
It is natural for people respond based on whether or not a result proved
beneficial. According to the social learning theory, “it attempts to explain
how individuals observe other people’s actions and how they come to adopt those
patterns of action as personal modes of response to problems, conditions, or
events in their own lives” (3). If
young teens see that by not using drugs and alcohol people were rewarded, they
will want to perform similarly in order to be rewarded as well.
Branding
Everybody, especially during the
teen years wants to feel a sense of belonging and identity. The “Yes” campaign
will become part of their identity. In this aspect, it will follow in the steps
of Florida’s “truth” campaign. The “truth” campaign has proven to be an
extremely successful intervention, and a large part is due to making “truth” a
brand. They believed, “if we
wanted youth to really embrace our anti-tobacco effort, it made sense that we
should deliver it just like other successful US youth products, such as Adidas,
Fubu or Abercrombie-in a branded form they understood” (5). Branding the “Yes” campaign will help
spread awareness of the campaign, and allows the youths who take part in its
effort to feel a sense of belonging and identity. Like these other successful brands slogans, values, and a
sense of community must be formed. The “Yes” campaign will incorporate all of
these.
In order to build a group that the youths will feel a
part of, “Yes” conventions will be held. These will be events where students
from several schools who support the campaign can gather, share stories,
participate in activities, and expand their social network with individuals of
similar values. People will promote the slogan, “I said YES” while sharing
their experiences. This community will also be found on social networks. The
webpage Isaidyes.org will be a place where individuals can share their stories,
find support, and relate to one another.
Framing
How a campaign is framed largely
effects how its message is received. “A frame is a way of packaging and
positioning an issue so that it conveys a certain meaning” (7). How a message
is framed can alter peoples’ opinion and change how they view something.
“Framing not only defines the issue, but it also suggests the solution: ‘if we
alter the definition of problems, then the response also changes’” (7). Framing
will not only affect people’s opinions, but their behaviors and actions as
well, which is why it is essential for the “Yes” campaign to have a strong
frame. Beyond the outlining
argument, a frame contains symbols, metaphors, catch phrases, and core values.
Often times public health campaigns support their arguments with the core value
of health; unfortunately health is not considered a strong core value.
Rather than
following this public health trend, the “Yes” campaign is going to find out
what value are important to the target population, and frame its arguments around those values.
Youths are looking for a way to be independent, freedom from their parents, autonomy,
etc. These values are considered dominant frames, and they are the frames the
“Yes” campaign will incorporate; by “saying yes” the youth population has the
freedom to create their own future, they have the right to happiness, and the
freedom to choose. Also, unlike the Above the Influence campaign which uses
visual images of depression and injuries, and other consequences of alcohol and
drug use, the “Yes” campaign will focus on positive symbols such as
athleticism, success, dreams, happiness, popularity, etc. These core values and
symbols will also be another way to decrease psychological reactance by making
the target population feel in control.
Conclusion
Although above
the Influence and the “Yes” campaign have different ways to execute an
intervention, the end goals are the same:
have teenagers make healthier life decision by reducing the amount of
teens that partake in alcohol and drug related activities. Although people are not always aware of
is, society plays a major role in influencing everyday decisions and behaviors.
People act a certain way because they feel that is the way society wants them
to behave; society expects teenagers to be rebellious, having your friend drink
is a passage into adulthood, etc.
It is no surprise that the rate of teenagers who use drugs and alcohol
have risen over the years because these actions are constantly advertised through
movies, television, music, and other aspects of everyday life. In order to
truly reduce the amount of teenagers engaging in these activities, society as a
whole must change their views and expectations. Parents and other sources
should not scare their children out of drinking, but rather be honest with
them. People of all ages get a
thrill out of doing something that they believe is a little dangerous, removing
that thrill immediately takes away some of the joy and reduces the amount of
people participating in that activity. If teenagers do not feel that their
freedom is taken away, they would not have the thrill to partake in drinking
and drug related activities.
References
1. Brennan
Linda, Binney Wayne. Fear, Guilt, and shame appeals in social markets. Jounrnal of Business Research. 2010;
63:140-146.
2. Czyegska
Maria, Ginsburg Harvey J. Explicit and implicit effects of anti-marijuana and
tobacco tv advertisments. Addictive
Behaviors 2007: 3: 114-127.
3. DeFleur
ML, Ball-Rokeach SJ. Theories of Mass
Communication (5th edition). Chapter 8 (Socialization and
Theories of Indirect Influences), pp. 202-227. White Plains, NY: Longman Inc.,
1989
4. Herey
James C., Niederdeppe Jeff., Evan W. Douglas., Nonnemaker James, Holden Debra,
Blahut Steven, Messeri Peter, and Habiland M. Lyndon. The theory of “truth”:
how counterindustry media campaigns affect smoking behavior among teens. Health Psychology 2005; 24” 22-31.
5. Hicks
J.J. The strategy behind Florida’s “truth” campaign. Tobacco Control 2001; 10: 3-5.
6. Individual
health behavior theories (chapter 4). IN: Edberg M. Essentials of Health Behavior: Social and Behavioral Theory in Public
Health. Sudbury, MA: Jones and Bartlett Publishers, 2007, pp. 35-49.
7. Menashe
C.L., Siegel M. The power of a frame: an analysis of newspaper coverage of
tobacco issues- United States, 1985-1996. Journal
of Health Communication 1998; 3(4): 307-325
8. Office
of national drug control policy. Campaign effectiveness: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/Campaign-Effectiveness-and-Rigor
9. Rosenstock
Irwin M., Strecher Victor J., and Becker Marshall H. Social learning theory and
the health belief model. Health Education
Behavior 1988: 15:175.
10.
Silvia P.J. Deflecting reactance: The
role of similarity in increasing compliance and reducing resistance. Basic and Applied Social Psychology 2005;
27; 277-284.
11.Weinstein
N.D. Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980; 39: 806-820.
