Walking the walk…

Feb 24

Last week we got a group of volunteers from Ogilvy to help WAMU 88.5 Public Radio with its membership drive. Rob Mathias, our managing director,  made sure we looked sharp in our Ogilvy Red T-Shirts and we were a fun and enthusiastic group. WAMU raised $20,000 over two hours and really appreciated our support. Here’s a little video to capture the event with an interview with the WAMU volunteer coordinator Anthony Washington.

Special thanks to my colleagues who made it such a great event: Maggie Carr, Sarah Ellenberger, Danae Goldberg, Heather Innella, Maria James, Paula Jones, Lauren Littleton, Jennifer Lowe, Stephanie Mui, and Matt Schoenfeld.

TV News Can Kill You – Film at 11

Feb 09

February is a sweeps month – that’s the time that Nielsen passes out ratings diaries and asks “Nielsen Families” to record what they watch on TV. They do it four months a year (May, July and November are the other months) and despite new, high tech ways of counting eyeballs in front of the screen on a continual basis, TV Stations still rely a lot on these ratings to set their advertising rates. And that’s why we sometimes see crazy promos of sensationalized stories during this time period. They are desperately trying to capture audience attention during these months.  Local TV reporters have confessed to me that they actually start working on sweeps stories months in advance, holding particularly “juicy” stories for those most important months. All local TV news folks breathe a sign of relief when the month is over.

Well, now it’s time for local TV News to turn the camera on themselves because a couple of new studies show that when they sensationalize – people die.

I’m sorry; let me be a little more responsible. Two newly published research studies (Study: Cancer Fatalism Propagated by Broadcast News | Smart Journalism. Real Solutions. Miller-McCune) show that the way local TV news stations cover the causes of cancer leads to cancer fatalism, meaning that people end up thinking that “everything” causes cancer and there is nothing they can do about it.

It seems when local TV news outlets report about cancer research they are, “less likely to include information that would allow viewers to follow up by seeking out additional resources, guidance or advice regarding the coverage they watched,” according to the study authors.

So what’s so bad about having cancer fatalism? This is where the people die part comes in. Previous medical research shows, “Americans who hold fatalistic beliefs about cancer prevention may be at greater risk of cancer because they are less likely to engage in various prevention behaviors.” (Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention, 2007)

This wasn’t true for people who watched national newscasts and their research indicated it wasn’t just fatalistic people who happen to watch more local TV.

While ringing this alarm bell, they also issued a call to action, “researchers and public health officials might consider conducting education or training sessions with local TV journalists to report on cancer in a way that minimizes the likelihood of developing fatalistic beliefs.”

That’s where people like you and me come in – working with our clients (many of them the researchers and public health officials mentioned above) to help them discuss these issues clearly and succinctly with news outlets.

My former CNN colleague Gary Schwitzer has created a cottage industry of calling attention to the inadequacies of all health care reporting not just local TV news. He particularly rails against disease mongering on his web site healthnewsreviews.org. These studies will add wind to his sails emphasizing the importance of journalists’ getting it dead right.  I encourage colleagues and clients to take a look at the site for a good evaluation of the state of health care reporting and how we can help.

The Association of Health Care Journalists (AHCJ) is another incredible resource for reporters who want to understand the nuances of science and health reporting and the effect it can have on public health. Their annual conference with some 500 reporters in attendance provides a variety of workshops for writers, producers, and editors to become more adept at reporting health risks in a more responsible context. One of them is usually led by Schwitzer. They also conduct a variety of workshops and seminars as well as produce guidebooks for journalists navigating science, health risks and public policy.

While in Aesop’s fable The Boy Who Cried Wolf , the sheep and boy lost their lives, the townsfolk also suffered. So it’s incumbent upon all of us to make sure TV News doesn’t make the same fatal mistake.  Film at 11.

With Notable Exceptions, U.S. Residents Are Turning to the Web for Health Information

Feb 03

Believe it or not, there are those among us who can still remember when “computers” were the kind of thing we saw on school field trips and “Google” wasn’t even a word. At that time (and it really wasn’t so long ago) social marketing and communications professionals relied on some practices that seem downright quaint today – I’m talking about press releases sent by snail mail to media outlets that produced news on paper or through a handful of broadcast networks, video shot with clunky shoulder and tripod-mounted cameras, and educational materials that were stored in government warehouses and made available mostly when consumers called toll-free numbers and requested them.

While most of us agree that today’s Web-driven communications enable us to be more persuasive, pervasive and creative, we are occasionally reminded that many of those we need to reach and influence aren’t necessarily online. This week’s reminder came with results of the Pew Internet Project and California HealthCare Foundation Health Topics report that showed strong demographic differences among those who turn to the Web for health information.

The report found that while a large number of white adults with some college education and those living in higher-income households frequently turn to online sources for health information, the number drops to less than 50 percent among African-Americans, Latinos, those with less than a high school education and those living in low-income households.

The result of a persistent Digital Divide? Perhaps – yet the report also found that fewer than half of those aged 65 and older and those with a disability turn to the Web when they’re looking for health information.

The study was led by Susannah Fox, Associate Director, Digital Strategy for the Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project, who wrote an interesting blog post for e-patients.net about the findings.

The report also has some useful overall information for health communications professionals, notably:

Overall, eight out of 10 Internet users look online for health information, making it the third most popular pursuit among those tracked by the Pew Internet Project.

  • 66 percent of those with online access look online for information about a specific disease or medical problem.
  • 56 percent look online for information about a specific medical treatment or procedure.
  • Adults who provide unpaid care for a friend or family member are among those most likely to have looked online for health information on various topics, with 88 percent reporting they have done so.
  • Since approximately 25 percent of adults do not go online, the percentage of those who seek health information on the Web is approximately 59 percent of the total U.S. adult population.

For social marketing professionals, the most significant message in these findings is that the Web can still be one of the best venues for engaging and influencing a large number of U.S. residents but it isn’t a panacea for health related communications to every audience. It’s also a good reason not to forget some practices that were proven effective long before any of us knew how to handle a mouse. We need to continue considering and evaluating the role of partners and intermediaries with established credibility among target audiences and remember that traditional media is still effective for some audiences. According to Pew’s “The State of the News Media” annual report on American journalism, well over half of U.S. adults aged 55 and over still read daily newspapers and the number rises to over 60 percent among those 65 and over.

We also need to recognize that swift advances in technology continue to make online access more affordable and accessible, which will likely boost participation rates among many audiences in the coming months and years. In other words – this report is a snapshot about the way various sectors of the population utilize the Internet for learning about health topics today, but the results may be very different a year from now. As noted by the report, “young people, Latinos and African Americans are increasingly likely to use mobile devices to gather information, which could potentially shift the patterns among those groups when it comes to using health information resources.” Opportunity could therefore be knocking for social marketers who utilize those technologies as effective engagement tools.

Read the full results and let us know what you think below.

Food, Glorious Food

Feb 02

I like food. Ok, I love food. I wouldn’t necessarily call myself a “foodie” maybe more of a “food geek.” Because of that, I think I tend to be more immersed and interested in food issues—healthy school lunches, organic vs. not, herbivore vs. carnivore vs. omnivore, and yes, which food truck is the best in DC (jury is still out on that one)—than most people. Many of these issues can incite pretty passionate discussion (especially that food truck one), with heated arguments on all sides. Food is kind of a touchy subject. It’s strikes an emotional chord. It speaks to our cultural and regional identities. In short, it’s not that simple.

Or is it?

In his inaugural column today, Mark Bittman of the New York Times penned a simple and direct, well-written summation of the food “issues” we face and what it means for us. He calls it “A Food Manifesto for the Future.” I think it’s a really nice piece that outlines clearly what the problems are, and the very core issue—what the public health implications are. Not just individual health, but environmental health and the overall health of our planet.

Because while food is wrapped up in emotional, cultural, and social ties…at the end of the day it is fuel and sustenance. It has the power to keep us healthy, it is the fuel that drives us. When you think of it that way, who wouldn’t want the best?

Read the article, and I would love to hear your thoughts in the comments.

Exciting Social Marketing Career Opportunities at Ogilvy

Feb 01

Ogilvy Washington, headquarters to Ogilvy’s flagship Social Marketing Practice, is looking for social marketing experts at all levels.  For more information, visit http://careers.ogilvy.com.

Look Who’s Talking About Health – On Twitter

Jan 27

If you’re brainstorming ideas for new ways to utilize spokespeople or key experts for your social marketing campaign,  look no further than Twitter and consider hosting a Twitter chat.

Twitter chats are arranged conversations that happen on Twitter through the use of a hashtag, a word that links tweets together using the # sign, that joins everyone in a virtual conversation. They are usually publicized in advance, occur at a specific time and may even include a moderator.

Healthcare experts are starting to embrace the use of these chats as a way to join the conversation about key health issues. Here are the two recent health-related live chats on Twitter I found interesting:

Topic: Concussion in Sports
Twitter Chat Host:
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Injury Center
Hashtag Used:
#CDCHeadsUp
Panel:
Former professional athletes and health experts

Today, the CDC hosted a chat that focused on concussion in sports. The virtual panel included professional athletes and experts, such as Sean Morey, a former NFL player; Chris Nowinski, former pro-wrestler and college football player; Dr. Stan Herring, team physician for the Seattle Seahawks and Seattle Mariners ; and Dr. Richard Hunt, director of the CDC’s Division of Injury  Response. The CDC was able to utilize social media as a way to become apart of the online discussion about head injuries in sports. The combination of medical professionals and professional athletes helped balance the conversation between medical expertise and practical knowledge.

Topic: Questions about Vaccines
Twitter Chat Host: USA Today’s Liz Szabo
Hashtag Used: #vaccinechat
Panel: Dr. Sue Hubbard, a Dallas-based pediatrician

USA Today held a live chat on Jan. 10th with Pediatrician Dr. Sue Hubbard, aka @TheKidsDoctor, to answer questions and discuss myths and controversies surrounding vaccines. This  is a great example of how to use a Twitter chat as a platform to discuss relevant issues in the news. In this case, the recent media coverage surrounding vaccines and autism (check out Alex Hughes post earlier this month on the topic: What can public health communicators learn from the autism/vaccine debate) provided the perfect opportunity for USA Today to allow participants to voice their thoughts and/or concerns about vaccines and engage with a doctor around the topic.

While hosting a Twitter chat does require some planning, it is a simple and free way to discuss health-related issues using spokespeople or experts in a transparent way.

Here is a list of a few weekly/bi-weekly healthcare twitter chats to check out:

#eldercarechat – A bi-weekly chat held on Wednesday’s at 1 p.m. EST, about issues of importance to elder care professionals and caregivers.

#hcsm – A weekly chat held on Sunday’s from 9-10 p.m. EST, to discuss healthcare communications and social media. The chat is moderated by Dana Lewis (@danamlewis).

#Socpharm – A weekly chat held on Wednesday’s from 8-9 p.m. EST, about social media and marketing in the pharmaceutical/biotech industry. Each chat is moderated by Eileen O’Brien. Eileen invites people from pharma companies to guest moderate once a month.  The chat also includes guest moderators from industry publications, agencies and other related companies.

Have you ever utilized a live Twitter chat for either a campaign or personally? If so, I’d love to know about your experience.

Note: Updated to correct the moderator for the #Socpharm Tweet Chat.

http://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/socialmedia/twitter.html?source=govdelivery

Should the next edition of Theories at a Glance include the Fun Theory?

Jan 27

I just came across this video on my Facebook news feed and watched it over and over again.  

This is an incredible example of making a desirable behavior the more appealing option.  It’s like putting melted cheddar cheese on broccoli to encourage vegetable consumption among children – but bigger!   This effort was developed based on the Fun Theory, which is defined on funtheory.com as “the thought that something as simple as fun is the easiest way to change people’s behaviour for the better. Be it for yourself, for the environment, or for something entirely different, the only thing that matters is that it’s change for the better.”   Brilliant. Truly brilliant.  We all could use a little more fun.

I challenge you to think about how we can infuse more fun into the behaviors we are promoting.  So, it’s not just promoting benefits and reducing the barriers, but packaging the behaviors with appealing – and fun – elements.  It takes some seriously innovative thinking… check out www.funtheory.com for additional inspiration.

Help Celebrate Social Marketing’s Anniversary – What Are Your Favorite Social Marketing Campaigns?

Jan 25

Yesterday I shared my excitement for celebrating social marketing’s upcoming anniversary by presenting #3 on my personal list of top three favorite social marketing campaigns. Today, I want to share with you my top two. Do these campaigns hold a spot in your top three?

#2.  Don’t Drink Yourself Fat, 2009-Present, New York Department of Health

Background: The New York Health Department encourages consumers to choose beverages with less sugar, and to aims to fight obesity caused by sugary drinks.

Objective: The campaign’s signature image – in which a bottle of soda, “sports” drink or sweetened iced tea turns to a blob of fat as it reaches the glass – is a reminder of how these products can lead to obesity and related health problems. The ads urge New Yorkers to cut back on sugary beverages and quench their thirst with water, seltzer or low-fat milk instead.

Insight: The NY Health Department aired a controversial video PSA that garnered a lot of attention. The video is based on the advertising campaign the department started on the subway in the summer of 2009 that pictured gobs of fat pouring from a bottle of soda into a glass beneath the words “Are you pouring on the pounds?” The video cost about $50,000 to produce, and was paid for by a private donor.

Results: New research indicates that New Yorkers are already curbing their liquid sugar cravings.

•        According to the city’s Health Department, the number of people drinking one or more sugar-rich beverages decreased by 12 percent between 2007 and 2009, but three out of every five New Yorkers are still overweight or obese.

•       The department also claims that sugar in sweetened beverages is the leading source of calorie intake amongst Americans.

Sources:

The New York Times Online, http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/pouring-on-the-pounds-in-good-taste/

The American Council on Science and Health, http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsid.1714/news_detail.asp


And a drum roll please……..


#1.  Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk (1983-Present), U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

Background: In 1983 the Ad Council and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (under the U.S. Department of Transportation – U.S. DOT) partnered to launch the Drunk Driving Prevention campaign.

Objective: The campaign, with its tagline, “Drinking & Driving Can Kill A Friendship,” was originally designed to reach 16-24 year-olds, who accounted for 42% of all fatal alcohol-related car crashes, and inspire personal responsibility to prevent drinking and driving. As the years passed, statistics showed that the issue of drunk driving was approaching the forefront of American consciousness.

According to an April 1986 Roper poll, 62% of young Americans reported that they were now more conscious of the dangers of drunk driving than they had been previously and 34% refused to drink at all when they were planning to drive.

Strategy: In 1990, new PSAs encouraging friends to intervene in order to prevent a drunk person from getting behind the wheel introduced the tagline, “Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk.” The hard-hitting campaign was instrumental in achieving a 10% decrease in alcohol-related fatalities between 1990 and 1991 – the single largest one-year drop in alcohol-related fatalities ever recorded.

Results: Since its launch, the Drunk Driving Prevention campaign has received more than $1.3 billion in donated media support. Also:

•       Eighty-four percent of Americans recall having seen or heard a Friends Don’t Let Friends Drive Drunk public service announcement. Nearly 80 percent report they took action to prevent a friend or loved one from driving drunk, and 25 percent report they stopped drinking and driving as a result of the campaign.

•       In 2009 the campaign evolved to a new series of television PSAs designed to remind viewers that “Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving.” The campaign is designed to correct that misperception by communicating that you don’t have to be falling down drunk to be too impaired to drive and that even a few drinks can impair driving. The campaign tagline instills the notion that if you are “buzzed,” you’re too impaired to drive safely by asserting that “Buzzed Driving is Drunk Driving.”

•       Since the 1983 inception of the Drunk Driving Prevention campaign, alcohol-related traffic fatalities have dropped significantly and the term “designated driver” has become a part of American culture.

So there you have it, my personal list of top two social marketing campaigns. What is your #1 favorite social marketing campaign?


Happy Almost-Anniversary, Social Marketing!

Jan 24

When you think of something or someone turning 40 years old this year, what is the first thing that comes to mind? The classic children’s television show Sesame Street just celebrated its 40th anniversary in 2010, Starbucks’ first spice and tea shop sprouted up in Seattle in 1971, and the #4 hit song on the radio during 1971 was “It’s Too Late” by Carol King. While many of us remember the 40th anniversaries of our childhood shows, preferred stores, and lyrics to our favorite songs, there is another anniversary this year that deserves some attention.

It has been almost 40 years since social marketing became a formal discipline in July of 1971 with the publication of the article, “Social Marketing: An Approach to Planned Social Change” in the Journal of Marketing by marketing experts Philip Kotler and Gerald Zaltman. Kotler and Zaltman advocated to the marketing community that social causes can be advanced more successfully through applying principles of marketing analysis, planning, and control to problems of social change. While this article was written four decades ago, the nuts and bolts which Kotler and Zaltman proposed are the very same social marketing principles that us “social marketers” use today. As the anniversary of this article’s publication approaches, it is clear that social marketing is more alive than ever.

In these 40 years, social marketing has been introduced to the public health community and filled the space for a much needed mechanism to propel awareness and behavior change-focused initiatives, campaigns, and programs. While I may be almost half as young as the discipline of social marketing itself, I wanted to share  one of my three favorite social marketing campaigns that still rings true in my mind as the best of the best of true social marketing campaigns. What are some of your favorite and most memorable social marketing campaigns? Look out for my top two tomorrow.

#3.  Truth®, 2000-Present, Legacy For Health

Background: Launched in February 2000, truth® is the largest national youth smoking prevention campaign and the only national campaign not directed by the tobacco industry. The campaign exposes the tactics of the tobacco industry,the truth about addiction, and the health effects and social consequences of smoking—allowing teens to make informed choices about tobacco use by giving them the facts about the industry and its products. It is designed to engage teens by exposing Big Tobacco’s marketing and manufacturing practices, as well as highlighting the toll of tobacco.

Objective: To change social norms and reduce youth smoking. Recent data has shown that historic declines in youth smoking have stalled, making truth®’s lifesaving messages more important than ever.

Strategy: Tobacco use provides some teens with an outlet to express themselves; truth® provides an alternative. Teenage years are a time of transition into adulthood and a quest for control. For some teens, tobacco use can fulfill the innate adolescent need to rebel; truth® is an alternative way to meet that need.

As a brand, truth® directly counters messages from the tobacco company brands, which spent more than $13 billion in 2005 to market their products in the U.S. alone. truth® can never match that spending, so instead it stays ahead by breaking through and being more “cutting edge.”

The truth® campaign uses research with teen audiences, marketing and social science research, and evidence from the most successful anti-tobacco campaigns to inform its strategies.

Results: The campaign has won more than 300 awards for advertising efficacy and has also been lauded by leading federal and state public health officials, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and former President George W. Bush.

Source
Legacy for Health, truth fact sheet, http://www.legacyforhealth.org/PDF/truth_Fact_Sheet.pdf

Fear Tactics – Appeal to Reason or Fear?

Jan 12

When you want to convince someone to change a behavior, do you appeal to their sense of reason or to their fear? A recent Public Service Announcement by the New York City Health and Mental Hygiene Department says it’s time to scare young African American and Hispanic men about HIV/AIDS. Titled It’s Never Just HIV, the video graphically depicts what the disease can do to your body and mind even though we have effective treatments to manage the fatal condition.

Dr. Monica Sweeney, the city’s assistant commissioner of HIV prevention and control, has been quoted as saying, “you need to hit hard and do something to counteract the pharmaceutical ads that say having HIV is a walk in the park.” The department says it is just building off of the success of their anti-smoking campaign that also used graphic images to get attention and drive home a point.

Larry Kramer, who is HIV positive and a long time AIDS activist (he founded Act Up nearly 25 years ago), thinks the ad hits it target and marks a shift away from the “lily-livered nicey-nicey ‘prevention’ tactics (that) have failed.”

Having lived through the AIDS crisis of the 80’s and 90’s as well as having covered the disease and its devastation for CNN for ten years, I share Kramer’s concern for the compliancy that currently surrounds the condition. It’s not news anymore despite the fact it is still claiming and destroying lives.

The Gay Men’s Health Crisis, the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and others have criticized the ad. They say a more positive message about condom use would be more effective in helping prevent transmission. They say there are more successful ways of promoting prevention, “than perpetuating outdated images of sickness, dying and death.”

If nothing else, the ad has started a debate about the need to educate young men about a disease that affected and continues to affect the lives and well being of millions. Since the New York Times covered it in its article Graphic HIV Ad by New York City Splits Activists – HIV prevention is back in the news.

While the jury is still out on whether it can change behavior, “fear” is definitely a better news hook than “reason.”

<object width=”640″ height=”385″><param name=”movie” value=”http://www.youtube.com/v/d0ANiu3YdJg?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US”></param><param name=”allowFullScreen” value=”true”></param><param name=”allowscriptaccess” value=”always”></param><embed src=”http://www.youtube.com/v/d0ANiu3YdJg?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US” type=”application/x-shockwave-flash” allowscriptaccess=”always” allowfullscreen=”true” width=”640″ height=”385″></embed></object>