Office of National Drug Control Policy

views updated

Office of National Drug Control Policy

PO Box 6000
Rockville, Maryland 20849-6000
USA
Telephone: (800) 666-3332
Fax: (301) 519-5212
E-mail: [email protected]
Web site: www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov

EARLY INTERVENTION YOUTH CAMPAIGN

OVERVIEW

In late 1998 advertising agency Ogilvy & Mather was put in charge of the "National Youth Anti-Drug Media" campaign, charged with curbing drug use in teenagers. The original emphasis was on prevention, aimed at 12 and 13 year olds, but some research indicated that the advertising was counterproductive, kindling a curiosity about drugs in young people and actually leading to increased usage. The campaign raised the target age to 14 to 16 year olds, and a new effort was developed, the "Early Intervention Youth" campaign, which sought to convince teens to urge friends with alcohol and drug problems to seek help.

The $37 million campaign broke in early 2004 and ran through the rest of the year. The primary media vehicle was television spots on network and cable TV, although radio also played a major role. To a lesser extent print, Internet, and out-of-the home advertising where teens gathered was also used. In addition the advertising sought to drive traffic to the freevibe.com website, where teens could learn more about the deleterious effects of drinking and drugs and the importance of intervention, as well as ways to accomplish it.

Ogilvy statistics indicated that the "Early Intervention Youth" campaign met its primary objectives of increasing awareness of the intervention concept with the target market, convincing teens that intervention was a good thing, and stimulating an increase in the number of visits to the website. Nevertheless, it was difficult to determine the effect the campaign had on the ultimate goal, curbing alcohol and drug use among the target audience. What was certain was that the "National Youth Anti-Drug Media" campaign soon changed direction and crafted a new message rather than build on the "Early Intervention Youth" effort.

HISTORICAL CONTEXT

The White House Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) was established in 1988 by the Anti-Drug Abuse Act, the goal of which was to create a "drug-free" America. One component of that effort was the use of advertising. Hired in late 1998, advertising agency Ogilvy & Mather was put in charge of the "National Youth Anti-Drug Media" campaign, responsible for evaluating ads produced by several ad agencies and buying media. According to Vanessa O'Connell, writing in the Wall Street Journal in 2002, the campaign included more than 212 TV commercials featuring such performers as the Dixie Chicks and hip-hop singer Mary J. Blige, as well as actors posing as drug users. The campaign, developed by some of the best-known agencies on Madison Avenue, was "considered a novel step in public health advertising because it was aimed directly at children." But in 2002, as the campaign was up for reauthorization for five more years, the anti-drug effort and Ogilvy came under fire. The new U.S. "drug czar," John P. Walters, claimed that not only had recent anti-drug advertising failed but it might have actually inspired young people to experiment with marijuana. O'Connell wrote, "Mr. Walters suggested that the ads' messages were 'too indirect' to have an impact, and speculated that the commercials might be doing more harm than good. 'If an ad answers a question that a child doesn't have, there's a chance you'll incite his or her curiosity,' he said." According to Advertising Age's Rance Crain, Walters believed that eliminating the source of drugs was a more effective approach: "Before he became drug czar, Mr. Walters said an anti-drug campaign aimed at teens is a 'lazy man's way of trying to appear that they're doing something.'"

To complicate matters further, Ogilvy had come under fire for its billing practices, including allegations that agency employees altered time sheets and billed ONDCP for items not permitted under government contracts, leading to criminal and civil fraud probes. Early in 2002 Ogilvy settled the civil claims, and eventually five Ogilvy executives would either plead guilty or be convicted of fraud charges. To the surprise of most observers, Ogilvy was retained in 2002 as the lead ad agency in the "National Youth Anti-Drug Media" campaign. ONDCP maintained that it would work with Ogilvy to refine the campaign and make it more "hard-hitting."

One problem all public-health advertising aimed at teens had to contend with was the natural rebelliousness of youth. The "National Youth Anti-Drug Media" campaign tried to promote the concept of the "anti-drug," natural ways to get high, such as hang gliding or kayaking. The advertisers tried yet another new approach in its 2004 campaign, called "Early Intervention Youth," which sought to keep the anti-drug motif alive yet move the campaign from prevention to intervention, to leverage peer pressure and convince teens to convince other teens that their drug use was a problem that required attention.

TARGET MARKET

In the first few years of the "National Youth Anti-Drug Media" campaign, the target audience was 12 to 13 year olds. After Ogilvy retained the contract with ONDCP, the focus shifted to 14 to 16 year olds. The "Early Intervention Youth" campaign targeted youths in this age group who had close friends who used drugs (primarily marijuana) or alcohol. These teens tended to be tolerant of the choices their friends made and were reluctant to urge them to change their behavior. While they believed that they should intervene only if the drug or alcohol use became a problem, what constituted a problem was open to interpretation. Some teens considered experimentation itself to be a problem, while others only viewed drug and alcohol use as a problem if it became dependency or, worse yet, grew self-destructive or destructive of their friendship. In order to address the widest segment of 14 to 16 year olds with close friends who used drugs, the campaign elected not to define when use became a problem. Instead it hoped to allow teens to receive the intervention message on their own terms.

COMPETITION

No other group was encouraging teens to intervene with friends who had problems with drugs or alcohol. And if there had been such a group, it would not have constituted relevant competition but rather would have been viewed as an ally in the effort. The opposition, in this case, would be the forces encouraging drug use among teens.

There was no competing advertising urging 14 to 16 year olds to take drugs, although some would argue that the media glamorized the activity. The real competition came from other teens. Just as the "Early Intervention Youth" campaign planned to use peer pressure to urge teens to stop using drugs and alcohol, other teens of their own volition were urging their friends to start drinking and using drugs and to continue using them. Popular teens who drank and did drugs offered the same message on an indirect level, serving as peer role models. Moreover, the campaign had to contend with sheer curiosity and the rebelliousness of the age group.

ANY ANSWERS?

Perhaps the most famous anti-drug television commercial ever produced showed a man frying an egg in a sizzling pan. He commented, "This is your brain on drugs. Any questions?" Sponsored by the nonprofit organization Partnership for a Drug-Free America, the scare-tactic spot became the fodder for comedians. It became an object lesson for advertisers on how not to influence a target audience about drug usage.

MARKETING STRATEGY

The strategy behind the "Early Intervention Youth" campaign was to motivate the teen who would serve as the person intervening with a friend who had a drug or alcohol problem. First a case had to be made about the negative consequences of a friend's drug or alcohol use, whether it related to health concerns or the harmful impact on their friendship. Second the messenger had to be motivated to act. This was to be accomplished by portraying the situation as a moral obligation, bolstered by examples of teens taking the step—or not—to intervene with friends. But fulfilling this strategy remained a tricky transaction. In a write-up of the campaign for the EFFIE Awards, a prestigious advertising industry competition, Ogilvy explained, "While this campaign intended to instill in youth a sense of moral responsibility for intervening with friends who are developing patterns of use, it was imperative that executions guide youth to this conclusion, without dictating their 'responsibilities' to them directly. It was vital that teens feel their decision to intervene is one they have come to themselves, and not one being forced on them to accept, otherwise they will disregard the message."

The "Early Intervention Youth" campaign established three objectives. It sought to increase awareness in teens that they had a responsibility and an ability to help friends with alcohol and drug problems. Second the campaign wanted to educate youths about the dangers of drug and alcohol abuse, thus empowering them when they intervened. The final objective was to drive traffic to the campaign's website, freevibe.com, where teens could find more information on the importance of intervention and ways to achieve it.

The campaign used a mix of media in order to reach the largest percentage of the teen population. Television was the primary media vehicle, accounting for nearly half of the $37 million budget, almost all of which was spent on network and cable TV. Spot television, time bought on local stations as it became available at attractive rates, was also used in the top 25 markets where drug use was concentrated. Another 9 percent of the budget was spent on the Channel One daily television newscast shown to middle, junior high, and senior high school students. Network radio was the next most important media component, representing nearly a third of the budget. Spot radio was also purchased on top teen stations. In addition the campaign spent about 4 percent of the budget on ads in teen magazines and 2 percent on out-of-home advertising, such as signage at malls where teen congregated.

Typical of the campaign's television spots was "Lake," which first aired on the hit television show Survivor following the Super Bowl telecast in early 2004. In the spot a teenage girl cried for help as she was drowning in a lake, while on a nearby wharf another girl watched, hands in her pockets, doing nothing to help. The voice-over of a young woman then said, "If your friend was in trouble, you'd help them. Wouldn't you?" The girl on the wharf turned her back on the drowning friend, then the commercial cut to title cards that read, "If a friend has a problem with drugs or drinking, do something. Friendship. The anti-drug. freevibe.com."

OUTCOME

According to Ogilvy's EFFIE summary, the "Early Intervention Youth" campaign succeeded on a number of levels. Regarding the first objective the agency claimed that after just one month the campaign achieved 68 percent awareness among the target audience, an impressive showing given that new product introductions that last as long as six months reach comparable awareness levels. In terms of educating and empowering youths, according to Ogilvy data, teens exposed to the advertising were significantly more likely than other teens to say that they should get involved if a friend was having a problem with drinking or marijuana or that they would feel good about intervening in such a situation. Finally traffic to freevibe.com increased by an average of 108 percent each month after the launch of the campaign, a significant increase over same-month traffic from the prior year.