Module 3

A few things stood out for me during this last module: testimonials, framing, and fear- vs. humor-based appeals for campaign messages.

THE USE OF TESTIMONIALS

Testimonials give a personal touch to the messages – they put a face on the issues being discussed. Of course, like every other factor considered for social marketing and message promotion, the testimonial needs to match the target audience. The individual presenting their testimony needs to be a member of the identified target audience in order to make a connection and relate directly to the audience. It hink it's especially effective if the testifying individual is admitting to having some of the same questions, doubts, or concerns about the issue discussed as those in the target audience before THEN being convinced about the promoted message. In the case of Buena Vida, people from various target age groups were utilized because, after all, “No one is safe from cancer. It can affect men, women, and children of all ages.”

I really enjoyed the Buena Vida campaign and believe that it was likely effective with recruiting Hispanics to participate in cancer research studies. In addition to relating well with the identified target audience, I think that the most impactful component to the Buena Vida campaign was the array of the various "family photos" presented. Each of the individuals that were highlighted in the campaign pictures were shown multiple times. I believe this factor was key to its effectiveness in that I felt very familiar with the people pictured. The pictures were displayed (at times) with photo frame borders and arranged like a photo album. It was as if I had been invited to look through the family photo album and view snapshots of their personal lives along side their family and friends. By the time the campaign introduced the individuals and presented each of their personal statements and views about their participating in cancer research, I felt like I should know each of them personally already.

There was one detail that realyy threw me off, though. I recognized that one of the photos used for the Buena Vida campaign was also used amongst the power point slides in our lecture. I also noticed that the name used in the Buena Vida campaign ad (Marta G. Cortez, 68) was different from the example used in the lecture (Ana Hurtado, 62). I’d like to think that the Buena Vida ad referenced the true quote from the lady pictured in the ad rather than assigning a name, age, and fictional quote to some random picture of a senior Hispanic lady found on the Internet for the purpose of making a fraudulent connection with the audience. As a viewer, if I had recognized the same picture from a different ad with a different name and age attached, the testimony would have a largely negative impact on the way in which I related personally to the ad. I would have lost all trust in the message and the campaign as a whole. Recipients of the campaign’s message must be trustworthy. . . in fact, the testimonials MUST be true and share real-life experiences by individuals. . . and not just by actors who play them on TV.

FRAMING

I really liked the way the following anti-smoking ad (desribed in the snopes article below) was framed. The anti-smoking ad is displayed as a mural placed on the ceiling of the designated smoking area for employees. The individuals who step inside the smoking area to light-up view the ad as they glance up at the ceiling. The image provides an eerie perspective of looking up from inside a grave at people mourning the individual's death at the funeral. Like the experiment with Pavlov's dog, the message is paired directly with the target behavior to be changed, providing a negative reinforcer to ceasing the undesirable behavior.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/advertisements/smokingmural.asp

Of course, the campaign is targeted specifically at current smokers encouraging them to stop and likely not effective to prevent someone from starting to smoke. For one, non-smokers are not likely to be exposed to the campaign due its specific placement. Also, the non-smoker viewing the ad would not connect the fatalistic message to smoking since they themselves are not smoking. It would just be a morbid image of imagining themselves in their own grave with no specified cause of death.

FEAR-BASED VS. HUMOR-BASED APPEALS

My comments here are also in response to Melissa and Liliana's comments noted earlier in the week. They bring up the interesting point that while the literature seems to suggest that humor would be more effective at grabbing the attention of the audience, making the message more memorable, and more enjoyable to the audience, humor is not utilized as often as one would think in social marketing to influence health behavior changes. Like Melissa and Liliana, I wondered this myself. The best explanation I came up with is that the messages most often presented through social marketing ads are SERIOUS ones. It is generally acceptable to joke or laugh about the social issues addressed, especially the ones with fatal consequences like smoking, HIV, and drunk-driving campaigns. Using humor to communicate the health promoting message doesn't typically match the tone of the various health issues highlighted. Humor can also dilute the perceived severity of the issue which, according to HBM, would discourage an interest or adoption of behavior change.

I can remember a couple of examples where the Truth campaign attempted to use humor in its TV commercials. Most of the Truth Campaign TV ads that I can remember have used fear appeals, shock value, and outrageous public demonstrations to communicate the message to young adults and teens. Here are a couple of them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIBaSPSYaO8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4xmFcrJexk&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJTCWtcAews&NR=1

I was disappointed by some of the Truth ads that used humor. When they ended, I was left saying, "what?" I didn't get it. I mean, I understood the messages, but they seemed silly and corny, especially with the whole sing-song quality. Here are some:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3352942533695064300#

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjUF1GG65Zk&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmAI7KQC0aI&NR=1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PHSAaGZyZdY&feature=related

I would guess that this funny...er, I mean satirical one would be more effective:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRHvZazd4IM&NR=1

Otherwise, it seems that the fear-based, shock-value, "in your face, tobacco company" ads are more effective with getting the attention and making a statement with the audience.