Fear Appeals: Their Lost Appeal in the Fight Against Meth

Tiffany King

Professor Bell

CMMU 4665

September 27, 2010

Fear Appeals 2

Abstract

Advertising efforts containing anti-drug campaigns have always predominantly been geared

towards the younger generations. As well they should be, children and youth are vulnerable

and still very impressionable. Though finding a way to persuade a-know-it-all teen into

intelligent and logical thinking is not always an easy task. Several anti-drug campaigns have put

together some very “in your face’’ advertisements using fear appeal and imagery. First I will

delve into advertising history followed by a short synapses of anti-drug campaigns and their

history. Then, I will discuss the success that these types of campaigns have had. Then I will

discuss the two anti-drug advertisements I chose and where they might have gone wrong.

Finally I will expound on how all too many anti-drug campaigns have focused predominately on

using fear based techniques thus creating desensitization to the preventative persuasive effort

against meth use.

Fear Appeals 3

Almost every piece of visual stimuli we encounter in a days time is some sort of

persuasive effort to get society to engage in certain behaviors, thoughts or attitudes. Anti-drug

campaigns fight to gain societal consensus (especially targeting the younger generations) that

drugs are a life-destroying epidemic and we should all steer clear of them or else their negative

effects will inevitably haunt us. Different styles of persuasive-behavior-promoting-

advertisements have different affects on different people in differing situations. The job of the

advertiser is to find the audiences vulnerability and play on that, be it fears, insecurities, ego,

etc. Then the advertiser suggests that the way to reduce the dissonance or fear that has been

presented is to accept and act on the product in question, which in this case is the act of not

using meth. There have been many anti-drug campaign tactics utilized over the years.

However, too many years of anti-drug campaigns have focused on using extreme fear appeals

and audience desensitization has occurred. Thus it is time to begin a new chapter in regards to

the types of appeals used in order to keep getting positive results in the fight against meth.

History of Advertising and Anti-Drug Campaigns

Advertising has been around since before the 1900’s and has seen a lot of change since

then. Originally advertising, lacking mass communication abilities, was taken care of face-to-

face, door-to-door (Bell, lecture 8-30-10). Then came the invention of the newspaper that

heralded the ability to mass produce print ads and have them seen by many people at very

different times (8-30-10). Papers gave way to mass communication such as radio and television

which was followed by the introduction of internet capabilities (8-30-10). Those were the

means of advertising. The techniques of advertising and persuasion can be considered rhetoric,

Fear Appeals 4

which also has revolutionized conceptuality over time. Rhetoric dates back to the days of

Aristotle. It has had a long time to change and diversify and that it has. Theory based

approaches have been established based on studies conducted throughout time that indicate

some approaches to persuasive appeals are more effective than others. Thus inevitable

alteration due to time and revolutionary processes involving ‘natural selection’ have put the

content of ads and their means of distribution where they are today.

Anti-drug campaigns started as early as 1980’s publicly, but were coined in the 1970’s by

the social psychology professor Dr. Richard Evans (drugfreeworld.org, 9-20-10). Intervention at

childhood was the best time to intervene. Evidence suggests that if a child can make it until the

age of 21 without using or even trying drugs, that child’s chance of remaining drug free for the

rest of their life is almost guaranteed (Basisonline, 2009). Nancy Regan was the first to jump

aboard proclaiming that this type of effort was the cure all end all for drug abuse in America (9-

20-10). ‘Just Say No’ was the slogan that surfaced at one of Reagan’s first stops at an

elementary school when she was asked by a little girl what she should do when encountered

with drugs (9-20-10). Reagan’s response was “just say no”, thus the slogan took hold.

Admittedly it was a catchy slogan, for a short time. I remember growing up with the

D.A.R.E. program and there was always a police officer at the school, he was the one running

the program. There was a graduation ceremony and of course, the DARE Bear. Now, in

retrospect I would have to say that was nerdy, very nerdy. I can’t believe something as un-cool

as cops and big fuzzy bears were able to attract, not only the attention that they did, but to

elicit success, if any at all. Surprising as it may sound, drug use dropped among students of all

Fear Appeals 5

ages rather significantly (9-20-10). What is coined the social inoculation model was at work

during these campaigns which, though costly, seemed to show success in most everyone’s

opinion.

Success of Meth Campaigns Today

A lot of advertising theory is coupled with concepts found within the study of

psychology. It has become a universal idea that knowledge, attitudes, and behavior influence

each other (Baker, 1991). In the older drug campaign efforts it was assumed that simply

provoking negative thoughts about drugs would quickly affect attitude and drug use would

decrease (Baker, 1991). Today there seems to be a bit more complexity involving contextual

factors than there might have been in the early 80’s. Baker suggests that there are more

attitudes involved than just the one about the drug itself (1991). People have an attitude about

ones self (low self esteem), authority figures and their peers, and these attitudes all influence

their final actions (1991). Thus, the goal must ultimately be to alter the attitudes of the

audience in order to change their behavior.

How should one go about this feat? Apparently for quite some time the answer was

fear appeal. The first commercial I remember was the one with the egg, “this is your brain on

drugs.” As a child of the 80’s I can say that we were concerned about intelligence levels and

dead brain cells. At some point in time unfortunately, that concern faded away and along came

the shallow, appearance-reliant teenager. With the changing trends, all being indicative of

outward-beauty dependence for social acceptance, came the change in trends of anti-drug

campaigns. Anti-drug campaign ads [anti-meth campaigns for the purpose of this paper]

Fear Appeals 6

became focused solely on the effects of meth on personal hygiene and appearance. It was a

highly accepted belief, and therefore theory, that targeting the decaying outward appearance

of teens using meth would have direct implications on the number of users that pick up every

year. This silly assumption was just that, an assumption.

Thomas Seibel, in February of 2005, created what is known as the Montana Meth

Project (basisonline, 2006). Seibel started this campaign to raise awareness of the

consequences associated with using meth and he focused on aiming the ads at teenagers

(2006). His hopes were that these ads would 1) initiate conversations between parents and

kids, 2) stigmatize the use of meth use like tobacco use once was, and 3) to “increase the

perceived risk and decrease the perceived gain” of using the drug (2009). There were an

enormous amount of those ads that were in the media: 45,000 television ads, 35,000 radio ads,

10,000 print ads, and 1000 billboard ads (Anderson, 2009). These ads reached an estimated 70-

90% of kids three times per week (2009).

There may have been errors in the statistical data collected in addition to the fact that

rating successful recovery or abstinence is quite ambiguous. After the launch of the MMP in

September of 2005, seven other states adopted their own versions of anti-meth projects

because they had a high belief in their success rate (2009). About half the sources claim that

there was no significant behavioral change regarding addiction and the other half claim that the

2-3 million dollars a year pumped into the MMP was worth every penny (Anderson, 2009).

The NCJRS claims that there are four determining factors associated with successful

anti-drug campaigns (NCJRS, 2008). They claim that private corporations pay big money to

Fear Appeals 7

advertise and that they do it because it yields results (2008). Those are as follows: strong

legislative support, solid scientific research, free advertising in conjunction with private

partners, and participation by media corporations, civic leaders, volunteers, education,

prevention and the like (2008). Their stats suggest that due to anti-drug campaigns even pot

use has decreased some 25% among students, which is a deterrent for later use in life (2008).

My Meth Ads

Having sifted through numerous studies and other evidence I concur with the opposite

side and that is that anti-drug campaigns of the present caliber are just not doing their job.

Take the ad that exclaims “15 Bucks For Sex Isn’t Normal. But On Meth It Is” for example. This

ad in particular should strike a fearful note in my mind although somehow, it does not. The first

time that I saw one of the MMP ads I was shocked, at that point it made me feel filthy and

wrong. That was my first encounter with the ad but few subsequent encounters proved to be

this successful in evoking enough emotional appeal to even make me stop to think about the

advertisement.

In fact, one survey indicates that kids were under the impression that meth was a party

drug and that had no fear at all (Anderson, 2009). Mark Anderson, an economics student at the

University of Washington, writes that MMP claims usage was down by 45% since 2005 due to

their collective efforts (2009). Anderson says that is just simply not true, that poor

methodology is to blame for numbers turning up as such and he attributes the decrease in use

to the already present trend of decline in use (2009).

Fear Appeals 8

The other ad I pulled depicts Cookie Monster holding a gun robbing someone and says,

“This Is Not Normal. On Meth It Is”. Personally I find this ad makes a whole lot more sense to

me. The silly and retarded things that people on meth do need to be made a mockery out of. I

would be more apt to not want to look silly than to have one little sore on my mouth, only

because it doesn’t seem as though that would ever really happen. For one psychological reason

or another, humor about meth deters me far more than fear about insufficient social

appearance. I am sure in any event I have suffered the much spoken of desensitization that a

lot of others have experienced regarding anti-meth campaigns.

Conclusion Regarding the Use of Fear Appeals

The overuse of fear appeals has brought itself right to a dead end where they may never

have the capacity to work as they once did. Fear has been utilized as a technique since the late

1990’s in trying to deter kids from using meth, even once. Their days were numbered however

and it is time to embark on a new tactic. Humor may shockingly be the way to combat what is

known as the meth epidemic. What will probably never work again is the approach that

screams that the deterioration of ones appearance and the fear of losing it, the teeth, the

sores, the shrunken skin that falls over one’s bones, is inevitable such that using meth

miraculously is no longer an option.

Fear Appeals 9

References

A n d e r s o n , D . M . ( 2 0 0 9 ) . D o e s i n f o r m a t i o n m a t t e r ? t h e e f f e c t o f t h e m e t h

p r o j e c t o n m e t h u s e a m o n g y o u t h s . U n p u b l i s h e d m a n u s c r i p t ,

D e p a r t m e n t o f E c o n o m i c s , U n i v e r s i t y o f W a s h i n g t o n , S e a t t l e ,

W a s h i n g t o n . R e t r i e v e d f r o m

h t t p : / / s t u d e n t s . w a s h i n g t o n . e d u / d m a 7 / M e t h W o r k i n g P a p e r _

Baker , In i t ia l s . (1991) . The persuas ion handbook: deve lopments in theory and pract i ce . Thousand Oaks : Sage Pub l i cat ions .

Basisonline.org. (2006, February 26). With Scenes of Blood and Pain, Ads Battle

Methamphetamine in Montana. The New York Times, p. 18.

B e l l , R . ( 2 0 1 0 ) . H i s t o r y a n d a d v e r t i s i n g . P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e L e c t u r e 8 -3 0 - 1 0 D e n v e r : U C D e n v e r .

N a t i o n a l C r i m e J u s t i c e R e f e r e n c e S e r v i c e , ( 2 0 0 8 ) . W h a t w o r k s : e f f e c t i v e p u b l i c h e a l t h r e s p o n s e s t o d r u g u s e ( N C J 2 2 1 7 4 1 ) . W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . : G o v e r n m e n t P r i n t i n g O f f i c e . R e t r i e v e d f r o m h t t p : / / w w w . n c j r s . g o v / o n d c p p u b s / p u b l i c a t i o n s / p d f / w h a t w o r k s . p d f

Fear Appeals 10