The Pros And Cons Of Anti-Drug Advertisements

The federal government has spent more than $1 billion on anti-drug advertising campaign since 1998 run by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (Students). Without a doubt using drugs is a bad habit that causes a lot of health problems and social problems. It is not only bad for addicts, but also for their families, friends and neighborhoods. While the government uses these ads to address an important issue and communicate with their public, there are some serious arguments against those who think that anti-drug advertising has powerful impacts. According to the organization Students for a Sensible Drug Policy, “An internal White House review gave the [National Youth Anti-Drug Media campaign] a score of just 6 out of 100 for 'results

Even a drug as serious as meth may not seem scary to kids. According to Brian Schweitzer, “teens knew of peers who had experimented with meth without losing their lives or their teeth, and they quit using on their own” (qtd. In Zernike). In real life, this kind of ad doesn’t accurately represent people who use drugs any more. Therefore, teenagers don’t take these ads seriously because they are attracted by things that scare. The majority of viewers’ responses to these ads are either walking away or changing the channel because they look at that ads as ridiculous and they mock them.

What is even worse is that anti-drug advertisements might have actually had the opposite effects, particularly on teenagers who are not discriminating about what they should do and what they should avoid. In fact, many anti-drug ads set up bad examples and negative influences on teenagers as they grow up. Shaunacy Ferro writes about some anti-drug TV commercials that "may have encouraged teens to try drugs” (qtd. In