This case was written by Professors Michael A. Belch and George E. Belch to analyze the marketing strategies used by the Partnership for a Drug Free America (PDFA) and the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP). They also discussed their progress over time, and the challenges they faced on their journey to fight the “War on Drugs” through media advertisement. The PDFA was officially launched in 1987, and is a private, non-profit organization consisting of professionals from the communications industry. Their mission was to reduce drug demand in America, and they believed that helping adolescents understand the dangers and consequences of drug use, and ways to resist the pressure of using would achieve that goal. As the PDFA started …show more content…
The most important change implemented by the ONDCP was their increased focus on the needs of their target audience through market segmentation. They recognized that drugs differ in classes, consequences, and have different perceived risks associated with them. Therefore the ONDCP proposed that ads be developed with the awareness that adolescents hold different beliefs about various drugs and the social consequences associated with abusing them. It was recommended that the new messages be designed to target specific age groups, ethnic audiences, and individuals of different socio-economic status and geographic location. The most effective segmentation would have been age specific since adolescents and adults may perceive drug use differently, and have different reasons for their drug use i.e. adolescents may abuse drugs due to peer pressure where as adults may abuse drugs due to stress. Moreover, adults and adolescents have different priorities, therefore an age specific market segmentation would address those issues ergo increasing the effectiveness of the …show more content…
In my opinion, neither the government or the PDFA should be involved in producing anti-drug advertisement since they are not knowledgeable in what drives drug abuse, what maintains it, or how to properly target it in order to prevent it. The PDFA did not have subject matter experts in the organization, and were creating advertisement to address a sensitive topic with no scientific backing. In fact, when the ONDCP developed a behavioral-change expert panel consisting of multiple psychologists, sociologists, and advertisement experts the PDFA were not happy with the development and thought it would slow down their creative process when the introduction of such a panel should have been encouraged especially if their motives were to in fact to reduce drug use instead of receiving funds. Both the government and PDFA started putting more focus on proving the effectiveness of the ads to draw in more funds which took away from their original mission of fighting drug use, and benefiting the public. For an organization to produce such ads, they must be scientifically knowledgeable of the issue, and should be able to effectively evaluate the campaign, two matters which both the ONDCP and the PDFA failed to do. They used tax dollars to produce ads which were not benefitting the public, and used this as a way to endorse a political agenda which did not benefit the public
Provocative and eye-opening, The Stickup Kids urges us to explore the ravages of the drug trade through weaving history, biography, social structure, and drug market forces. It offers a revelatory explanation for drug market violence by masterfully uncovering the hidden social forces that produce violent and self-destructive individuals. Part memoir, part penetrating analysis, this book is engaging, personal, deeply informed, and entirely
As director of the National Drug Control Policy, William J. Bennett shares his stance on the drug war in “Drug Policy and the Intellectuals”. He addresses the arguments that American’s have proposed in regard to the legalization of drugs. Bennett goes on to say that the justification behind legalizing drugs lacks the seriousness that a topic like this should have. In addition, the results would likely be disastrous. Rather than “taking the profit out of the drug business”, Bennett’ alternative is to make the usage of drugs a less appealing option.
To understand the War on Drugs one needs to understand the cultural landscape that made the war on drugs advantageous. Ronald
(2016). Annual Editions: Drugs, Society, and Behavior, 11th Ed: McGraw-Hill Publications. Unit 1, Article 1.5: Lauby, George; Wheelock, Kamie. (2009). “Tackling Top Teen Problem-Prescription Drugs” (pp. 31-34).
For example, agencies have been established with the sole intent to manage drug use and distribution and technology has been exclusively developed to detect the presence of drugs. Yet, evidence has indicated that such exhaustive efforts have been relatively unsuccessful. First, it has been assumed that drugs have perpetuated violence in society and based on this rationale, it was believed that by the suppressing the pervasiveness of drugs that incidents of violence would simultaneously diminish. However, reality has failed to align with the expectations that had initially been anticipated. Research findings have suggested that the decriminalization of drugs would result in a less adversarial drug market in which conflicts have tended to arise among dealers as well as between dealers and buyers (Common Sense for Drug Policy, 2007, p. 21).
Assessment of STP Options Both behavioral segmentation and age segmentation are strategies that can effectively divide consumers into two major markets
In his article, “Toward a Policy on Drugs,” Elliot Currie discusses “the magnitude and severity of our drug crisis” (para. 21), and how “no other country has anything resembling the American drug problem” (para. 21). The best way to describe America’s drug problem is that it is a hole continuously digs itself deeper. America’s drug issues were likely comparable to other country’s at one point in time, but today it can be blamed on the “street cultures” (para. 21) that continue to use and spread the use of illegal drugs. These street cultures transcend the common stereotype of drug users, such as low income communities in cities or welfare recipients, and can be found in every economic class and location. They are groups of people who have
The use of narcotics like cocaine, claimed many lives and earned widespread coverage by media and news. Following this Nancy Reagan began the “War on Drugs”, a campaign to combat pre-existing drug usage and prevent future
Upon reading Gore Vidals "Case for Legalizing Marijuana" one may wonder why drugs are not legal in the United States of America. Afterall, several valid reasonings were made throughout the article. There is a demand for drugs and many people are supplying them, while also making a small fortune. If drugs were made legal and sold for high prices, their market would decrease because many people would not be able to afford them. Most people involved in the drug world do not know the consequences of that which they consume.
The brochure clearly targets its target audience of young adults who like to party. It shows that is has an understanding for their attitudes towards the subject but emphasising that drug rape is not the victims fault and that it is in fact a crime. 6. How might you tell if this brochure is meeting its target? Using the sample audience survey discussed in the lecture pod, how might this be used to measure the audience impact?
However, they should not be allowed to target the consumers themselves on television, only though physicians. This would drastically reduce over prescribing and patients being prescribed drugs they do not need. By banning drug and narcotic advertising, this would infringe the corporation’s rights to free speech. This has been one of the top argument for why legislation should not be passed, as seen in the lawsuit by Arimin against the FDA. This is a very strong argument as it has constitutional backing.
General Purpose: To Inform Specific Purpose: To inform the audience about the drug abuse in the United States both throughout history and currently. Central Idea: The War on Drugs was first brought up on 1971 by Richard Milhous Nixon our 37th president. The budget to initiate the war on drugs was roughly 100,000,000 million dollars, currently as we speak for every 21 seconds a drug arrest is taking place in the United States according to drugpolicy.org.
As most people know, drug can easily make people addicted. Conventional drugs such as opium, heroin, methamphetamine (ice), morphine, marijuana, cocaine can all classify as narcotic drugs and psychotropic drugs. Drug has been a severe problem for decades. The U.S government attaches great importance to this issue. However, there are just an increasing number of people calling for legalizing drugs.
Advertisers end up losing millions of dollars in failed advertising. Sometimes the content they create ends up being disliked by their target market and they receive a lot of backlash which may negatively affect their
As of recent, the war on drugs has been a very often discussed topic due to many controversial issues. Some people believe the War on Drugs has been quite successful due to the amount of drugs seized and the amount of drug kingpins arrested. I believe this to be the wrong mindset when it comes to the war on drugs. The war on drugs isn’t a winnable one so we must do all that is possible to assist those who struggle with drug addiction and decriminalize small amounts of drugs. These minor changes in the way we combat drugs will create significant change and have lasting effects.