War Damn Eagle!

As I sit here in my Auburn shirt, getting dirty looks from all these UT fans, I feel proud. I didn't go to Auburn, but my sister does, which counts for something. I love, love SEC football, wearing dresses to football games, and getting beer spilled on my pearls. I will not apologize for not caring about UT football. My loyalty will always be to the SEC. Keeping with this SEC pride, I thought I'd give a little shout out to the Alabama Department of Public Health

In a state where 31% of the total population is considered obese and 9% have obesity related diabetes, Alabama is up against some scary statistics in their public health battle. To make matters worse, 15.9% of Alabama residents live below the poverty line, this is compared with the US average of 13.2%.

So, how does the Alabama Department of Public Health start to make gains in making Alabama a state that doesn't lead the nation in obesity, diabetes, and poverty? They start a Facebook page, of course.

By now, it is clear that in order to create awareness of public health crisis and then change those crisis causing behaviors, public health agencies must know their audience. They have to reach them where they are.

The Alabama Department of Public Health Facebook page is rich with content for both information seekers, advocates, and public health professionals. Video and article links enrich the public health agenda of Alabama with relevant and timely updates.

This being said, I doubt the Alabama public health folks think that Facebook will make a huge dent in changing behaviors, but, it does create awareness, give advocates a place to show their support, and create a groundswell of support around specific initiatives. For example, Scale Back Alabama, a state-wide weight loss initiative, has it's own cause page.

Most public health maintained Facebook pages leave something to be desired. They are not frequently updated, the applications are not used efficiently, and they struggle to find relevant, easy to understand content. The Texas Department of Public Health doesn't have a Facebook page, however, the Texas Department of State Health Services does. See? No picture, no consistency of voice, and not content rich/diverse.

Facebook alone can not change the health of Alabama, but, it can be a tiny piece of the strategy to arm advocates and target audience with easy to digest information in an easy to access format.

War Damn Eagle! and Roll Tide! ( I guess)

get rich or die tryin

I'm going to stray from the typical blog post here to explore the idea of million dollar ideas for social good.

This story was featured on This American Life, episode 412 Act 3. I point this episode out for two reasons: 1. I love This American Life and 2. this episode highlights people, ideas, and things that are all striving to be remarkable.

At the threat of higher cigarette taxes, Philip Morris commissioned a study in the Czech Republic. This study was intended to show that smoking Czechs actually saved the government money. Philip Morris asserted that smokers died young, saving the government money on their long-term care. Philip Morris was creating a campaign to show the good side of death, or, the good side of poor health. To quote "because people die early you save money in elderly housing." They created a cost benefit analysis to support their product in an entire country. Good idea. Except, you can't say your product kills people and that their early death is a benefit. It just doesn't sit right.

Of course, this study got found out and Philip Morris had some 'splanin to do. They groveled and apolgized and said the study wasn't authorized, even if the data did support their product.

Then, anti-tobacco groups got a hold of this cost-benefit to society and government idea and ran with it. They came up with the notion that, a smoker's cost to society and their credit to society was about even. What anti-tobacco folks could figure in was the cost-benefit to the individual, which of course wound up in the cost column. No one wants to live 10 years less, and five of those last years are with lung cancer.

These findings, the cost to the individual, are now widely used in lobbying and advertising for anti-tobacco campaigns. And Philip Morris is quiet, while their idea gets used against them.

It's fascinating to think about the talent behind socially destructive products. It's more fascinating to think about what that talent could do behind socially responsible products. Sadly, it seems to be all about the benjamins.

lol. omg. gtfo. rotfl......is it worth it?

I curse AT&T at least once a day for a dropped call. I have gotten irate after I was overcharged on three seperate occasions with no explanation on the other end of the phone. If you ask me what I think of AT&T, I'll tell you they are pretty good. I'll tell you they are pretty because of the fantastic work they are doing on a public safety issue: texting and driving.

AT&T hired BBDO do produce an anti-texting and driving campaign.

This campaign was highlighted in Ad Age.

Texting and driving hasn't gotten me hurt (thank goodness) but did get me hit from behind. Texting and driving has caused me to swerve off the road just a little and be discourtious to other drivers. I don't mean to do these things. Texting has become an addiction for most people, and when fighting an addiction you are fighting a habit, an unconcious behavior.

BBDO and AT&T have collaborated to come up with a campaign that gets your attention. Now, they have to keep pushing to change behavior.

Doc, I need Cialis

We've all been there. Hanging out with your parents or grandparents when an advertisement for Viagra or Cialis comes on the television. Someone scrambles for the remote while your grandpa makes a crude joke and your grandmother turns bright red. But, these advertisements are doing more than making you want to crawl under the rug, they are changing the way the healthcare system works.

While a slight deviation from the public health campaigns described up to this point in this blog, the direct to consumer (DTC) marketing of a product that consumers can't buy directly brings up a few interesting points. And, it seems to be adding to the pharmaceutical companies bottom line.

In fact, every $1 the pharmaceutical industry spent on DTC advertising in that year yielded an additional $4.20 in drug sales. DTC advertising was responsible for 12% of the increase in prescription drugs sales, or an additional $2.6 billion, in 2000, according to the summary findings of a study by Harvard and MIT researchers.

Direct to consumer advertising of prescription drugs is creating a demand market for a traditionally supply driven market. Consumers are demanding products now while they used to take whatever was supplied to them.

A consumer reports health blog reports, "In a 2006 survey by our National Survey Research Center, 78 percent of doctors said that patients asked them at least occasionally to prescribe drugs they had seen advertised on television, and 67 percent said they sometimes did so."

I'll use the same example the above linked article does. The first time I saw the Restless Leg Syndrome commercial, I was convinced that because I sometimes was fidgety, I was an unlucky sufferer of RLS. That night when I tried to go to bed, my legs were tingly. I knew it! RLS! The power of suggestion is, well, powerful. By advertising all the things that can go wrong with you (and a drug to fix them) consumers can now diagnose themselves, ask for the corresponding drug, and be on their way.

Creating brand-name demand for a drug that has potentially serious side effects and may not be right for each patient is a dangerous game to play. Patient demand for specific products and doctor supply of those products creates a health care system where the best brand wins, not the best treatment.

As far as advertising prescription drugs goes, how far is too far? Or are prescription drugs just the new brand battleground? We'll see.

Again, for levity:

Bringing sexy back...to condoms.

Public health campaigns in developing countries are developed by public health officials and communication professionals in those countries. Sometimes, foreign aid assists in the educational and resource provision to accompany those campaigns. When those campaigns are finished they traditionally have a print component (posters, flyers, etc) and a resource component (free condoms, birth control, vaccines, etc). Without big budgets, this is the best that public health officials can do.

The trained sexual health advisor in the video below doesn't think these tactics work. In fact, she's taking down the public health provided condom usage promotion posters. She thinks the plain white packaged free condoms are making condom usage boring. She's on a mission to bring the sexy back, to condoms.

The take-away here is that marketing socially responsible products doesn't have to be boring. Smart branding, coolness, and relating to your audience are just as important in public health campaigns are they are selling anything else. The other take away is that communications professionals and public health policy folks aren't the only ones that need to be around the table when campaigns are conceptualized. Those on the front lines have the best connection to the lives that everyone is trying to save.

Throwback Special

Jonas Salk's discovery and successful implementation of a polio vaccine eradicated polio from the United States. The polio vaccine became standard for EVERY child born in the United States, so standard, that polio is no longer a concern for parents in the U.S.

So, how was this new health standard integrated into the American psyche? Here's some throwback footage to one of the first fully integrated health marketing campaigns.

Community events, television coverage, and a celebrity spokesperson (Franklin D. Roosevelt) worked to educate American's on the importance of vaccination. Vaccinations against preventable diseases for children became part of the American way.

The polio vaccine campaign, "Victory over Polio" , was one of the first successful public health campaigns in the United States, thanks in part to the March of Dimes. This campaign set the pace for health communication strategies in the United States until technology began to set the pace in the 1990's with the invention of cell phones, the internet, and social media.

Texts in the Time of Cholera

In 4th grade, we got to play Oregon Trail if we finished our keyboarding lesson early. I always finished early. My mother was the Louisiana State Typing Champion in 1973. Needless to say, she thought knowing how to type quickly and accurately is something her 9 year old should know. So, I crushed all the keyboarding lessons in about 5 minutes so I could play Oregon Trail. I was not as talented at Oregon Trail as typing. I always got the error message "You have died of cholera." Ugh.

This is about as close to cholera as any kid in the United States has gotten. Unfortunately, children and adults in Haiti are facing the real cholera head on. Last week, a few cases of cholera were reported in a camp just north of the capital, Port-au-Prince. Cholera spreads quickly and viciously through contaminated water and food. It causes severe dehydration and death if left untreated. Within the week 300 Haitians had died of cholera and 4,000 had been sickened.

Public health officials scrambled to slow the spread of cholera. The spread of cholera to a densely populated city, like Port-au-Prince or the camps around them could lead to an epidemic of disastrous proportions.

Public health officials quickly began an education and awareness campaign about cholera through radio, text, and 1:1 communication.

The International Organization for Migration broadcasted a live cholera education seminar to 40 radio stations, "Since people in Haiti get most of their news from radio, it's one arm of the frantic campaign to keep the cholera epidemic that started to the north from coming here to these overcrowded camps" according to Christopher Joyce's article on NPR.

Texts are used to directly reach Haitians. The texts provide a phone number for Haitians to call to learn how to prevent cholera. IMO officials say "Cholera doesn't need to be a killer, they say, if people just know more about it", also from Joyce's recent article.

Thanks to the timely, relevant, and simple health messaging the cholera epidemic seems to be losing steam. Click here to hear a short summary by Christopher Joyce in Haiti.

This cholera education campaign is a shining example of how effective messaging and a careful understanding of how audiences use media can prevent, or at least allay, an epidemic.

Integrated Marketing and Pregnant Boys

If health communication campaigns are supposed to get your attention, this one does. For sure. I was browsing the staff side of the United Way Worldwide website and came across this campaign. This campaign was part of the One Milwaukee project which was partially funded and advised by the United Way of Greater Milwaukee. The One Milwaukee project website has some bad links, but, I was able to track down the agency who did this work: Serve.

Check out Serve's way of getting people to pay attention by watching the video available here.

Serve's took an integrated marketing campaign approach to decreasing the teen birth rate in Milwaukee. In addition to the 'pregnant boy' ad (targeted at business and community leaders/activists), as seen above, Serve used graffiti like messaging to get people to call a phone number. See the results of that campaign at the video below.

In addition, they used bathroom posters in girls high school bathrooms and various other tactics. It is an integrated campaign as they used multiple avenues to reach segmented audiences to not just encourage behavior change but support that change through business and community leader buy-in. This is a critical factor in Milwaukee's dropping teen pregnancy rates. In fact, "on November 18, 2008, public health officials announced that births among 15-17 year olds in Milwaukee had dropped to the lowest level in 28 years" according to the UW Milwaukee website.

Awesome job Serve and United Way Milwaukee. Your communication tactics coupled with research and community wide buy-in is enacting real change.

Public Health Goes Guerrilla

What is public health? Don't worry. Most people don't know, that's why The Association of Schools of Public Health went guerrilla to spread the message of the scope and services public health provides.

Click here to watch the video.

Then, check out the website . There are tons of resources for folks who are want to know more about the role of public health and for advocates who want to spread the work of public health initiatives.

The Association of Schools of Public Health do a fantastic job of advocating for their cause through guerrilla marketing. They connected everyday objects and services with the role of public health-everything from bike helmets, to sewers, to running water.

Pretty cool. I just wish it was a national campaign, but, I suspect limited funds is to blame.

Self-Efficacy and Cage Fighting

I received this poem from a family friend the day I graduated from high school.

The Victor

by C. W. Longenecker

If you think you are beaten, you are.
If you think you dare not, you don't.
If you like to win but think you can't,
It's almost a cinch you won't.
If you think you'll lose, you're lost.
For out in the world we find
Success begins with a fellow's will.
It's all in the state of mind.
If you think you are out classed, you are.
You've got to think high to rise.

When I got this poem I was 18 and, naturally, thought it was really, really lame. I actually still do. It's not a great poem. But, I share it here because it is still what I think of when I think of self-efficacy. Self efficacy is the perceived ability to perform a given behavior given the skills you posses. That's why I think the above poem is sort-of stupid. I think I can be beaten in a cage-fighting match because I do not possess the skills to be successful in a cage fight. I do think I can be successful in buying groceries at Central Market because I like Central Market, I like buying groceries, and I have experience buying healthy, cost-effective groceries (both direct and indirect).

But, suppose you hated buying groceries. You hated your grocery store, for whatever reason, and you had no experience in buying healthy, cost-effective groceries. You have no self-efficacy in your ability to buy groceries to feed your family healthy, good food. So, you bail. You go to Wendy's and feed your family of 6 for $20 bucks and no one complains they don't like it. You win.

So, self-efficacy plays a big role in getting individuals to make healthy decisions. The "perceived behavior control reflects motivational factors that have an indirect effect on behavior through intentions", meaning that someones intentions to make a behavioral choice are formed by their motivation to and confidence in their ability to perform that behavior (Madden, Ellen, Ajzen, 1992). Remember my cage fighting match example? It should be noted that, "only when the perceptions of control were accurate was perceived behavioral control a significant predictor of target behavior" (Madden, Ellen, Ajzen, 1992). My 100% confidence in my inability to win a cage fighting match predicts my behavior not to engage in such a match.

When health communications campaigns seek to change individual behavior, they are seeking to increase the confidence that individual has in being able to complete the healthy behavior change, among other things. Instead of telling a family they should buy more produce, perhaps the campaign is incomplete in effectively changing behaviors unless the campaign shows the family how to choose, cook, and serve the produce. Without those elements, the self-efficacy of individuals to complete the behavior change is likely to be low. Going to Wendy's is much easier, is comfortable, and predictable.

It seems, then, that understanding the ways in which people make decisions before asking them to make lifestyle change decisions is crucial to maximizing the effectiveness of health communications campaigns.

See, even Kung Fu panda learns to have self-efficacy.

References

Madden, Thomas J., Ellen, Pamela Scholder , Ajzen, Icek (1992). A Comparison of the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Theory of Reasoned Action. PSPB, Vol. 18 No 1. February 1992 3-9.

Food Deserts, Social Cognition Model, and Hamburger Helper

There is an an overwhelming focus on personal responsibility in health communication campaigns. Sounds fairly reasonable given that people choose to eat too much, not workout, smoke, drink, etc. However, "psychological research suggest that humans tend to overemphasize individual factors and underemphasize contextual factors when attributing responsibility for others' actions or dispositions" (Niedredeppe, Bu, Borah, Kindig, Robert 2008).

Ok, what does that mean? That people aren't responsible for their own wellbeing? Not quite, "This fundamental attribution error suggests that people are more likely to assign blame for others' poor health to individual shortcomings(e.g., failure to engage in health behavior) than to social or structural factors (e.g. poverty and little education)" (Niedredeppe, Bu, Borah, Kindig, Robert 2008). It seems, at least from this article, that health communications is focused on the individual when a larger focus on the environment in which poor health choices are made might yield better results. Why aren't more people focusing campaigns on the larger social determinants that create unhealthy behaviors? Probably because it's overwhelming to change a system. Wouldn't it just be easier if target audience member B just stopped smoking? Wouldn't that make our campaign effective?

I originally intended to focus this blog post on the effectiveness measures used for health communication campaigns. While doing that research, I realized that there was a more pressing issue. That issue being the way in which health communication professionals go about campaigns in the first place.

While health communications professionals toil away at finding the perfect way to create awareness, change attitudes, and influence individual behavior, a mother in Del Valle has six kids to feed on $4 a day. She has no car and no access to a grocery store, she lives in a food desert. Yes, she knows Hamburger Helper from the Dollar Store isn't good for her kids. She'd love to make them fresh lunches everyday, but, she's at work until 7am. She can not augment her behavior because the social determinants of health (SDH) are stacked against her (Niedredeppe, Bu, Borah, Kindig, Robert 2008) .

It is absolutely not enough for health communications professionals and government agencies to work to change individual attitudes and influence individual behavior. Health communications professionals must understand the larger world in which they are working and then find innovative ways to reach new target audiences (policy makers, politicians, non profits, etc) with social determinants of health change messaging.

Knowing your target audience is important but a deep understanding of the environment in which they make decisions is equally as important. According to the Social Cognition Model, Environmental Determinants are an equally important part predicting actual behavior. Environmental Determinants sit an an equal place with Personal Determinants and Behavioral Determinants (Bandura, 2001).


(Bandura, 2001)

So, if health communications is solely focused on personal and behavioral determinants, we are crippling the ability for individuals to actually make the behavior change we ask of them. We are cutting out a giant piece of the way people make decisions. And we aren't making a healthier neighborhood, city, state or nation. We are only making a nation where people know what a healthy choice is and simply can't make it. At least not those who need the help making the healthy decisions the most.


References

Bandura, A. (2001). Social Cognitive Theory of Mass Communication. Media Psychology, 3(3), 265-299. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete database.

Niederdeppe, J., Bu, Q., Borah, P., Kindig, D., & Robert, S. (2008). Message Design Strategies to Raise Public Awareness of Social Determinants of Health and Population Health Disparities. Milbank Quarterly, 86(3), 481-513. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0009.2008.00530.x.

Would you like carrots with that?

I love a good cheeseburger and fries. There is nothing that I enjoy more than a large fountain Dr. Pepper with crushed ice and 400 calories on a hot summer day. But, I only eat/drink these things a few times a year. Why? Because if I ate those types of things regularly I'd be increasing my chances of heart disease and diabetes. And, I'd probably be part of the 28.7% of Texans who are considered obese.

Obesity is now considered an epidemic, according to the World Health Organization. AN EPIDEMIC. Like AIDS or the Black Death of the Middle Ages. And yet, addressing obesity is very different than addressing HIV/AIDS, famine, or cancer. Obesity is, largely, a product of over-abundance and some say, the American lifestyle and culture. When we talk about fighting obesity we are really talking about changing the American way of life. Dr. David Ludwig, Director of the Optimal Weight for Life program at Children’s Hospital Boston says "If we just expect that inner-city child to exercise self-control and walk a little bit more, then I think we’re in for a big disappointment" in a NY Times blog.

With all this in mind, I've been trying to aggregate knowledge from The Tipping Point, The VW Fun Theory, and all my other experiences to come up with a silver bullet to get people to stop eating things that are slowly killing them, costing the healthcare system (read: you and me) tons of money, and making the American life expectancy decrease.In fact, “We’re in danger of raising the first generation of children who could live sicker and die younger than the generation before them” says Dr. James Marks in a July 2010 Newsweek article.

However it seems a "Bunch of Carrot Farmers" have figured it out already. They hired Crispin, Porter, and Bogusky to design a campaign around baby carrots. Crispin, Porter, and Bogusky decided to market pre-packed baby carrots like junk food, it's called the "Eat em' like junk food" campaign. The campaign has a few different ads: Extreme, Indulge, Future, and Munchies. All are pretty funny. I love the tag line at the end of the video below: "Now in extreme junk food packaging!"

This bunch of carrot farmers put baby carrot vending machines in a high school in Ohio and a high school in New York. The school couldn't keep the machines stocked. Kids were choosing baby carrots over a bag of Dorito's en mass. Advertising got kids to make healthier choices even when real junk food was available. They did it by making baby carrots cool.

Countless government agencies, nonprofit organizations, chefs on a crusade, and nutritional experts have been trying for YEARS to get kids (and adults) to make the right food choices. They've used all sorts of programs and marketing tactics and scare tactics and we, as a nation, are fatter, eat less vegetables, and are less active than ever.

It took a group of carrot farmers, trying to make a profit, to make vegetables cool. Which leads me to believe that, perhaps, for profit companies who make healthy lifestyle products are the ones with enough advertising dollars, enough to gain, and enough to lose to really make social impact. Maybe, we've been going about it all wrong.

Buckle em' up. Click it. Just do it.

A 13 year old boy is in critical condition at Dell Children's Hospital this afternoon after an accident on TX 130 on Monday afternoon. His two siblings and his mother were killed. Tragic, yes. Even more heartbreaking when I read that "A preliminary investigation showed that Morfin [mother] and Sparkman [other driver] were wearing seat belts, but none of the children were..." in the article linked above.

Adult decisions to not wear seat belts are just that, adult decisions. But, if a child is not wearing the proper restraint, it is still an adult decision. That child has no choice in their plight. I wondered how many traffic deaths involved unrestrained children? And, how adult behavior could be modified to ALWAYS buckle up the tiny lives they are responsible for.

According to 2005 data (which seems to be the most up-to-date), "among passenger vehicle occupants over age 4, safety belts saved an estimated 15,632 lives in 2005. If all passenger vehicle occupants over age 4 had worn safety belts, 20,960 lives (that is, an additional 5,328) could have been saved in 2005." You can peruse through the data at your leisure, but, you'll conclude that children should be buckled in. Always.

Buckling your child into a car seat or into a seatbelt takes a minute, maybe 2. How do we insure that caregivers are making the decision to buckle em' up? The Texas Department of Transportation has initiated a comprehensive campaign to encourage restraint use across the state. This campaign targets two audiences, one being adults buckling in themselves and the second being caregivers buckling in their charges. The campaign operates under the tag line "Click It or Ticket."

This campaign has outdoor, radio, TV, theater, and oodles of press materials. You can even request materials for your organization through the website. The campaign kicked off with renewed energy on May 3 at The Long Center. A massive public installment caught the attention of passerbys. Check it out:


Below you'll find an example of an outdoor ad. Click here to watch one of the 30 second TV spots. It's pretty cute.



TxDOT seems to have taken time segmenting their audience and then reaching out with specific messaging for those audiences. Adults, parents of small kids, parents of older kids, etc. And yet, for whatever reason, two kids died on Monday afternoon along with their mother. Who knows if they could have been saved if they were buckled in. Their mother wasn't saved by her seatbelt.

And that's the hard part of trying to change behavior with advertising. Sometimes bad things happen to people, no matter how many ounces of prevention you throw at them. Keep up the good work TxDOT. What you don't hear in the news is how many lives Click It or Ticket will save.

Every Ounce Counts, unless it's formula.

"If most new moms would breastfeed their babies for the first six months of life,
it would save nearly 1,000 lives and billions of dollars each year,
according to a new study published Monday in the journal Pediatrics."
- Study: Lack of breastfeeding costs lives, billions of dollars

In the state of Texas 78.2% of babies are breastfed at some point according to the CDC's Breastfeeding Report Card. This number meets the Healthy People 2010 goal and is above the national average of 73.9%. Louisiana and Alabama come in last at 49.1% and 48.3%, respectively. Utah and Oregon top the list with 92.8% and 91.4%. In sum, most women in Texas attempt to breastfeed their babies at some point.

When we look at the numbers for women who are still breastfeeding at six months, Texas falls below the Healthy People 2010 goal at 48.7%. The numbers are even lower when we consider those Texas women who are exclusively breastfeeding at six months--a mere 14.2%. This is especially worrisome considering that the World Health Organization (WHO) recommends that infants be breastfed exclusively for 6 months.

The Texas Department of State Health Services Women Infants and Children (WIC) is the overseeing government agency that supports women and their babies. The national WIC website describes their target population as "low-income, nutritionally at risk" women and children under five years old.

WIC recently launched an integrated social marketing campaign to encourage moms to breastfeed their babies, the Every Ounce Counts campaign. There are several components to this campaign including radio, outdoor, TV, and web. The image below is one of the outdoor advertisements. This particular one can be seen on South 1st Street.
The Every Ounce Counts campaign message seems to have a lot of supporters and supporting organizations. Although not specifically associated with the Every Ounce Counts campaign, an event to celebrate the Breastfeeding Awareness was held at City Hall in Austin. There was also a Flashmob that was organized by Central Texas Healthy Mothers Healthy Babies. Check out the video below. Skip to 4:00 to listen to the rap about why breastfeeding is important, and apparently, really hip.

Clearly, a lot of men and women think breastfeeding is important. Again, 78% of Texas moms attempt to breastfeed their babies at some point. Which begs the question: Why do they stop?

After doing research, the problem isn't getting women to try breastfeeding. The problem seems to lie in a woman's ability to keep breastfeeding . Then, wouldn't the more impactful message on women and babies health be to keep breastfeeding? This is an important distinction and a problem that requires a very different tactic than educating a woman on the benefits of breastfeeding. Lots of factors can discourage a woman from breastfeeding, all of which are complicated and nuanced.

The Every Ounce Counts campaign does a great job of making breastfeeding look pretty and sound really wonderful. For those women who are able to successfully and easily breastfeed their babies, Every Ounce Counts stands as a validation point that they are doing the right thing, that their baby will be a rocket scientist, and that they will lose that baby weight if they just keep nursing.

Every Ounce Counts outdoor ads, radio, and TV spots don't prepare women for the problems that breastfeeding can bring, for the inconvenience, or any tactics for overcoming those real obstacles for the greater good of your baby. For that information you have to go to the Every Ounce Counts website which provides an inclusive and helpful troubleshooting section as well as links to get personalized help from a lactation consultant. This is a crucial piece of moving the needle on improving continued breastfeeding rates through six months.

The CDC gives some outlines of how social marketing can effect breastfeeding attitudes but not how social marketing can work to change persistent breastfeeding rates until six months of age. It should be said that perhaps the Every Ounce Counts campaign was not ever intended to focus on keeping women breastfeeding or provide practical advice on how to do so. Perhaps the goal of WIC is to increase the percentage of babies that are ever breastfed to 100%.

It just seems that to make the greatest social impact on the lives of small babies and women in Texas, social marketers must also understand that scientific data and numbers behind the social problem and then make tough decisions about target audience and on where their talents can change the most, for the most good. I do not think it is sufficient for social marketers to seek to change attitudes, social marketers must seek to change behavior.

I'll leave you with this for levity: