Pubdate: Wed, 15 May 2002 Source: Cape Cod Times (MA) Copyright: 2002 Cape Cod Times Contact: http://www.capecodonline.com/cctimes/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/72 Author: Christopher Newton, Associated Press Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/campaign.htm (ONDCP Media Campaign) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/walters.htm (Walters, John) Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/youth.htm (Youth) SURVEY SAYS $180 MILLION ANTI-DRUG CAMPAIGN HAS NOT DISCOURAGED TEEN USE WASHINGTON - President Bush's top drug policy adviser says the government's anti-drug ads largely are being ignored by teens, and a survey finds no evidence the multimillion-dollar campaign is discouraging drug use. The survey, conducted by the private research firm Westat and the University of Pennsylvania, actually charted an increase in drug use among some teen-agers who saw the television ads. But it noted that further analysis was necessary before the ads could be directly tied to the increase. The White House drug policy office, headed by John P. Walters, said the ad campaign must be refocused. "These ads aren't having an impact on teen-agers," said Tom Riley, a spokesman for the White House drug policy office. "We've spent millions on these ads and we are not seeing a return on the investment." Walters said the ads and their impact will be reviewed every six months. "If we can't make them work, we're going to end the program and put the money where the other needs in this area are," he said Wednesday on ABC's "Good Morning America." The ads are part of a five-year campaign devised by some of the nation's best-known public relations firms. The evaluation is based on a survey of youth ages 12 to 18 between September 1999 and December 2001. The survey did not reflect the effectiveness of the new ads that link drug use to funding terrorism. Parents also were surveyed about ads persuading them to be more involved in their children's lives. Those interviewed were shown the commercials on a laptop computer. The teen-agers then answered questions about their intentions to use drugs in the next 12 months. The survey revealed no decline in the rate of drug use among those surveyed. But 80 percent of the parents who viewed the ads aimed at them were positively influenced to ask their child questions about their social lives and become more involved. Why the commercials are not having an effect on teen-agers is unclear, but the survey suggests it's not that the ads don't make an impression. According to the survey, 70 percent of teen-agers remember seeing the ads about once a week. The anti-drug ads are designed to approach teen-agers on their own turf, offering electric guitar and skateboarding as cool alternatives to a generation too complex for "Just Say No." Alan Levitt, manager of the anti-drug media campaign, said, "We're pleased with the impact the campaign is having on parents and having on their behavior in monitoring kids, but it hasn't yet affected their own kids' behavior or attitudes." The drug policy office, which Walters directs, partly blames the way the government creates the ads, saying it cuts policy directors out of the creative process. Currently the Partnership for a Drug Free America, an advocacy group, asks ad companies to donate their services and create television spots. The government buys the television time for airing them, but effectively has little creative control. Walters, who openly criticized the ads even before he took the post, is pledging to refocus the drug campaign. The campaign is now up for reauthorization for another five years. Walters wants Congress to maintain the campaign's funding at its current level - $180 million. The federal government spends $18 billion on anti-drug efforts every year. Riley said the office will begin testing ads in focus groups before they go on the air - an expensive process. The drug policy office also wants to target more heavily children between the ages of 14 and 16, and become more involved in creating the ads. - --- MAP posted-by: Alex