Introduction
The Foods and Drugs Administration of the United States launched “The Real Cost Campaign from February 2014 to November 2016. The FDA created the real cost public campaign to influence the youth aged 11-19 years to stop smoking and prevent those not smoking from initiating the behavior. The campaign was sponsored by the foods and drugs administration of the United States for the prevention of e-cigarette and tobacco product smoking. The public education campaign was successful in preventing nearly 350,000 youths in the United States from initiating smoking between February 2014 and November 2016. The results of the campaign were positive, and it was proof of the effectiveness of media campaign intervention in public health education.
The ability of the Real Cost Campaign to Influence an End to Smoke
The real cost campaign’s target audience was mainly the youth. The FDA used the media to reach the target audience through advertisements (ads) by conveying messages intended to prevent, reduce and stop smoking (Brubach, 2019). The campaign described the actual impact of cigarette smoking as the ‘real cost.’ The “real cost’ influence demonstrated a negative attitude toward cigarette smoking (Brubach, 2019). The negative approach towards smoking introduced a positive perception of the ability to resist the urge to start and stop smoking.
The media platforms of advertisements disseminated the slogan and messages of the real cost campaign through gaming ads, social media platforms, radio, television, and print. As mentioned above, the mode of spreading messages of the initiative effectively reached the target audience (Brubach, 2019). Different messages incorporated in the ads could influence a change in societal beliefs and smoking tendencies (Brubach, 2019). A survey of the campaign’s effectiveness shows that participants could recall the campaign’s ads and other promotional materials. The physical ads, tooth skin bully and Alison, had the highest number of people who recalled them (Brubach, 2019). The participants in the survey showed a negative attitude towards smoking after seeing or hearing the real cost ads (Brubach, 2019). In the analysis, participants showed a firm belief in experiencing health adversities if they regularly smoked cigarettes in the next ten years. In response to different analyses of the real cost campaign, it is clear that the campaign successfully influenced the target audience (Brubach, 2019). There was a widespread reach, and the ads brought out a well-persuaded audience of the negative health effects of smoking.
Relevance of the Real Cost Campaign to the Target Audience
The major influence of the real cost campaign was to prevent the initiation of smoking among the youth and prevent the prevalence of lifelong smokers. A National Youth Tobacco Survey showed that 723000 youth smoked their first cigarette at 18 years or less (Delahanty et al., 2019). Other study results show that an estimated 5.6 million young people 18 years and below die prematurely from cigarette smoking (Delahanty et al., 2019). Most young adults who initiated smoking show signs of dependence within the first few days of smoking.
Young adults are exposed to traditional cigarettes and the new trend of vaping. The new adoption of e-cigarette use is a continuing public health concern in the United States (Brubach, 2019). The various types of electronic cigarettes available at the exposure of young adults include; vape pods, standard vape pens, and disposable and rechargeable electronic cigars. Considering the above statistics, the target audience of the real cost survey was very relevant. The marketing strategy of using social media platforms was very useful because people ages 11 to 19 years own or possess cell phones, radios, and televisions (Delahanty et al., 2019). The teen-centered campaign was aired on the radio, in magazines, on television, as well as in phone ads. The theme of the real cost campaign was “every cigarette costs you something. Negative health outcomes, life-threatening cigarette components, loss of control, and self-reliance were the three themes of the real cost campaign. The themes influenced mostly young adults who had not started smoking to avoid it (Brubach, 2019). The theme of life-threatening health problems associated with smoking influenced those already smoking to reduce and stop the tendency.
Critique of What and Why Could Have Been Improved
The real cost campaign was successful in creating public awareness to the public about the health effects of smoking. It also successfully influenced the audience to deformalize smoking behavior in society, preventing more young people from smoking (Brubach, 2019). The real cost campaign used a direct mode of transmitting anti-smoking messages. The real cost campaign could have adopted a more practical and serviceable mode of portraying the adverse effects of smoking. The hard-hitting advertisement is likely to cause stigma among people who, for example, have lung cancer (Lozano et al., 2020). Most people with lung cancer were once smokers or were smoking. People with tobacco-related diseases may develop negative self-undermining traits that can cause depression and avoid seeking medical attention or attending therapy sessions due to stigma.
One of the life-threatening chronic diseases associated with smoking is lung cancer. Including graphic imagery of the adverse effects of smoking was a useful tool in the real cost campaign. However, there are concerns that this type of advertisement can cause depression due to its stigma (Lozano et al., 2020). Various ways of educating the public on the adverse effects of smoking prevent more people from the same. Public awareness of the dangers of smoking is important, and the campaigns that have been implemented seem successful.
Nonetheless, more practical methods can minimize the stigma associated with public anti-smoking campaigns. For example, there needs to be an evolution of to what extent is public campaigns likely to cause stigma and after effects such as shame and self-judgment (Lozano et al., 2020). One of the recommendations for easing the strength that a hard-hitting advertisement on an anti-smoking campaign would be to prompt how patients suffering from smoking-related diseases felt about the ads (Lozano et al., 2020). Secondly, healthcare professionals should speak to patients with smoking-related diseases empathetically to improve their resilience. The third would be to create awareness among the public to treat patients suffering from smoking-related illnesses with love and encourage them to seek medical help.
Conclusion
Tobacco smoking is hazardous, and as previously stated, the goal of stop-smoking efforts has always been to raise public knowledge of the acute health consequences of tobacco consumption as well as passive smoking contamination. Furthermore, the campaign has focused on encouraging adults who smoke to stop while also attempting to make free aid available to everybody. Hence. The best way to curb the behavior is to strongly discourage the young from starting or stopping smoking. Advertisements through media platforms can be a fast method of reaching the target audience. However, the campaign should focus on expanding tobacco control while minimizing stigmatizing people suffering from tobacco-related illnesses.
References
Brubach, A. L. (2019). The case and context for “the real cost” campaign. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 56(2), S5–S8.
Delahanty, J., Ganz, O., Bernat, J. K., Trigger, S., Smith, A., Lavinghouze, R., & Rao, P. (2019). Awareness of “the real cost” campaign among US middle and high school students: National youth tobacco survey, 2017.Public Health Reports, 135(1), 82–89.
Lozano, P., Thrasher, J. F., Forthofer, M., Hardin, J., Shigematsu, L. M. R., Arillo Santillán, E., & Fleischer, N. L. (2020). Smoking-related stigma: A public health tool or a damaging force?Nicotine & Tobacco Research, 22(1), 96–103.