 |
 |
|
|
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign
Phase 1 (Report No. 1)
3.1.1.2 Media Influences on Youth
This section presents findings on the types of media and the drug-related media information that youth indicate as being influential.
General information and mixed messages -- The majority of youth in target and comparison sites mentioned television shows and movies as general sources of information (both anti- and pro-) about drugs. They regarded the media as conveying mixed messages, citing TV shows with anti-drug or anti-alcohol messages being aired back-to-back with beer commercials as an example. Youth noted many TV shows that included profanity, violence, drinking, smoking, drug use, and poor values. They thought that, in general, TV glamorized violence and drug use; TV characters would use drugs, but there would always be a happy ending.
Pro-drug media messages -- Youth mentioned being aware of relatively few pro-drug messages in the media compared with anti-drug messages. But they were aware of ads for beer on TV, billboards and magazines advertising cigarettes, and cigarette use in movies. Young people understand very clearly that these ads are trying to sell them something, and high school youth in particular are aware that the ads are promoting an image. In a non-urban high school focus group, one participant said "some things you listen to or watch, you kinda say, `ooh', you know, `they're kinda cool, I kinda wanna be like that, and if I wanna be like that I have to do that'..."
Most young people were critical of cigarette use in films: members of a non-urban 7th-9th grade focus group questioned why smoking in films was necessary and saw it as "adding on to the problem if they're, you know, glamorizing smoking." Participants in a non-urban 4th-6th grade group thought that beer ads should be removed from TV and that cigarette ads should be removed from magazines.
Radio, music tapes and compact discs, and videos were seen as focusing heavily on drugs and sex, and youth described them as almost totally pro-drug. "Heavy metal" groups like Acid Rock are named after drugs and music groups like "Kiss" reportedly have members who are known to use drugs. A non-urban focus group in Denver mentioned the Internet as a source of drug information. In particular, youth reported that some Internet personal home pages had directions for making a "bong" (a device used to smoke marijuana). An urban high school student in one focus group said that even if young people did not want to drink or smoke, some of the neighborhood billboards had advertisements that tempted them to start.
One non-urban focus group in Portland summarized media influence by saying "You learn a lot about drugs on TV. TV teaches you how to use drugs, drink booze, and smoke cigarettes." Elementary school children in some focus groups mentioned having seen, for example, Menace movies on how to "cook crack"; intravenous drug use; using rubber to "wrap the arm" on The Promised Land [television show]; marijuana use on Murphy Brown [television show]; and the movie Kingpin that showed how to manufacture homemade water pipes (used for smoking marijuana) from ordinary objects. They also mentioned the promotion of majors sports events by alcohol and tobacco companies.
Anti-drug media messages -- Although they acknowledged that there was some good anti-drug programming on radio and television, most youth reported that the pro-drug messages simply overwhelmed the anti-drug messages. However, they felt that anti-drug programming could be effective if it was of high quality and was shown often enough. They mentioned movies like The Class of 1999 and The Goat and television documentaries featuring real drug addicts as examples of effective anti-drug programming.
- Age group differences -- Older teens understood that movies such as the Menace series and TV shows such as "Full-House" and "Jerry Springer," have a graphic anti-drug message and depict lives ruined by drugs. Younger children, however, often interpreted these graphic movies and shows simply as "pro-drug." Irony and symbolism were lost on these younger viewers, who are very literal. For them, the image is the message. For example, elementary students generally reported how they acted out what they saw in movies and ads. For example, they would pretend to be "cutting" cocaine by using chalk dust to simulate cocaine, cut up dried glue as pretend "rock," and even act out the Frying Pan ad in the play kitchen at school.
Youth critique of anti-drug advertising -- Youth of all ages were aware of anti-drug ads in the media. Young people in both target sites and comparison sites reported seeing anti-drug messages. Overwhelmingly, youth mentioned TV and the movies, with some mentions of radio and a few of posters or billboards. For the most part, older students (7th-12th graders) were highly critical of these ads: "you don't really listen" [to the message] and "those who say `don't use drugs' are using drugs" (Atlanta urban high school student). Some participants pointed out that some people perceived the anti-drug ad as "just a commercial" and would change the channel because they do not like commercials.
In the 4th-6th grade groups, it was difficult to elicit reactions to ads. Some participants remembered images from a few ads but typically did not offer reactions to them. When probed, some of the youth said they thought such ads might be effective. In 7th-9th grade groups, participants were attracted by ad images (for example, Joe Camel) but were ambivalent about the effects of the ads. It was this age group that most often said anti-drug information should come from parents --
not from ads; this age group also reported worrying that ads may induce youth to try drugs. Youth in 7th-9th grades frequently reported that they thought the anti-drug ads were intended for significantly younger children. By 10th-12th grade, participants watched and clearly remembered ads but typically found them laughable. They were articulate about feeling disconnected from the people depicted in the ads. In general, the high school focus groups reported that the ads did not influence them but might be effective with much younger children.
A number of participants said, in effect, that anti-drug messages in the media seemed remote to them. An urban high school student in Sioux City stated "It's like a nickel a day to save the starving families in Rwanda. I have nickel a day; I don't pay `em because you're not connected with what's going on. It's no way involved in your life. You just let it go in one ear and out the other." Two other participants in the same group said, "It has to be more real than just on TV because everyone knows TV's not real," and "TV is not teaching them. If something happens to their friend or interview someone like it's personal, then [they] will listen."
A number of youth emphatically said that ads would have no effect --
except, perhaps, to make people use drugs more --
because, as one student said, "people do what they want to anyway." Middle and high school students joked among themselves about anti-drug ads; they laughed about them in the focus groups and mimicked the ads while giggling at their effects. The words "funny" and "stupid" were frequently used by middle school and high school students to describe ads they had seen.
These responses were distributed almost equally across urban and non-urban groups, although urban groups seemed to be more cynical about the ads. Participants in one urban focus group were especially negative about the use celebrities in ads. One person commented, "I wouldn't even listen, `cause I don't see them [celebrities] at home everyday. You know what I mean?" This sentiment was widely shared by other youth. The findings across target site focus groups were surprisingly similar to findings across comparison site focus groups.
