3.2.2.2 Parent Perceptions of Impact and Effectiveness of Ads

Many target-site parents in Denver, Hartford, Milwaukee, and Portland reported that although the anti-drug television ads had not changed their ideas about drugs, the ads did help to stimulate discussion between them and their children, especially the Father and Son at Breakfast ad ("another lost opportunity"). They also reported that the ad about the father role-playing with his son had given them concrete ideas about educating their children about the dangers of drugs. The parents appreciated the way the ads provided ideas for opening the lines of communication, reinforcing positive behavior, and pointing out the negative consequences of drug use.

Parents agreed that the commercials provided valuable information about the drug problem, how to obtain more information, and the importance of educating their children about the dangers of drug use. Parents in Baltimore reported that the anti-drug ads were needed because "the ads help you realize how bad the problem is." Parents in Tucson said the ads had inspired them to visit their children's schools to obtain more information. One parent reported that prior to the ads, she was unaware that youth were using drugs at young ages; the ads were instrumental in changing her perceptions. Overall, parents were generally unaware of the community's response to the ads.

Parents tended to have strong and differing opinions about the effectiveness of the ads in preventing drug use among youth. Many target-site parents felt that anti-drug commercials were important ways to spread the message about the dangers of drugs and could help youth avoid drug use. Some parents in Sioux City believed strongly that the ads were effective in getting parents' attention and reminding them to talk with their children.

Houston focus group parents felt that the ads were a source of education for parents, were helpful in keeping the drug issue at the forefront, were effective in reinforcing the message that drugs are dangerous, and encouraged youth to be cautious when they encountered drugs. Parents in Milwaukee felt that the ads were effective in providing periodic reinforcement and "tipping the balance" for those considering drug use.

Other target-site parents believed that the more graphic commercials were probably effective but would have a full impact on youth only if parents followed up and talked to their children. Some parents emphasized that anti-drug ads could be effective only as a part of a comprehensive approach that highlighted parental involvement and responsibility. Parents in Boise believed that the ads directed at parents, might, in conjunction with other influences, reinforce parents' decisions. Parents in Tucson reported that they felt the Media Campaign already had been very successful with youth in their area.

Some target-site parents were quite skeptical about the effectiveness of anti-drug ads. Parents in Atlanta voiced the opinion that television ads would neither change anyone's attitude nor inspire parents to talk with their children if they were not already doing so. An Atlanta parent in the urban focus group said "drugs may be the least-talked-about thing in the home." Non-urban Atlanta parents said that most parents do not believe their children use drugs so they do not pay attention to anti-drug ads. Some urban Baltimore parents reported that youth are already inundated with anti-drug information and ignore or make jokes about the ads. Many parents maintained that personal face-to-face contact with children is required to influence their decisionmaking about drugs.

Some of the parents were not sure if the ads were effective and felt that anti-drug ads would be more effective if there were not so many pro-drug messages on TV. As one Hartford parent stated, "They're getting both messages [pro-drug and anti-drug] from the same thing (i.e., the television), they really have two choices right there in front of them." Parents also pointed to other powerful pro-drug influences, such as popular music and their children's peers, and maintained that children needed a consistent message coming from all sources of influence.

In general, comparison-site parents were pessimistic about the effectiveness of anti-drug commercials. These parents had not yet experienced a paid ad campaign and were familiar only with PSAs. Most believed that the PSAs they had seen probably were not effective because they were too general, vague, and infrequent.