that trusty old kitchen sink

This night has finally come. While I attempt to prepare tomorrow’s lecture for the class I am teaching and do some work for my mentor, I find that my thoughts are constantly turning to tonight’s primaries. Results from the primaries continue to pour in, and all I can seem to do is watch. And wait. My goodness! I even feel like taking up a nail-biting habit! Given the anticipation of this evening's primaries, I thought I would post about the election. In a recent (and great) NYT Op-Ed piece, Maureen Dowd discusses the Clinton campaign approach of late. Her words summarize the problem with communicating a message that lacks unity and coherence. Dowd says:

“After saying she found her “voice” in New Hampshire, she has turned into Sybil. We’ve had Experienced Hillary, Soft Hillary, Hard Hillary, Misty Hillary, Sarcastic Hillary, Joined-at-the-Hip-to-Bill Hillary, Her-Own-Person-Who-Just-Happens-to-Be-Married-to-a-Former-President Hillary, It’s-My-Turn Hillary, Cuddly Hillary, Let’s-Get-Down-in-the-Dirt-and-Fight-Like-Dogs Hillary.

Just as in the White House, when her cascading images and hairstyles became dizzying and unsettling, suggesting that the first lady woke up every day struggling to create a persona, now she seems to think there is a political solution to her problem. If she can only change this or that about her persona, or tear down this or that about Obama’s. But the whirlwind of changes and charges gets wearing.

By threatening to throw the kitchen sink at Obama, the Clinton campaign simply confirmed the fact that they might be going down the drain.”

When I first read this article, it brought me comfort. Perhaps this did mean, as Dowd suggested, that the Clinton campaign would soon be ending. After all, as I have learned in my Health Communication course, having a clean, clear, tailored, and unified message is critical to any campaign’s success. Why would that not be the case for Hillary? Only time will tell what the impact of Hillary’s scattered message will be.

And with that, I’m off. With fingers crossed.

To read the article in its entirety: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/27/opinion/27dowd.html?ex=1361854800&en=e52cc0a1a83d5aed&ei=5124&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink

just watch

Here I am, sticking to my word. It's time to have some fun. Check out the recent skit performed on Saturday Night Live, which pokes fun at advertisements for oral contraceptives that promise to reduce the frequency of visits from Aunt Flo. It is hilarious. The big picture? The skit sheds light on an industry gone overboard. And I love it.

girls just wanna have fun

I just left another great installment of Health Communication, the class for which I am keeping this blog. During the class, we stepped into our professor's office, which happens to be the sunny Mediterranean garden just off to the side of the building where class is held. As we basked in the tireless California sun, we engaged in an activity about audience segmentation, which is essentially the process of dividing the larger population into smaller groups--groups that are united by one or more characteristics. This is done in order to tailor message relevance, appeal, and in the end, effectiveness. Our professor illustrated this important health communication strategy by dividing the class by demographics, geographic characteristics, and various beliefs. A very informative exercise indeed! At one point, our professor segmented the class by asking the group whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statement:

"Health is my greatest priority in life."

At first, I struggled a bit, wondering which side of the leaf (the object being used to delineate the groups) I would stand on. After all, I love talking about health. Heck, I even have a blog centered around the topic. And of course I want to maintain my health, as well as the health of my family and friends. But suddenly, a sort of irreverence came over me, and I joined the dissenters on the north side of the leaf. When my group was asked why health wasn't our number one priority, many answered that family and love trumped health. But even those things didn't fully resonate with me. Nothing did until the word "fun" came to mind. Of course its not as simple as that but right now that does seem to be the thing that's missing from my life and the one that could be more highly prioritized. And then it dawned on me. Perhaps a lack of fun-spiritedness is also what leads our health messages to fail. It must mean somethin' that even I, someone who has dedicated the last eight years of her life to improving people's health, is sick of the proselytizing. Perhaps our messages would have more relevance and effectiveness if we, in the field of public health, stopped taking ourselves so darn seriously.

So, here's to fun! Time to add a dash of it to both my life and to the health messages I know--deep down--are truly important.

appealing to the socially conscious smoker

I wanted to strongly suggest that you all hit up the following blog: http://www.sidewalkradio.net/. I know, I know. Clearly, I'm really starting to feel this whole blog thing. But this one is really worth checking out.

The writer of the blog gave a job talk last week for one of the SDSU Graduate School of Public Health faculty positions. He studies the history of tobacco campaigns and their use of film to paint a positive picture of their industry. Even more exciting is the fact that he creates documentaries that counter the messages being conveyed by Big Tobacco in their industry films. His films expose the environmental consequences, as well as labor injustices, that are part of the tobacco industry. I’m totally intrigued by this approach, because the health consequences of smoking don't always motivate people to quit. This might be just the right health campaign approach for the socially conscious smoker.

Check out his blog, Sidewalk Radio, where many of his videos are posted, as well as descriptions of his research. His approach to combating the tobacco problem is pretty darn unique and inspiring. Check it out.

truthiness

Inspired by the recent discussions of health campaigns and what makes one effective, I decided to check out one of the more famous (and successful?) campaigns of late--the Truth Campaign, which is aimed at reducing/preventing tobacco use among young folks. When I first arrived at the site, I thought I had gone to the wrong place. The site was filled with cartoon characters, games, and quips such as “tobacco will kill 1 in 3 youth smokers”, followed by “but at least two live!”. The site also compared death from tobacco and death from murder, saying that tobacco kills far more people but “murder’s a lot scarier, so it’s a tie.” At initial glance, the site seemed to be far too much fun to actually be aimed at reducing cigarette smoking. But then I realized—that’s the point.

Probably the coolest thing I saw on the site was the feature called “useful cigarette”. This interactive component to the website allows you to scan across an enormous cigarette and see a visual depiction of all of the *fun* ingredients found in cigarettes. Some of my favorites (in no particular order) include pesticides, embalming fluid, urea (yes, what’s found in urine), and mothballs. Yum!

This fun little feature can be found here: http://www.thetruth.com/facts/useFulCig/

So the question to ask, then, is whether this thing works. Well, according to the website called Protect the Truth (http://www.protectthetruth.org/truthcampaign.htm):

You bet it does.
0. Seventy-five percent of all 12 to 17 year-olds in the nation - 21 million - can accurately describe one or more of the truth® ads.
0. Nearly 90 percent of youths aged 12 to 17 - 25 million - said the ad they saw was convincing.
Eighty-five percent - 24 million - said the ad gave them good reasons not to smoke.

I have been hearing people talk about The Truth for some time now. And I thought I understood just how powerful it could be. I was wrong—after spending a little time on the website this morning, I got a FANTASTIC lesson in what works when trying to change health behavior. And this will be my gold standard until something better comes along.

crystal blue persuasion

I am currently sitting in a dark and dingy(ish) room in the basement of Life Sciences, thinking about the Health Communications course we just had. Today, we talked about the skeleton of health communication--the various components that go into and that should be evaluated and considered when creating a health communication campaign. Perhaps the most salient topic discussed was that of the dual process persuasion theory, which my JDP classmates will remember learning about an eternity ago. (Big ups to Radmilla). Yep--systematic vs. heuristic; argument vs. cue; central vs. peripheral. The works. Despite having understood the theory's principles the first time around, it was today that I really grasped its weight and relevance to our field.

Applying this theory in the context of producing health promotion campaigns makes complete sense. In our field, we talk a lot about tailoring messages to have the best impact--almost incessantly. But I hadn't before considered the practical utility of tailoring health messages based on whether someone was likely to think about an issue centrally (i.e., systematically, effortfully) or peripherally (heuristically, using mental shortcuts). I came away from today's class realizing that it is critical to make messages relevant to the target group and to then to use either simple cues or complex arguments, depending on the cognitive approach the target individuals are using.

As I close, I am thinking about some of the (psychotherapy) clients with whom I have trouble making an impact. Perhaps part of the reason that my message does not get through to some of the folks I am working with is that I have not adequately accounted for the relevance of the topic to and/or the cognitive style of the individual. In other words, perhaps some of my clients are “cognitive misers!” With this new perspective in mind, I look forward to working with my clients on Friday--perhaps I will be able to move some folks toward much-needed change... Fingers crossed!

blogariffic

Recently, in an attempt to help my husband and me with our food-challenged selves, my wonderfully helpful/knowledgeable best friend Rose turned me on to several food blogs. There is one that I am really excited about. It is called 101 Cookbooks and the tag for the site is "Super Natural Cooking". Reading the blog last week, I became inspired--not only to cook but to cook healthful food. The site does not approach healthful eating (as many other companies, chefs, etc... do) by focusing on carbohydrate consumption, caloric intake, or low fat foods. Instead, it focuses on eating pure, natural ingredients in a balanced way, while also being delicious and gorgeous. Pretty awesome indeed!

It really drove home for me the ways in which new technology has the power to revolutionize the health of the masses. Reading food blogs allows one to check out healthy recipes in a much more inexpensive and convenient way than can be done with the traditional cookbook. The food blogs also are ever-evolving, so that you don't get into the rut of cooking that favorite recipe on page 172 of a cookbook you have had for years... Finally, they add a personal touch. Instead of learning recipes that have been through the ringer at a publishing house or a slew of producers and writers on the Food Network, these are real people, doing real cooking, who are truly passionate about it. So, check out http://101cookbooks.com/ and see how blogs are revolutionizing the way we eat.