attack toolkit webinar 9-7-11
DESCRIPTION
This is a slide show from an interactive training designed for tobacco control advocates and enthusiasts working with youth and young adults. In the training, we reviewed content and navigation of the ATTACK Toolkit. With the help from Jeff Jordan, President and Founder of Rescue Social Change Group, we highlighted how Social Branding strategy promotes tobacco-free lifestyles.TRANSCRIPT
ATTACK Toolkit Webinar on Social Branding©
9-7-11
www.ATTACKtobacco.net
ATTACK Toolkit Overview
Navigating Toolkit
Social Branding©
www.ATTACKtobacco.net
Social Branding©
Jeff Jordan, M.A.
President/Founder
Rescue Social Change Group
www.ATTACKtobacco.net
COMMERCIAL MARKETING
SOCIAL MARKETING
!
Sepe E, Glantz, SA. Bar and club tobacco promotions in the alternative press: targeting young adults. Am J Public Health. 2002 Jan;92(1):75-8.
BAR AND CLUB PROMOTIONS
Department of Medicine
“The field representatives…will be recruited from within the local scene, thus they will acquire the respect and trust of these “trend-setters.” They will speak their language, dress their dress, and walk their walk….Once our relationship is solidified with the nightclub owners, management, and staff, we will begin to subtly train the employees on how to influence smokers…”
KBA for RJR, 1996, 516619663/9766
The process of classifying a market into distinct segments that behave in similar ways or have similar needs.
SEGMENTATIONSEGMENTATION
EXAMPLE
Play Video: “MOUNTAIN DEW”
San Diego Young Adult Subcultures
10%
52%
21%
17%
HipstersUrbanPartiersLGBT
Four Distinct Subcultures Were Identified
Smoking by Subculture
Urban Hipster Pop LGBT
19%
13%
29%
15%
38%
32%
50%
30%
10%
52%
17%21%
Subculture SizeCurrent SmokingRegular Smoking
Compared to the other bar subcultures:• Hipsters significantly less likely to support action
against tobacco industry• 28% of Hipsters, 35% of others
• Hipsters equally agree SHS dangerous• 58% agreement among both Hipsters and others
• Hipsters equally agree smoking “useful”• 33% of Hipsters, 35% of others agree
Hipsters and Smoking Attitudes
Social Concern & Risk BehaviorsSD YA Social Concern and Reported Smoking Behavior (p<.001)
Social Concern and Risk Behaviors
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1-3 4-6 7-9 10-12 13-15 16-18 19-21 22-25
84%
75%
66%
56%52%
20%
35%
1%
YOUNG ADULT SMOKING IN BARS
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
CA ME NM OK
Statewide YA Prevalence (BRFSS) 18.0 25.0 25.4 27.0
Current SmokingYoung Adult Bar-Goers 56.3 51.5 46.8 57.2
Regular Smoking (20+ Days in Past 30) 28.2 19.4 21.0 34.0
SOCIAL BRANDING ®A behavioral change strategy that utilizes certain commercial marketing tactics to change the social image associated with certain behaviors within specific peer group populations.
How is Social Branding Different?• Meaningful Segmentation• Direct Experience Vs. Information• Social Image & Identity vs. Knowledge• Diffusion of Innovations• Selective Empowerment• Cultural Authenticity & Relevance
COMMUNE
Play Video: “COMMUNE”
How is Social Branding Different?• Meaningful Segmentation• Direct Experience Vs. Information• Social Image & Identity vs. Knowledge• Diffusion of Innovations• Selective Empowerment• Cultural Authenticity & Relevance
METHODS
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
• Series of cross sectional surveys using randomized venue-based sampling
• Enumerated all Hipster bars and clubs and most popular nights for Hipsters
• Randomly selected venues and times for intercept survey• Cross sectional surveys at four time points:
• Baseline N=1,105 collected over 14 weeks• FU1 (10m) N=1,174• FU2 – collected in three parts, with a goal of 1200 surveys total
over the year: part1 (22m) N=277, part 2 (28m) N=507, part 3 N=500
• Respondents age 18-26 present in or around bars at randomly selected time were eligible to participate
EXPOSURE
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Baseline 10 Months 22 Months 28 Months 32 Months
Total SampleHipstersSC Hipster n = 1,105 n = 1,174 n = 277 n = 507 n = 500
p <.1p <.1
p <.05
“Likes” Campaign
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
0%
6%
12%
18%
24%
30%
Baseline 10 Months 22 Months 28 Months 32 MonthsTotal SampleHipstersSC Hipster n = 1,105 n = 1,174 n = 277 n = 507 n = 500
p <.05p <.05
p <.01 30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
Baseline 10 Months 22 Months 28 Months 32 MonthsTotal SampleHipstersSC Hipster n = 1,105 n = 1,174 n = 277 n = 507 n = 500
CURRENT SMOKING
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
Total Sample (p=0.003, OR=0.71 95% CI [0.57, 0.89]) Hipsters (p=0.001, OR=0.62 95% CI [0.47, 0.82])SC Hipsters (p=0.006, OR=0.43 [0.23, 0.79])
55%
60%
65%
70%
75%
80%
Baseline 10 Months 22 Months 28 Months 32 MonthsTotal SampleHipsters
BINGE DRINKING
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
n = 1,105 n = 1,174 n = 277 n = 507 n = 500p <.001
p <.001
FINDINGS
Center for Tobacco Control Research &
Education UCSF
• Campaign awareness increasing over time• Awareness and Liking highest among the target audience
(Hipsters with high social concern)• Increasing association between Commune and Hipsters
over time, particularly among Socially Concerned Hipsters• Increasing association between Commune and anti-
tobacco themes over time• Significant decrease in Current smoking from 56% at
baseline to 49% at FU2 (p<0.01) • Unexpected significant decrease in binge drinking in past
month from 79% at baseline to 69% at 28m (p<0.001)
Discussion & Questions
Jeff Jordan, [email protected]
Resources
• Rescue Social Change Group www.rescuescg.com
• ATTACK Toolkit
www.ATTACKtobacco.net
www.ATTACKtobacco.net
Kimberly Bankston-Lee
[email protected] x211
Alex [email protected] x206
ATTACK Toolkit Project – www.ATTACKtobacco.netBreathe California of Sacramento-Emigrant TrailsSacramento, CAwww.SacBreathe.org
www.ATTACKtobacco.net