UK - Talking to Frank: Do anti-drugs adverts work?

[edgarshade]

BBC News

7 February 2013 Last updated at 02:03

Talk to Frank is the longest running anti-drugs campaign the UK has had. But has it stopped anyone taking drugs? Ten years ago a police Swat team crashed into a quiet suburban kitchen and changed the face of drugs education in the UK forever. Out went grim warnings of how drugs could "screw you up" and earnest exhortations to resist the sinister pushers lurking in every playground. In came surreal humour and a light, even playful approach. In the first ad, currently being repeated to mark the 10th anniversary of the campaign, a teenage boy calls in a police snatch squad to arrest his mother when she suggests they have a quiet chat about drugs. The message was new too: "Drugs are illegal. Talking about them isn't. So Talk to Frank."

But like every other anti-drugs media campaign in the world, there is no evidence Frank has stopped people taking drugs. Drug use in the UK has gone down by 9% in the decade since the campaign launched, but experts say much of this is down to a decline in cannabis use, possibly linked to changing attitudes towards smoking tobacco among young people. What little research there is into the effect of anti-drugs campaigns around the world, such as a 2011 study in Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, suggests they have little or no impact on consumption. "All the research suggests they don't work. They are not cost-effective," says drug prevention expert Prof Harry Sumnall, of Liverpool John Moores University's Centre for Public Health. Like most people working in the drugs prevention field in the UK he is reluctant to criticise Frank, which is seen as a big improvement on what went before, but adds: "My personal view is that we have tended to rely on Frank as a replacement for a comprehensive drug education strategy." Mike Linnell of Manchester-based harm reduction charity Lifeline, believes the campaign may have run its course and the money would be better spent on drugs education at a grassroots level.

"The ads certainly haven't got any credibility among serious drug users but I don't think they are aiming for that," he says.

The Home Office argues that advertising is the most cost efficient method of raising awareness among "a large audience of four million 13-18 year-olds" and correcting the distorted information they get about drugs from popular culture and their peers. Frank has survived a major cutback in government-funded advertising and, as long as illegal drug use is falling, looks set to be around for a while yet, whether it is responsible for that decline or not.

More...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21242664

 

[captaintom]

Frank are among the more level-headed of the anti-drug lobby, although if I'm honest, the A to Z of drugs on their website which we were shown when I was around twelve was probably a key factor in me becoming interested in substances, d'oh!

 

[edgarshade]

Exactly how can truthful, honest drug information educate people to not use drugs when the truth is that a lot of them are not all that harmful and can actually be quite thereputic, fun, inspirational and life-enhancing?

 

[captaintom]

I get the feeling a lot of people more "high up" know this, but nobody has the balls to go forward and say it, for fear of ridicule or dismissal, I mean, look what happened to david nutt...

 

[edgarshade]

David Nutt became a celebrety and a hero. Nout wrong with that

 

[captaintom]

David Nutt became a celebrety and a hero. Nout wrong with that

very true, he is a dudely dude, but he did get sacked first