Tag Archives: Yale

Is Public Health a Competition?

The NY Times recently published an article titled, “Tobacco Funds Shrink as Obesity Fight Intensifies,” pitting anti-smoking public health folks against anti-obesity public health folks. The NY Times asked us, in short: Should we focus on addressing obesity over anti-smoking efforts? Is this the right thing?

David Katz, Director of Yale University’s Prevention Research Center, published a response via the Huffington Post to examine the “this vs. that” and “right vs. wrong” approach the NY Times took–and asked another question: What choice are we really making?

Now, this is an important one. The NY Times article does do a great job in bringing up the debate: What are our nation’s health priorities? Katz brings up a second good point: How do you divvy resources amongst these health priorities to get the most juice from the squeeze (so to speak)?

First–> Disclaimer–In the words of Katz, I too, am not prepared to answer the NY Times’ question of this or that because I don’t fully know–but then, who does? That said, I have two additions to Katz’s suggestions:

1.  Katz first suggests “conduct modeling exercises to determine what general allocation of research and policy dollars — across an array of conditions, behaviors, and even types of research — would most improve our health over a defined period of time.

To this, I say, that we all need to get more involved and clued into the Healthy People 2020 initiative that is run by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (disclaimer:  This project lies within  a client of my employer that I work on). This is a collaborative, science-based approach to setting 10-year national health objectives to promote health and prevent disease. So, when we are talking “this or that” or about our Nation’s health priorities, Healthy People 2020 is a good start. (Stay tuned, in December the Healthy People 2020 objectives will be released along with guidance for achieving the new 10-year targets).

2. Secondly, Katz suggests that we need to be more “holistic.” Going on to say, “A healthy person is healthy…Recent studies have shown that people who don’t smoke, eat well, are active and control their weight are roughly 80 percent less likely to get ANY major chronic disease than their counterparts who do the converse in each case…So, a healthy person doesn’t smoke. A healthy person eats well. A healthy person is physically active.

I couldn’t agree more and this is why–I don’t feel it needs to be an either-or type of situation. It can be all the above. Healthy living (aka living a healthy lifestyle) can be defined by a number of behaviors such as:

  • Not smoking
  • Eating Right
  • Being active

One could argue that other behaviors could be umbrella-ed into healthy living such as getting immunizations or getting preventive screenings. Thus, the message could not just be anti-smoking or anti-obesity, but instead, be about promoting a health lifestyle which encompasses a set number of behaviors. This should be our focus. Thus, I leave you with the same question Katz asks at the conclusion of his Huffington Post article:

What interventions for individuals, families, schools, worksites, communities and more will encourage, promote and empower the adoption and maintenance not of some single preventive strategy, but of healthful living?

flickr credit: lets.book

3 Themes Social Media and Social Marketing Can Learn From

Social marketing and social marketing have something to learn from one another. Let me elaborate. (and no, that was not a typo.)

The fuel to my fire is social marketing. And, I’m not talking about any of that Web 2.0 or government 2.0 buzz-word crap (pardon).  I’m talking about real behavior change. Thus, when I was asked to present at Yale University about social marketing, I knew I had to explain what social marketing is and what it is not in terms of the Web 2.0 “social marketing” often discussed. However, I’m also not a fan of black and white. In fact, my favorite color is gray. So instead of drawing boundaries or limits, I talked about what each can learn from the other.

I began with a slide that had social marketing on one side and social marketing on the other side, and asked: What’s the difference? A rhetorical question and maybe mean, but the truth is that when people say social marketing, they often mean two very different things. One means tools, the other means behavior, but both can enable and empower to reach that all-elusive real behavior change. Thus, I continued by outlining three themes that I find consistent between the two applications:

  • freedom vs. control
  • mission vs. mantra
  • voice vs. message

I feel these themes go beyond (just) social media and social marketing, but also dive into business, society and politics of today, and are relevant to a discussion when it comes to either social media or social marketing.

Social media thrives when freedom is given and control is released. In the field of social marketing, often times there is a battle over the message, the delivery, the pitch, etc. to remain controlled, yet if freedom was given, then sometimes reach could blossom. In addition, when it comes to the ethical framework of social marketing, some feel social marketing expands freedom, while other naysayers see it as control and manipulation. Thus, whether talking about either social media or social marketing, you need to discuss how you will or will not balance the two: freedom and control.

What is your organization’s mission? What is the campaign’s purpose? What problem are you solving? Who are you talking to? These are just some of the questions one needs to ask when wanting to communicate in social marketing or social media. In social media land, you have less room, less time and more clutter. You need to think mantra. You need to be understood. In social marketing, our audiences don’t always get “mission.” Sometime, we need to admit that we don’t even know what our mission is during a campaign or as an organization and regroup. If we could lean more mantra with both social media and social marketing, then perhaps we could connect more with the audiences we want to reach.

Come out behind the firewall–but first know when and where it’s appropriate. More and more, the trend is transparency, openness, honestry. If you don’t know the answer, admit it. People want to connect and engage with you. Your brand, organization could potentially be so much more powerful if you give it a voice, a person, a story….and not necessarily push out your nicely crafted messages that every senior exec QCed five times. (Okay, I’m over-exaggerating, but it gets the point home). Whether social media or social marketing, think voice and the ideals that go with voice, rather than message. As I prefeced though, know when and where appropriate.

What are your thought? How can social media marketing and social marketing learn from each other? What else do they have in common? Where else do they differ (we know there’s lots in that department)? Or, better yet, how and why do you think these themes go beyond Just social media and/or social marketing.

(I like questions.) =P