|
|
| 'Reality' Ad Campaign Will Urge Fighting Drugs |
|
Posted by FoM on April 04, 2002 at 21:52:36 PT By Del Quentin Wilber, Sun Staff Source: Baltimore Sun 
Baltimore officials are launching an ambitious $2 million media campaign that will urge residents to fight drugs and crime, and try to alter the psychological fabric of city life. The 13-week campaign, which officials will unveil at a news conference Friday at Israel Baptist Church in East Baltimore, will begin Monday with a four-minute television spot that is intended to shock residents into seeing the reality of the city’s problems. The campaign continues with a two-page advertisement -- a "Declaration of Independence from Drugs" -- in The Sun on April 14. In the following weeks, four television advertisements will address issues ranging from drug trafficking to drug abuse and police recruiting -- each spot offering a phone number that connects callers to operators who can offer information. The campaign is being financed by the Baltimore Police Foundation, a private fund that closely supports the city police department. It is unclear how successful the campaign will be at dislodging a drug culture that permeates the city, where nearly 60,000 residents are addicts. Police Commissioner Edward T. Norris, a strong backer of the campaign, said the campaign will encourage people to take action, which will help police reduce violence and drug trafficking. "We are very optimistic that it will work," Norris said. "The problems here are so acute. ... The police can’t fix this. ... We want to mobilize the community to take responsibility." The campaign’s architect, John Linder, said the advertising will succeed because the first spot confronts viewers with the gritty and honest side of Baltimore, establishing credibility with viewers. "People won’t listen until you do that," said Linder, president of Linder & Associates, a consulting firm. Subsequent ads will be more upbeat and show that the city is improving, and that all residents have a role to play in its growth, Linder said. Outside experts said the campaign could be successful because it starts by shocking people with reality, a proven technique to reach television viewers who often ignore advertisements. "These advertisements get people to stop and think," said Joe O’Donnell, a marketing professor at Towson University. "When you throw reality at people, they recognize it, associate with it right away. They start thinking about it." The four-minute movie begins by showing images of the city at night: a man standing over the fire in an oil drum, a homeless man under a bridge, an open door to an abandoned rowhouse. A boy begins to speak: "I know that there is a fire in me that nobody can put out." A camera follows the boy walking down a dimly lighted street, past young thugs. The boy then says that a guy on a street corner asked him to hold something for $100. Two men portraying suburban ites driving to the city to buy drugs then pull up in a car, and one of them reaches out to the boy. "A guy from the county thinks I’m a drug dealer," he says, "all they think I’ll ever be." Near the end of the spot, a man’s voice says: "The people of Baltimore are in a fight, a fight that in some places we’re losing." "The fight is not over," the man says. Then, the words -- "Believe, Believe in Us, Believe in yourself, Baltimore, Believe" -- flash in succession on the screen. The police foundation will air that advertisement several times on local television stations during the next two weeks, as well as a one-minute condensed version. The foundation then will air four other advertisements, including one that will urge drug addicts to seek treatment and another that encourages people to volunteer as mentors to children. All will offer a telephone number to a call center, where operators will direct people to help or information. Anticipating a flood of calls for drug treatment, city health officials added 85 additional drug treatment slots, boosting the total to about 7,700. Dr. Peter L. Beilenson, the city health commissioner, said he was not worried about a crush of people demanding treatment. Counselors at the call center will have access to up-to-date information on the amount of open drug slots and backlogs, he said. They also will have a list of more than 400 Narcotics Anonymous groups, some of which hold meetings all day long. "It’s time we had a campaign that highlights that this is everybody’s problem," Beilenson said. Note: Privately funded drive to be launched today. Source: Baltimore Sun (MD) Related Articles: Medical Marijuana: Delegates Act With Compassion Marijuana is a Medicine That People Need Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Comment #14 posted by FoM on April 05, 2002 at 23:04:27 PT |
| I just checked in before I called it a day and saw your comment. We are going through a hard time these days and hope you and others understand if I slip up a little. My father-in-law has taken a turn for the worse and hospice is starting to say a nursing home might be necessary. There is a law that if a person in hospice gets really bad they must be put in a nursing home because of a law. We are working very hard to find away around it and for now it is ok but the nurse told me that a nursing home requires money up front. About $3,500 a month. I asked if they would take the person's property if the bill gets to high. She said yes. I believe in the right to live and to die with dignity. Something is very wrong with our system. Why work all your life to give it to the government in the end. No legacy. No nothing. It's very wrong. Thanks for reading my rant. [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #13 posted by Hope on April 05, 2002 at 22:54:13 PT |
| You say, "Who has rights? I don't really know. The right to what? What does it all mean?" At this moment, I can't think that it means anything. "Everything is meaningless. Everything is vain." It's political. It's something we fight over and grieve over and kill over. Right now we have the freedom...the privilege...the right...to use computers...the internet. There are those who would take that freedom from us or curtail it greatly at the least. Rights obviously aren't evenly spread around. There are rights that I'm not even mildly interested in taking advantage of. But, even if I don't want to have or do something, even if I don't want to take advantage of the right , I like knowing I have it and that I'm not being forced to not have that right.....whatever it might be. I think right and privilege technically mean about the same thing...but most of the time when I speak of "rights", I'm talking about the "rights" supposedly guaranteed by the Constitution and of course, God given or natural "rights". Freedoms and liberties that I am allowed that are not to be infringed upon by another. Most people seem to use the word "privilege"...which really is just a special right...to mean, "This...whatever it might be....is a "privilege" that you are allowed and it can be taken away from you, legally, at the whim of whoever controls it". When you think about it...it's political, yet it's one of those invisible treasures, like love, air, water, health, and security that you hardly notice that you have unless you don't have it. I don't know what any of it means. I'm just exercising my right to try to understand it. Thanks for the privilege. :-) [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #12 posted by Nuevo Mexican on April 05, 2002 at 14:18:25 PT |
| was a GREAT band! I saw them in Tucson in 73', and had had they're double album for two years before that, so I was psyched to see them perform. Down on the Rillito River (dry sand bed. great for horseback riding). It makes my day to see them mentioned here, as their lyrics were always insightful and uplifting, as was their music. Thanks for the stab from the past! Many great memories, here is their website: http://www.sonsofchamplin.com/ Made this ole hippies day!!!! Time to light up! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #11 posted by FoM on April 05, 2002 at 13:03:57 PT |
| That's very true. I have a lot on my mind these days and I get scattered very easily and miss very important observations. Who has rights? I don't really know. The right to what? What does it all mean? [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #10 posted by Hope on April 05, 2002 at 12:51:53 PT |
| Something I've noticed happening in recent years is that privileges are replacing rights. What we once thought of as "Rights", we are now told are "Privileges"....which of course can easily be lost. Slaves don't have "rights"....they are allowed "privileges". [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #7 posted by tmjc118 on April 05, 2002 at 11:49:22 PT |
| I'm sure you all know what an authoritarian government is. A totalitarian government, where you are restricted rights and controlled. If you have read 1984, or any distopian novels similar to it, you must realize how horrific these governments can be. I had an epiphany a few months ago, as I asked myself a question which I'm sure many of us think about every day. Why are certain substances illegal in free states like the U.S.? We all know the propaganda, it's harmful to our bodies, it sends the wrong message to the children, hell, apparently it funds terrorists nowadays (ya i know, its bull). But do any of these reasons, according to our constitution, make it just that certain substances are outlawed? In an ideal democracy, it's my choice as an individual, so long as it does affects others' "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness." I don't know what other think, but in my sincere opinion, this is a violation of my rights, and it's called suppression.
-TC [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #6 posted by Jose Melendez on April 05, 2002 at 08:34:27 PT:
|
| The reality is that even Bob Barr is starting to get the hint that laws based on kneejerk reactions, such as his own opposition to the counting of legally cast votes, actually cause harm and exacerbate the very problems they are designed to address.
From: Panel faults restrictions imposed since Sept. 11 [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #5 posted by Sandino on April 05, 2002 at 08:14:50 PT:
|
| "Reality is just a concept that truth will always replace." A line from The Sons Of Champlin tune: "Boomp Boomp Chop." [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #4 posted by Dan B on April 05, 2002 at 07:48:53 PT:
|
| Simplistic, not simplic\stic. Oops. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #3 posted by Dan B on April 05, 2002 at 07:47:20 PT:
|
| Baltimore has a reputation as a very liberal city when it comes to drug policy. In the past, the people of Baltimore have elected a mayor who was openly against the War on Some Drugs. The people of Baltimore seem to know instinctively (as people around the country and around the world are beginning to understand) that declaring war on drugs only serves to fill prisons. What I like about these ads is that they do not say that Baltimore needs to crack down on drug users, or that addicts need to be forced into making a decision between prison and drug treatment. Nope, what these ads are saying is that the community can respond in a positive way--without police intervention. It is as though the police are finally admitting that they are not the answer to Baltimore's drug problems (and with 60,000 addicts--yes, Baltimore does have a serious drug addiction problem). The ads and the added beds are a beginning, but one wonders how significant an increase of 85 beds to a total of 7700 will be for the total of 60,000 addicts who need those beds. Of course the issue is less simplic\stic than these ads make it out to be. Thousands of Baltimore residents live in poverty--the chief cause of the despair that leads some toward hard drug addiction. The city would do well to address the poverty of its citizens (those with homes and those without) in addition to calling on the community to help those who are already addicted. When I see real programs aimed at ending poverty (the real cause of crime in the "inner city"), that is when I will believe that the city is truly interested in curbing its drug problems. Still, it is refreshing to see ads from the police aimed not at imprisonment, but at helping those who need help. I would bet that if the feds would finally relent and allow compassion rather than force be the rule for handling drug addiction, Baltimore would be one of the cities to lead the country in abolishing draconian laws that seek to punish rather than serve its citizens. Dan B [ Post Comment ] |
|
Comment #2 posted by freddybigbee on April 05, 2002 at 06:38:56 PT:
|
| Yes, shock ads grab one's attention; for about five seconds. Once people tune those out, what next? Even more shocking ads? Perhaps images of people being exploded by land-mines or torn apart by canine-cop dogs would make them listen. Maybe someone will invent TVs that actually shock their viewers with 110 volts. Then the government could up the amperage if viewers didn't pay enough attention. For the Super Bowl, they could set the amperage at the maximum that household circuits will sustain. If that doesn't work, they could revise the building codes to increase the capacity, say up to 50 amps. Or maybe require 220 volts. Until drugs are legalized, removing law-enforcement and "justice" from the equation, rational stategies for minimizing harm will never prevail. Common sense, self-interest, and peer-pressure would moderate drug use in the absence of repressive forces. People used drugs before prohibition and after; it's human nature. It doesn't have to be a tens-of-billions of dollars per year problem. It's the prohibition, stupid! [ Post Comment ] |
| Comment #1 posted by goneposthole on April 05, 2002 at 06:30:16 PT |
| I don't think anybody really cares. That is the reality. [ Post Comment ] |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |