http://money.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2002/02/19/ccdom19.xml&sSheet=/money/2002/02/19/ixcoms.html

 

Huge budget needed to get jab point over
(Filed: 19/02/2002)

IT'S not a fact that the Government likes to be reminded of, but these days it is Britain's biggest single advertiser.

Of course, you might think that is inevitable when its reaction to every difficulty is to open the various departmental piggy banks and spend millions on explaining itself. Still, all this advertising surely makes ministers feel as though they're doing something.

That's one conclusion to be drawn from the news that the Department of Health is considering a TV, press and radio campaign to persuade parents that the MMR vaccine is safe.

If they are to go ahead, they ought to get on with it. Given the extent of the debate about MMR, every day they delay makes the task more difficult. On this basis, they shouldn't stint on the media budgets either.

Blanket coverage of the country is essential and the £3m figure bandied about is probably the very least necessary. It isn't just parents of young children who need to be reached but grandparents and opinion formers in the media - anyone parents will turn to for advice. That necessitates a broad-brush campaign.

The opposition parties will no doubt claim this is a political campaign and therefore cannot be funded by the taxpayer. The Government will respond by saying it is a public health issue. Both are right. MMR is a public health issue but by its dithering the Government has made it into a political test as well.

All that will be picked over by Parliament. Meanwhile, the real issue remains: can advertising persuade increasingly sceptical parents that MMR is safe? It's unlikely. Advertising is not a blunt instrument. It works best when it tries to shift attitudes and opinions over time, not when it tries to reverse them instantaneously.

There are times when, whatever the logic of the case - and it's hard to see what else the advertising can be based on - the emotional arguments against are overwhelming. That's why the airlines pulled all their advertising in the aftermath of September 11. On occasions like these, it's better to stop the ads and let the debate run its course.

At the moment, the argument is going against MMR. Across the country first-stage inoculation take-up is below 85pc and in one London health authority it's just 65pc. Take-up of the critical booster jab is also in decline, suggesting that parents who may have swallowed their fears before are now having second thoughts.

According to figures for July to September last year, 73.4pc of under-fives had the booster, compared with 74.2pc the year before. That's the measure of the task.

Remember too that the Government spent some £3m last year on advertising MMR - so, as the figures indicate, the message isn't getting home. It took the Department of Transport 20 years of often-brilliant advertising to change public attitudes to drink-driving.

The way the public view of MMR is going, the Department of Health will have to think similarly long term. Somehow, you can't imagine them sanctioning that kind of advertising budget for MMR.

·  Dominic Mills is editorial director of Campaign and Marketing. Email: dominic.mills@haynet.com

12 February 2002[News]: MMR adverts are a waste, say autism groups

23 January 2001[News]: Campaign to persuade parents that the MMR jab is safe

 

ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE.  THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.