Partnership to End Addiction

In the mid-1980s, a small group of advertising professionals with wide–ranging experience on diverse campaigns, and working in conjunction with a nonprofit trade association called the American Association of Advertising Agencies, proposed a marketing campaign not to sell one more product or service, but rather to un-sell teenaged drug use. The group was formed officially in 1985.[3][8] Among the initial group was Los Angeles "ad guru" Phillip Joanou,[3] Thomas Hedrick,[3] Doria Steedman,[3] and Ginna Marston from the Ted Bates advertising agency. The group saw the merits of using a focused approach similar to that for a commercial product or service. In earlier decades, public service ads or PSAs had been shown by networks whenever it had been convenient for their schedules, regardless of the intended audience of the ad. Many PSAs aired late at night when most people had gone to sleep. In other situations, networks used PSAs as filler when slots opened up in their commercial lineup regardless of any consideration for reaching specific audiences. Marston urged, instead, a targeted focused anti-drug campaign similar to one for selling a specific brand of cereal or an automobile, but instead, the campaign would unsell drugs[9] or rather sell the benefits of not using drugs. Like a commercial campaign, the effort would conduct marketing research by studying teenagers and parents in depth using focus groups to understand their motivations, as well as conduct quantitative research using nationwide random-sample surveys as part of a recurring longitudinal investigation.

An anti cocaine advertisement the PDFA released in 1987.

Hedrick agreed that the group knew "next to nothing about illegal drugs and the youthful target audience for their ads," according to a report in the Los Angeles Times.[3] These realizations led to the creation of a "full-time and highly aggressive research staff" according to one report. The team reached out to knowledgeable activists such as Carole Fields-Arnold, who Marston later described as "one of those rare people who is street smart, and can be tough when needed, but also gets everyone to look up and see the light, dream a bigger dream than they thought they could and lock arms to reach for it together."[10] The organization was loosely modeled along the lines of a standard advertising agency, with a creative director post[11] and "account executives" to spearhead specific efforts. While the campaign approach was a radical departure from standard PSA approaches, the group was following a tried–and– true advertising strategy: research, choosing a marketing objective, writing advertisements to meet that objective, plus focused efforts to persuade that audience in chosen media at specific times. The intent was to change behavior by changing attitudes.[9] Further, the agency did continual reassessments: were attitudes changing? was drug use becoming less prominent? This feedback helped the group decide if goals were being met, and allowed them to change tactics accordingly. An account of the overall idea:

On Madison Avenue, it is still revered as one of the hottest marketing ideas of all time. Take the decision to buy and use heroin (or pot, or coke or any illegal drug) and treat it like any other purchasing choice. Liken potential addicts to a group of consumers whose buying habits can be manipulated by celebrity endorsements, catchy slogans, and powerful images. Then use those tricks not to sell the product, but to un-sell it. If the approach works, drugs will finally lose their cool.

— Reporter Pamela Warrick in the Los Angeles Times[3]

The Partnership was able to recruit top creative talent, such as actor and comedian Bill Cosby (left) and filmmaker Bobby Sheehan (taking this picture) to appear in PSAs against drug use. Partnership executive Ginna Marston (right) goes over script details while a production assistant looks on before shooting an anti-drug commercial in Astoria, Queens.
Photo by Bobby Sheehan

The agency found itself able to solicit help from many sources, for free. Copywriters often competed for assignments[3] on a pro bono basis.[3] The agency finagled free media exposure from print media and broadcast networks[3] including spots during prime time.[3] Later, when advertising was directed at inner-city youth, media was selected to target 37 large cities.[12] The organization has turned to media planning and placement experts who work, as well, on a pro bono basis.[4] One report suggested that there was a wealth of creative talent vying for a chance for assignments.[3] The group was prepared to feature rather risqué push–the–envelope ads; for example, one advertisement showed a girl with the "barrel of a revolver pushed up one nostril and a father singing a lullaby to his little daughter from his coffin."[3] Doria Steedman described the ads as neither pretty nor polite nor nice but designed deliberately to "disturb and upset."[3] A bandwagon effect happened soon thereafter: big advertising agencies including Saatchi & Saatchi, J. Walter Thompson, BBDO Worldwide joined the consortium. Key executives from The New York Times Company, Procter & Gamble, USA Network and others such as Daniel Burke of Capital Cities[13][14] sat on the Partnership's board of directors.[3]

The Partnership found office space on the 16th floor of the Chrysler Building in New York City.[3] By 1993, it had 30 employees, according to one estimate.[5] An early grant of $300,000 from the American Association of Advertising Agencies helped considerably to pay for rent, salaries, and other expenses,[3] and subsequent funds were provided by generous grants from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, a Princeton-based philanthropic organization focusing exclusively on health care and particularly substance use disorders. The foundation's founder, Robert Wood Johnson II, had built the family firm of Johnson & Johnson into an international health care products manufacturer, and he left the foundation a generous bequest of stock upon his death in 1968.[15] In addition to these revenue sources, the organization also holds fundraisers, including an annual awards dinner; in 2007, one awards dinner at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel raised $2.2 million.[16]

Analysis of research suggested that consumers decided about possibly doing drugs based on two basic considerations: the risk involved, and the perception of social disapproval.[3] And campaigns were targeted towards both mindsets: that using drugs was risky and that it was uncool among peer groups.

The Partnership used a simple advertisement showing an egg in a frying pan, similar to this photo, suggesting that the effect of drugs on a brain was like a hot pan on an egg.

The organization first entered the wider public consciousness in 1987,[9] with its This Is Your Brain on Drugs broadcast and print public service advertisements (PSAs).[17] The advertisement used the analogy that if a person's brain is an egg, then using illegal drugs would be like frying it.[17] This advertisement was shown repeatedly on broadcast media to the extent that it became a hallmark for the organization. Time magazine described the advertisement as "iconic".[17] It has been recognized by marketing professionals as "one of the most influential" ad campaigns in the history of marketing, according to numerous sources,[9][17] and has been applauded as one of the "most unforgettable images in modern American advertising."[3] TV Guide named it as one of the "top 100 ads of all time".[9] The ad became the organization's "calling card", according to one account.[3]

The ad had varyingly impactful effects on viewers. Student Taia Lubitz felt the "brain on drugs" commercial was not accurate, since she saw fellow students smoking marijuana whose brains were clearly not frying. She claimed that the ad "stirred her curiosity" and that the scare tactic was really more of a "dare" tactic.[9] Student Sepideh Modrek said that "The fried egg commercial really scared me when I was in high school. I remember picturing that egg in the frying pan and thinking that it wasn't worth it."[9]

The agency was able to solicit generous donations of free media time with an estimated worth of "$1 million worth of advertising every day" for more than a decade, totaling more than $2 billion in free space and time, according to one estimate.[3] Copywriters from big-city agencies in Los Angeles, Chicago, New York and elsewhere from "250 big-name ad agencies" contributed their creative expertise.[3]

The Partnership sought to de-glamorize drugs by showing real people doing real drugs, such as this photo of a woman smoking crack.

The agency coordinated efforts with government officials in their efforts to stem illegal drugs. However, the relationship between the Partnership and the federal government was sometimes marked by disagreements. In 2002, the White House director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, John P. Walters, questioned whether the Partnership's campaigns were lessening the use of illegal drugs.[18] Partnership chairman James E. Burke argued before a Senate subcommittee for better targeting of funds for media purchases.[19] Burke complained of improper interpretations of survey data as well as the federal government shifting $50 million away from vital media purchases.[19] Burke called for simplicity and focus:

The resulting campaign is far too complex, calling as it does for the lockstep shuttling in and out, at 6 to 8 week intervals, of TV, radio, print, outdoor and interactive messages in multiple languages against 36 different strategies aimed at eleven different targets.

— James E. Burke, to a Senate subcommittee, 2002[19]

The Partnership holds a special position under law within the National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.[20][21] It cooperates with government agencies in many initiatives to try to help reduce drug use. In 2010, it worked with the Drug Enforcement Administration in 2010 on a public relations event entitled "National Prescription Drug Take-Back Day."[22] The event involved 4,000 so-called "drop spots" for people to discard extra prescription drugs as a way to lessen the temptation for their misuse.[22]

In 1989, Johnson & Johnson chief executive James E. Burke took over leadership of the organization.[18] Burke held a reputation for having high ethical standards.[23]

The Partnership has tracked public attitudes towards drugs such as marijuana.

In 1992, the Partnership switched focus to targeting inner-city youth, where the drug problem had been more severe, and ran a campaign led by Ginna Marston.[24] Research suggested most children felt "nearly alone in their hostility toward drugs," so an effort was made to show them that they were not alone.[24] In one television commercial, a camera zooms in and out on two adolescents, one of whom is trying to get the other to try marijuana. The tagline then reads: "A friend who offers you drugs is not your friend."[24] It was a "strikingly different tack" from the milder Just Say No campaign championed by previous first lady Nancy Reagan.[8] Commercials written by a former Wieden & Kennedy copywriter were "infused with menace and melodrama" according to one report.[8] Some spots by a Goodby, Berlin & Silverstein copy team hinted that the earlier Just Say No had been simplistic.[12] Marston explained the utility of depicting young people "resisting drugs in real situations":[24]

The new campaign addresses kids' feelings and their sense of emotional isolation on this issue. ... The problem is not drugs, but an attitude of hopelessness ... They start to feel they don't count, they don't matter. They feel bad about themselves and give up on themselves; those are the ones who get into drugs ... It's not to kill time, as happens in the general market ... but to kill pain.

— Ginna Marston, 1992, PDFA campaign director.[12][24]

The organization picked up real-life stories about the effects of drug use and used these stories at times in its commercials. For example, a 28-year-old former drug user met for lunch with the Partnership's Doria Steedman, and at one point "pulled out her [false] teeth" to show the ravages of the drug use; this idea was used in a subsequent commercial.[3]

In 1994, an independent assessment from the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine suggested that the anti-drug campaign was having a measurable "deterrence effect" on American adolescents:

No one presumes advertising is going to stop all drug abuse in America ... Using the idea that attitudes change behavior and using the best ad minds to denormalize drug use, they have sent a very strong message over the years, and their work is a very important component in the national effort to reduce drug use."

— Chris Policano, spokesman for Phoenix House, in 1994[3]

Research efforts suggested that a key metric for the agency was getting preteens and teenagers to wait longer and longer before having their "first taste of drugs" since the longer wait period meant that it became less and less likely that a child would become a regular drug user.[3]

Two members of the pop music ensemble The Smashing Pumpkins suffered from a heroin overdose which proved fatal for keyboardist Jonathan Melvoin in 1996. Photo: the group in 2007.

In 1996, Partnership director Ginna Marston noticed, after examining survey data, trends indicating that not just teenagers, but preteens were showing greater smoking of marijuana and that the problem could no longer be viewed as a "teenage problem only."[25] At a press conference, Marston told reporters of a new media blitz aimed at "getting parents involved in the war against drugs.[25] Survey data showed marijuana use had gone from 230,000 children in 1995 to 460,000 children in 1996, according to the report.[25] In addition, there continued to be high-profile deaths of celebrities who had overdosed, such as Jonathan Melvoin of the group The Smashing Pumpkins, which put pressure on the music industry to take a serious look at drug influence in pop music.[26]

The Partnership turned images of glamour upside down by juxtaposing the illusory world of drugs versus the reality:

Glamorous parties, a night on the town.

With beautiful people, it's always around!
Everybody's doin' it, doin' it. ...

Her-o-in! For the rest of your life!

Television jingle accompanying black-and-white footage of a grimy boy twitching and retching into a filthy toilet[3]

Since the agency had been tracking usage and attitudes, it adapted to changing circumstances. Marston and other executives adjusted their media strategy accordingly as fast-moving trends made one drug "hot" while others fell out of favor.[3] The campaign was primarily oriented towards television and print media.[27] An analysis of the Partnership's efforts by Forbes magazine around this time suggested that it had earned "a single-brand advertising clout" comparable to McDonald's while noting that the fast-food franchisor outspent the Partnership by a ratio of "2 to 1."[3]

General Barry McCaffrey in 1994.

The Partnership coordinated efforts with Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey, a retired general who was the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy, in targeting efforts against heroin. McCaffrey endorsed the Partnership's campaigns and spoke at their news conferences.[3] Later, it worked with state alliance programs. [12]

In 1998, Marston noticed how game maker Fox Interactive had marketed its game N2O as being the "ultimate rush" and how game designers had used "the music and images of the drug-infused rave scene to appeal to hip consumers", according to one report.[28] Marston criticized the blatant approach:

... just one example of the kind of stuff that we see all over now, especially on the Internet – information that glamorizes drugs and exploits the language and imagery of drug culture.

— Ginna Marston, 1998[28]

During these years, it was a continuing effort to persuade media sources to provide the best spots and airtime. Newspapers such as the New York Times and Washington Post had generously given prime full-page spots for their ads, but "few other papers have been so generous", according to one account.[3]

Filmmaker Robert Zemeckis in 1997.

The Partnership got some help from the pop culture movie industry. In 1999, filmmaker Robert Zemeckis made a documentary entitled The Pursuit of Happiness: Smoking, Drinking and Drugging in the 20th Century which made an in-depth examination of the problem of drug use, covering 100 years and interviewing professionals and historians.[29] Zemeckis included Marston in the documentary film.[30] The film suggested, among other things, that "American society has habitually criminalized the substances used primarily by minorities" such as opium for Asian immigrants and marijuana and cocaine for African-Americans while legalizing those of white adults such as beer, alcohol and tobacco.[30] In addition, the documentary suggested that the 1920–1933 alcohol prohibition was a result of entrepreneurs such as Henry Ford needing sober assembly line workers.[30] Marston commented later in the New York Times:

Considering that it wasn't intended to be an antidrug piece, but a comprehensive and sophisticated treatment of a very complex issue, I thought it was great.

— Ginna Marston, 1999[30]

Lauryn Hill in 2005.

The firm continued its efforts to make drug use look uncool, in part by getting celebrities to help them break the "age-old stereotype of sex, drugs, rock-'n'- roll going together with everything cool", according to Marston commenting on CNN.[31] Celebrities such as Lauryn Hill and the Dixie Chicks came forward to say they're "drug-free".[31]

In 2002, Burke retired as chairman, and was replaced by Roy J. Bostock.[18]

Tracking research showed a decline in usage of alcohol and cigarettes, and that use of the club drug ecstasy had declined among teens.[32] The Partnership had been tracking ecstasy use since 1996, and found that 52% of students were aware of the dangers associated with its use as compared to 46% from the year before.[32] Marston said:

You still have way too many kids using a drug that could kill them.

— Ginna Marston, 2002[32]

In the mid-2000s, the Partnership gradually shifted away from de-emphasizing the perils of marijuana and focused more on targets such as prescription drugs, possibly responding to a shift of emphasis by the U.S. government, the growing cultural acceptance and push for legalization of marijuana as well as possible indications of declining marijuana usage by teens.[33] Reporter Elizabeth Sprague of CBS News noticed that the Partnership had not produced a single anti-marijuana PSA since 2005.[33] In a conflicting report in 2011, a study suggested that there were "sharp increases in the use of marijuana" as well as ecstasy after "years of declining use."[34] The "frying pan" ad was described as a "relic" in one report, although New York Sun reporter Amanda Gordon noted that the organization gives gold-plated frying pan awards (mounted under glass) at fundraisers.[35] By 2007, the agency had produced over 3,000 spots from 1985 to 2007.[35]

In 2010, the organization changed its name from Partnership for a Drug-Free America to Partnership at Drugfree.org, possibly as a result of increased emphasis on websites and Internet appeals.[36]

There are reports of misuse of unused or improperly used prescription medications.

In 2011, a study found that marijuana use was increasing, as well as the use of ecstasy and found that 45% of teenagers did not think drinking alcohol was "a big deal."[37][38] The Partnership was focusing more on teenagers' misuse of prescription drugs; one study they did suggested that on any given day, 2,500 American teens get high for the first time by using prescription medication.[39] The group was part of a campaign known as National Prescription Drug Take Back Day which encouraged residents to dispose of their old prescription drugs to nearby city halls or police departments.[39] Partnership executive Sean Clarkin suggests that parents sit down with their teens and ask "what's going on" as a possible beginning of a conversation.[40] There was one report that the Partnership will be reducing its commitment to broadcast media in favor of an approach of reaching out to parents,[41] particularly via the Internet, which increased from 10% of its budget to 31% for 2010.[4] It has focused on web efforts such as the site "Time to Talk" (timetotalk.org), and is exploring the possibility of advertising on cell phones and possibly in video games.[4] The drugfree.org website, according to one source, attracts a million visitors each month.[4] The agency is making a $55 million three-year commitment with cable operator Comcast including its "Time to Talk" campaign.[4] There was a report that it will sponsor a toll-free hotline.[35]