Creating and Framing the Agenda Social Marketing in the 21ST Century

Creating and Framing the Agenda Identify the problems “It is important to understand how issues go from being objective data to be coming social problems and then being subject to intervention efforts by society”. This process is call agenda setting, or agenda building. ( Berkowitz & Adams, 1990)

Three types of agendas dictate how any society addresses social problems (Soroka,2002) 1. The Public Agenda * This comprises the general public’s perceptions of what is important. * It is typically reflected in polls by organizations with leaders interested on a specific social problem. * It can be seen in chatrooms or “blogs” (Web logs), “cyber advocacy” .

Three types of agendas dictate how any society addresses social problems (Soroka,2002) 2. The Media Agenda * The news papers are writing about. * The television networks covering. * The talk shows emphasizing .

Three types of agendas dictate how any society addresses social problems (Soroka,2002) 3. The Policy Agenda * It is heavily influenced by political perspectives. * Views of political leaders. * Positions taken by political parties. * Input from consultants, lobbyists, think tanks, and government bureaucrats.

The Three Agendas Obviously Interact Lobbyist seeking to influence The Media Agenda and Public Agenda (People to pay more attention to the problem or advocating a particular solution) Important influence (signal legislators about what their constituents seem to want and what they do not want) Policy (Political) Agenda (To take action about something they believe to be important)

The Three Agendas Obviously Interact Other ways in which the Public and Political agendas interact is: * Advocacy organizations with large memberships. For example, National Rifle Association (NRA). It is important to understand The Public Agenda is ultimately the most critical in sustaining an issue and leading to some attention to desired outcomes. The Media Agenda helps to galvanize interest, shape the debate, and carry messages among interested parties. The Policy agenda often progresses parallel to the Public agenda because if the ultimate outcome is mainly a political decision, consequently the Public agenda dominates.

Public Polls Versus Public Knowledge Public Opinion Public Judgment Results when individuals have thought through the issues, understood the action alternatives, and considered the personal sacrifices and other implications of the choices that might be made. It Is more emphasis on the normative, valuing, ethical side of questions than on the factual, informational side. It is the result of an evaluation of issues in terms of personal relevance. Are often taken by politicians and the media as the definitive measure of the public agenda. It is used as a guide for social action, one should recognize several things. It is relatively superficial, and not grounded in any sense of personal responsibility. It is not the same as expert opinion.

Stages in the Agenda-Setting Process Yankelovich (1992) Dawning Awareness. The public first becomes alerted to a potential social problem and perhaps some suggested solution. Greater Urgency. The public sees some personal implications and are ready to consider some responses. Discovering the Choices. The experts and “policy wonks” working on ideas about how to handle the problem. Wishful Thinking. Politicians and other experts may be deluded into thinking that the public is ready for action . 5. Weighing Choices. Concrete benefits and costs of the choices. The public finally becomes engaged. 6. Taking a Stand Intellectually. Mental acceptance of one course of action by the public. This does not mean that the action is accepted yet emotionally. Making a Responsible Judgment Morally and Emotionally. It requires people to reconcile inconsistencies, consider relevant facts and new realities, and grasp the full consequences of choices, and additionally confront their own ambivalent feelings according to reality .

Rogers, Dearing, and Chang (1991) Anthony Downs (1972) The Problem Stage. Problems may well exist for some time before the public becomes interested. Alarmed Discovery and Euphoric Enthusiasm. The issue is “discovered” and exist inherent optimism and belief that any problem can be fixed. (Wishful Thinking stage 4 /Yankelovich). Realizing the Cost of Significant Progress. The populations comes to believe that major problems will take a lot of money to solve, major restructuring, or serious individual or public sacrifices. (Weighing the Choices stage 5 /Yankelovich). 4. Gradual Decline of Intense Public Interest. Some people will get discouraged. Some will feel threatened by the solutions and so stop talking about the problem and hope it will go away. Others just get bored. 5. The Postproblem Stage. Neglect does not mean that the problem has disappeared or that people are not working on it. It is just that the public has moved on to other topics. The Initial Era. During which there was little attention paid to the issue. 2. The Science Era. During more attention was paid to assembling the facts around the issue. 3. The Human Era. During which the issue was personalized with interesting cases and stories. 4. The Political Era. During which the focus became what action was going to be taken to address the problem.

Stages in the Life Cycle of a Social Change Issue Choosing courses of action. This is where debate takes place over the benefits and cost that action and inaction will have on society, victims, and those who have to take action if there is to be a solution. (Donate money, pass laws) Launching initial interventions. Foundations or government agencies put money into programs. Social marketing can play a major role. Reassessing and redirecting efforts. The outcome may be a reorientation and resurgence of interventions or it may not. Achieving success, failure, or neglect. After number of years, the problem will have found some major solutions or will have proven basically intractable and, in the absence of dramatic progress or new data, will “drop off the radar screen”. Inattention to the Problem. The social problem exist (evidenced by data, dramatics anecdotes), but it has not yet become anyone’s concern. Discovery of the Problem. The Problem comes attention of individuals or groups. Including the media. Climbing the Agenda. Activists, advocacy groups, individual politicians, investigative reporters, and nonfiction writers raise the volume on the issue. Outlining the Choices. Analysts and advocates look at the data and consider how the problem might be addressed.

Disjunctions and Distortions in the Agenda-Setting Process Distortions also occur because some social change issues are more controversial than others. Breast cancer is the number one cause of death in women. The reality is that the number or killer of women is cardiovascular disease (12 times). Lung cancer is a worse cancer problem for women, killing almost 60% more women than breath cancer in 2000( American Heart Association,2005a).

Framing Social Problems A frame is a context offered for interpreting a set of data. Different people will interpret the same set of fact - frame them- in different ways. Gun control or Gun safety. “A woman’s right to choose” or “ Protecting the rights of the unborn”. Partial birth abortion or Late-term abortion. Urban sprawl or Urban growth. Climate change or Global warming.

Objectivists Versus Constructivists Objectivist argue that social problems are real and concrete. Constructivist argue the humans generate knowledge and meaning from an interaction between their experiences and ideas.

Social Marketing and Social Agendas A social problem can hold high or low status: the media agenda, the public agenda, and the policy agenda. The three agendas influence each other in complex ways and inevitably need some level of congruence for a mandate for action to emerge. Social marketers can assist those who seek movement in any of these realms by * Identifying key target audiences, * Understanding what motivates them to action, and * Influencing actions that keep them working synergistically.

SMILES WITHOUT LIMITATIONS 1. Inattention to the Problem 2. Discovering the Problem 3. Climbing the agenda & Consider how the problem might be addressed.

SMILES WITHOUT LIMITATIONS 4. Choosing courses of action and launching initial interventions.

Creating and Framing the Agenda Social Marketing in the 21ST Century Thank you !