Viewpoint:
UK alcohol policy and market
research: media debates and
methodological differences
Chris Hackley
Over the past two decades, patterns of
alcohol consumption in the UK have
changed with a ‘culture of intoxication’
prevalent among rising numbers
of young people (Szmigin et al. 2007). The UK Government’s Safe, Sensible,
Social (2007) policy document argues
for a programme of research-based
initiatives and ‘social’ marketing campaigns
to change this culture by promoting ‘sensible’ drinking. Market,
consumer and social researchers have
an important role to play in this and
other key public policy debates but differences
of method and the priorities of media coverage may affect the policy
impact of findings.
My colleagues and I found that
while the level of media interest in
research is huge, coverage of findings
does not necessarily add clarity. Our
three-year project explored the identity
implications of alcohol marketing and
consumption for young people. We
analysed the marketing environment
for alcohol and then interviewed 106
individuals in the 18–24 age range in
three regions of the UK. We found that
drinking to intoxication had become
thoroughly normalised. Many of our
interviewees would relate ‘drinking
stories’, tales of extreme inebriation
on nights out with groups of friends. Getting drunk
seemed to deepen the
bonds of friendship within social
groups and enhanced the social standing
of the individual within the group
(Griffin et al. 2007).
On 10 December 2007 our research
received national coverage with some
uncompromising headlines contrasting
our findings with a ‘social’ marketing
campaign promoting responsible
drinking. A widely broadcast television
advertisement suggested that fear of
peer disapproval might dissuade young
people from drinking to excess. The
Daily Telegraph splashed ‘Anti-drink
adverts are “backfiring” and went on,‘Health campaigns highlighting the
consequences of drinking too much
could be failing because young people
take pride in their drunken exploits… advertisements that show someone
being thrown out of a nightclub, carried
home or passing out in a doorway
are often seen by young people as a
typical story of a fun night out, rather
than a cautionary tale’. The Times
headline was ‘Anti-drink campaign
aimed at the young is just wasted’. The
coverage, while colourful, accurately
reflected our view that the creative
proposition underlying the campaign
might not resonate favourably with
many young people.
The Guardian reported that the ‘illconceived… £3m campaign is funded
by Diageo’ who were quoted defending
their approach, saying: ‘We’re proud
of our adverts. They are strategically
sound [and] evidence based’. In appearances
on BBC Breakfast and BBC Five
Live I tried to explain our view, while
Diageo’s Marketing Director defended
their campaign. Diageo were responding
in good faith to calls for the drinks
manufacturers to be more proactive in
encouraging responsible drinking. They
felt strongly that the creative execution
of their campaign was based logically
on their own research findings.
Differences of opinion about the
implications of research for creative
strategy are by no means unknown in
the advertising business. Some agency
professionals feel that research makes
the creative work better: others argue
that it is irrelevant (Hackley 2003). The debate is often underpinned by
prejudices about method. Qualitative
methods such as ethnographies,
focus groups, observation and depth
interviews are often used in ‘creative’
research while surveys or quasiexperimental designs
are used in
copy-testing to measure the cognitive
or affective response of consumers to
particular executions. Generally speaking,
agency creative professionals tolerate
the former and despise the latter
(Hackley & Kover 2007). For many
account executives and clients, it’s the
other way around.
If research is a source of controversy
for commercial advertising, social
programmes present even more complex
challenges. The behaviours being
addressed are culturally primed, and,
at the extremes, can be compulsive
or addictive. Not only is the negative
message intrinsically unappealing, the
groups in need may be the most elusive
or resistant. Marketing programmes
to promote socially responsible behaviours
and attitudes cannot begin to
address consumption phenomena
which are not well understood. There
is a pressing need for research which
generates acute insights to underpin
effective communication programmes.
It is important for researchers to
engage in public debates on pressing
social issues but media forums can be
poor vehicles for picking apart nuances
in research design or interpretation. We hope that Diageo’s campaign has a
positive effect. There is no easy or onedimensional
solution to the UK’s alcohol
problem and initiatives from the
industry are to be welcomed. We have
arranged to discuss our respective studies
with Diageo’s representatives and no
doubt we will both learn more about
the ways in which differing research
designs might feed into alcohol policy
and social marketing initiatives. It may
be more difficult to work out the best
ways to engage through the media on
research and policy debates.
Acknowledgement
The research study referred to in this
article was funded by the Economic
and Social Research Council, ‘Branded
consumption and social identification:
Young people and alcohol’ (ESRC Ref:
RES-148-25-0021). Principal investigator:
Professor Christine Griffin, Psychology,
University of Bath; and: Professor
Isabelle Szmigin, The Business School,
University of Birmingham; Dr Willm
Mistral, Mental Health Research &
Development Unit, University of Bath;
Professor Chris
Hackley, Management,
Royal Holloway College, University
of London;
Research Assistant: Dr
Andrew Bengry-Howell, Psychology,
University of Bath.
References
BBC (2007) BBC Breakfast. BBC1,
10 December, 6.00.
BBC (2007) BBC Five Live News. BBC Radio 5, 10 December, 12.00.
Bennett, R. (2007) Anti-drink campaign
aimed at the young is just wasted. The Times, 10 December, p. 9.
Department of Health, Home Office,
Department for Education, Skills and
Department for Culture, Media and
Sport (2007) Safe. Sensible. Social. The
Next Steps in the National Alcohol
Strategy. London: HM Government.
Griffin, C., Szmigin, I., Hackley, C.,
Mistral, W. & Bengry-Howell, A. (2007)
Every time I do it I absolutely annihilate
myself: loss of (self)-consciousness
and loss of memory in young
people’s drinking narratives. Memory
and Narrative British Sociological
Association Annual Conference,
University of East London, 12–14 April.
Hackley, C. (2003) How divergent
beliefs cause account team conflict. International Journal of Advertising, 22,
3, pp. 313–331.
Hackley, C. & Kover, A. (2007) The trouble
with creatives: negotiating creative identity
in advertising agencies. International
Journal of Advertising, 26, 1, pp. 63–78.
Randerson, J. (2007) Anti-drink ad ‘not
effective’. The Guardian newspaper,
10 December. Retrieved from www.
guardian.co.uk/media/2007/dec/10/advertising.medicalresearch.
Szmigin, I., Griffin, C., Hackley, C., Mistral,
W., Bengry-Howell, A. & Weale, L. (2007) .
Re‑framing ‘binge drinking’ as calculated
hedonism – empirical evidence from
the UK. International Journal of Drug
Policy, 10.1016/j.drugpo.2007.08.009. Retrieved from www.sciencedirect.com.
Womack, S. (2007) Anti-drink adverts
are ‘backfiring’. The Daily Telegraph,
10 December. Retrieved from www.
telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1572044/Anti-drink-adverts-%27arebackfiring%27.html.
Chris Hackley is Professor of Marketing at
Royal Holloway, University of London.
His books include Doing Research
Projects in Marketing, Management
and Consumer Research (Routledge)
and Advertising and Promotion:
Communicating Brands (Sage). He is
currently writing a text on critical
marketing studies
for Sage.
International Journal of Market Research 50(4), 2008
|
