際際滷

際際滷Share a Scribd company logo

Think Before You Speak-A Social Marketing Case Study

Download as PPTX, PDF
Hsiao Han Hung
Hsiao Han Hung

The document summarizes a social marketing campaign called "Think Before You Speak" created by GLSEN to address anti-LGBT language among teenagers. The campaign aims to (1) raise awareness of how anti-LGBT language harms LGBT students, (2) increase belief that such language is harmful, and (3) reduce use of homophobic language. It targets teenagers who use anti-LGBT language as well as their peers and parents/educators who can influence them. Promotion methods include TV, print, radio, and online ads on the campaign website and social media to encourage teenagers to sign an online pledge to avoid such language.

1 of 24
Download to read offline
Think B4 You Speak A Social Marketing Case Suhyun Kim, Penny Wang, Amy Hung
Thats sogay
Background The GLSENs National School Climate Survey in 2007 9 out of 10 LGBT students reported being harassed at school 70% of LGBT students heard homophobic language: faggot dyke 90% of LGBT students heard the word gay used in a negative context frequently at school. LGBT students suffer from both emotional and academic problems: low self-esteem, loneliness, depression, poor academic achievement, and high rates of truancy. * LGBT = Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender * GLSEN = Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
Purpose & Focus The leading national education organization, focused on ensuring safe schools for all students In 2008, GLSEN developed a social marketing plan Think Before You Speak Campaign A Purpose to decrease the use of homophobic language with a focus on raising awareness about this issue and reducing the use of anti-LGBT language among teenagers.
SWOT Analysis Strengths Supports by many multinational companies (AT&T, CBS Television Network, Fox TV, IBM, Sony Picture) Multiple campaigns every year through grants Weaknesses The nature of the cause itself (emotional issue) The lack of tangible products or positive reinforcement Difficulty to measure the effectiveness of the campaign
SWOT Analysis (cont) Threats The disagreement with educating people about LGBT issues from some family members, media, churches, or communities The idea of heterosexual relationship in America Opportunities Positive attitude of government, society and many other organizations Dont ask, dont tell policy repealed by the government Same-sex marriage ( Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington D,C.)
Target Market The primary targets The teenagers who conduct either intentional or accidental harassment (verbal or physical) to LGBT students The secondary targets The rest of the students The third targets The parents and educators who have the ability to influence teenagers behaviors.
Marketing Objectives 1. To raise awareness among straight teenagers about the seriousness of anti-LGBT language bias and behavior 2. To raise the belief of anti-LGBT language is harmful among straight teenagers 3. To reduce and prevent the use of homophobic language 4. To gain supports from adults (school personnel and parents) To provide a safe environment for all members in the community regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression
Target Market Barriers Individual barriers The lack of knowledge for language harassment Low sense of responsibility for what they say Negative social interactions tend to have more potent effects on individuals self-esteem Environmental & cultural barriers School, media, parents and peers Resistance and opposition from various parties
Target Market Benefits Perceived benefits Avoid shameful feelings Raise self-esteem on taking responsibility of what they say
Competition Media Peers Parents Any sources that will influence teens language or attitude toward LGBT students
Product Core product To avoid shameful feeling by not saying homophobic language To be responsible for what they say Actual product To decrease the use of homophobic language at school and in public Augmented product Interactive official website Educators guide
Price Monetary cost None Non-Monetary disincentive To shame the target audiences into using anti- LGBT language
Place At school In the public Through Internet, such as social network sites
Promotion TV commercial Print Ads Radio Internet Official interactive website Sign the pledge Share the story &video Send E-card Social network sites
Back
Back
Back
Think Before You Speak-A Social Marketing Case Study
Promotion (contd) Internet Official interactive website Sign the pledge Share the story & video Send E-card Social network sites . Real-time counting on Twitter
Partnership Ad council Donate media model media company including MTV donate space and advertising time ArnoldNYC ads agency Donate ads run in the campaign Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) and Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) Facilitate the education process
Evaluation 90% 86.2% 84.6% 85% 80% 75% 73.6% 72.4% 70% 2007 65% 2009 LGBT students LGBT students heard reported being verbally derogatory remarks harassedory such as "faggot" or "dyke" frequently or often at school *Based on National Climate Survey conducted in middle and high school
Evaluation 50% 44.1% 45% 40.1% 40% 35% 30% 22.1% 25% 18.8% 20% 15% 10% 5% 2007 0% 2009 LGBT students LGBT students reported being reported being physically harassed physically assaulted at school in the past year because of their sexual orientation. *Based on National Climate Survey conducted in middle and high school
Thank you

More Related Content

Think Before You Speak-A Social Marketing Case Study

  • 1. Think B4 You Speak A Social Marketing Case Suhyun Kim, Penny Wang, Amy Hung
  • 3. Background The GLSENs National School Climate Survey in 2007 9 out of 10 LGBT students reported being harassed at school 70% of LGBT students heard homophobic language: faggot dyke 90% of LGBT students heard the word gay used in a negative context frequently at school. LGBT students suffer from both emotional and academic problems: low self-esteem, loneliness, depression, poor academic achievement, and high rates of truancy. * LGBT = Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender * GLSEN = Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network
  • 4. Purpose & Focus The leading national education organization, focused on ensuring safe schools for all students In 2008, GLSEN developed a social marketing plan Think Before You Speak Campaign A Purpose to decrease the use of homophobic language with a focus on raising awareness about this issue and reducing the use of anti-LGBT language among teenagers.
  • 5. SWOT Analysis Strengths Supports by many multinational companies (AT&T, CBS Television Network, Fox TV, IBM, Sony Picture) Multiple campaigns every year through grants Weaknesses The nature of the cause itself (emotional issue) The lack of tangible products or positive reinforcement Difficulty to measure the effectiveness of the campaign
  • 6. SWOT Analysis (cont) Threats The disagreement with educating people about LGBT issues from some family members, media, churches, or communities The idea of heterosexual relationship in America Opportunities Positive attitude of government, society and many other organizations Dont ask, dont tell policy repealed by the government Same-sex marriage ( Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, New Hampshire, Vermont, and Washington D,C.)
  • 7. Target Market The primary targets The teenagers who conduct either intentional or accidental harassment (verbal or physical) to LGBT students The secondary targets The rest of the students The third targets The parents and educators who have the ability to influence teenagers behaviors.
  • 8. Marketing Objectives 1. To raise awareness among straight teenagers about the seriousness of anti-LGBT language bias and behavior 2. To raise the belief of anti-LGBT language is harmful among straight teenagers 3. To reduce and prevent the use of homophobic language 4. To gain supports from adults (school personnel and parents) To provide a safe environment for all members in the community regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity/expression
  • 9. Target Market Barriers Individual barriers The lack of knowledge for language harassment Low sense of responsibility for what they say Negative social interactions tend to have more potent effects on individuals self-esteem Environmental & cultural barriers School, media, parents and peers Resistance and opposition from various parties
  • 10. Target Market Benefits Perceived benefits Avoid shameful feelings Raise self-esteem on taking responsibility of what they say
  • 11. Competition Media Peers Parents Any sources that will influence teens language or attitude toward LGBT students
  • 12. Product Core product To avoid shameful feeling by not saying homophobic language To be responsible for what they say Actual product To decrease the use of homophobic language at school and in public Augmented product Interactive official website Educators guide
  • 13. Price Monetary cost None Non-Monetary disincentive To shame the target audiences into using anti- LGBT language
  • 14. Place At school In the public Through Internet, such as social network sites
  • 15. Promotion TV commercial Print Ads Radio Internet Official interactive website Sign the pledge Share the story &video Send E-card Social network sites
  • 16. Back
  • 17. Back
  • 18. Back
  • 20. Promotion (contd) Internet Official interactive website Sign the pledge Share the story & video Send E-card Social network sites . Real-time counting on Twitter
  • 21. Partnership Ad council Donate media model media company including MTV donate space and advertising time ArnoldNYC ads agency Donate ads run in the campaign Gay-Straight Alliances (GSAs) and Students Against Destructive Decisions (SADD) Facilitate the education process
  • 22. Evaluation 90% 86.2% 84.6% 85% 80% 75% 73.6% 72.4% 70% 2007 65% 2009 LGBT students LGBT students heard reported being verbally derogatory remarks harassedory such as "faggot" or "dyke" frequently or often at school *Based on National Climate Survey conducted in middle and high school
  • 23. Evaluation 50% 44.1% 45% 40.1% 40% 35% 30% 22.1% 25% 18.8% 20% 15% 10% 5% 2007 0% 2009 LGBT students LGBT students reported being reported being physically harassed physically assaulted at school in the past year because of their sexual orientation. *Based on National Climate Survey conducted in middle and high school