My health campaign focused on the danger of distracted driving, with a particular emphasis on phone use while driving. My target audience was teenagers from around sixteen to young adults. The overall success of my campaign, based on the print ad and the six-sided brochure, could be analyzed from different angles. The issue of phone use while driving has been a difficult problem to resolve for many years. The information I had to present was neither groundbreaking nor brand new. The problem has become worse and more widespread in recent years, with the introduction of the smartphone. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why violent video games should not be banned”? Get an original essay The topic itself has also been discussed many times, whether in campaigns offered by major brands or targeting students in class on an education level. The major problem is the immunity teens and young adults feel when texting and driving. This is the mindset that my health campaign aimed to address. However, I believe that the campaign, if actually broadcast, would produce very little, if any, behavioral change. I would like to further analyze this claim using various models and theories that we have learned in this course, illustrating my predictions about the successes and failures of the campaign. It's important to first recognize that a small percentage of my target audience will actually take the messages to heart. Few teenagers or young adults would pick up a pamphlet on texting and driving, and even fewer would read the entire title when they come across such a pamphlet. Not to mention the fact that today, campaigns are much more successful when they are broadcast in more accessible ways, such as on television or the Internet. Taking this into account, it is likely that those in my target audience who read and read the brochure would at least like to be informed on the subject. Print advertising may also not be taken very seriously; quite simply because anti-texting and anti-driving campaigns are widespread. Almost everyone has seen at least one advertisement for such a campaign and is accustomed to seeing messages warning of dangers. It is also important to consider the size of the campaign's effect. This is why I mainly chose not to use fear, as the majority of people have become almost immune to this type of advertising. These campaigns and videos leave their audience with a pit in their stomach, but that feeling doesn't last long. A person may avoid distracted driving for perhaps a week or a month after watching the fear video, but it usually doesn't last much longer than that. When high school students take driver education, they are exposed to a tremendous amount of devastating statistics regarding deaths and injuries due to distracted driving. They are also shown these videos, staged or real, in which people are killed or injured due to distracted driving. The immediate effect of this type of persuasion is strong. After being informed of the serious and real danger, many students vow to never text or drive. Yet, years later, they usually end up doing it. Why does this happen? The effects of persuasion, however strong they may be during their initial impact, are not sustainable for this type of issue. It istoo bad, but it's true for a majority of my target audience. With my printed advertising image, I hoped to overcome this problem by approaching the central image differently. Rather than focus on a direct fear, I chose to create an image featuring the perspective of a windshield, with various phone notification icons blocking the view. I tried to create a sort of charged image, one that draws attention to the fact that using the phone while driving actually impairs your ability to focus on the road in front of you. By doing this, and using familiar images, I hoped to create something that people would remember the next time they are behind the wheel and think about reaching for their phone. I hoped it would make them think twice about the extent to which their phone activity blocks their vision of the road and hinders their ability to drive. If I had the opportunity to make this ad the way I wanted, I would have used a much more professional image with the same motif. I originally wanted the windshield to reveal an accident about to happen, with a bunch of text bubbles appearing in the driver's view, much like the icons are displayed in the image I I used. Despite the attempt to be unique, I don't think the print ad or brochure would have produced a major behavioral change for my target audience. As Charles Atkins explained, the percentage of people reached by health campaigns is very small, and even at that low percentage the change is minimal. An internal factor I was aiming for was a sort of appeal to needs. When you look at the image of a cluttered windshield, it should make you nervous or anxious. The idea of ​​things blocking your view should stress you out. I think the image itself would create appeal to my target audience when they see the image because to drive you need to have a clear view of the road and concentrate on what you are doing. As a whole, the campaign doesn't really address a call for need, as those who already text and drive feel they don't need to change. They are set in their ways and probably don't see a problem to solve. When creating a health campaign, it is always important to be wary of possible boomerang effects. A possible boomerang effect of my campaign could be teenagers' willingness to break the rules. Teenagers who are just starting to drive are at a stage in their lives where their friends may start to pressure them, and it may seem cool to do the wrong thing. Seeing an ad that calls texting and driving dangerous may cause a teen to start doing the act more, just to spite the message and to prove they can handle it. An example from my advertising that might explain this further is the phrase "You're not the exception", as teenagers may feel really capable of multitasking while driving, making them the exception to this problem. I do, however, feel that a successful part of my booklet, and coincidentally the last thing I added, is Liz's story. I initially listed some surprising statistics about texting and driving in place of an actual testimony. I found this approach less meaningful to my target audience. Statistics don't mean much to a teenager, even if they talk about deaths and injuries, but real-life images of a young girl affected by an accident can be powerful. I involved identification as a way to get teens and young adults to connect with Liz and her story. She was only onenormal high school student when her car accident happened. Teenagers can relate to this because many of them start driving while still in high school. The focal point of his inclusion in the brochure is the damage done to his face after the accident. This type of damage will change a person's life forever. I also stated that she has become blind in one eye, lost some of her hearing and sense of smell, and requires medication to produce tears and fall asleep. This is the most touching part of the entire campaign. Teens and young adults are often exposed to messages warning against texting and driving, but few of these messages delve into what can actually happen to you if you are involved in a car accident. I think using expressive language like this is important to properly illustrate a situation to an audience. The juxtaposition between his pre-accident photo and the post-accident photos definitely adds to the gravity of the situation. The likelihood of peripheral processing, as opposed to central processing, is a determining factor in whether a campaign is successful or not. Although the inside section of my brochure could be effective if applied to the public, it may not be seen by those who quickly skim over my print advertisement and brochure cover. My print ad may have a slightly higher chance of catching a peripheral processor due to the unique image. However, this image may also prevent people from centralized processing because it is an intentionally noisy image. This might seem boring and cause someone to not read the ad itself. The text in my print ad is also quite small, making it impossible to turn a peripheral processor into a central processor. The action step is a good place for a peripheral processor to grab it, but it's a bit long. Additionally, the last line, “You are not the exception,” seems out of place without much context. This, read as a secondary title, could also lead to confusion. As for my brochure, with the same big titles, the cover does nothing to attract the attention of a peripheral processor. To avoid looking too busy, I took the print ad image from the windshield and removed all the icons. Ultimately, I knew it wasn't the best decision as an ad creator, but I wanted to keep the same theme throughout my campaign. I think the inside part of the pamphlet could potentially be life-changing for a teen who reads Liz's story, but there's a good chance a teen wouldn't choose to pick up this specific pamphlet based on the cover and the main image. For the strength of the design, I could have improved the colors and formatting of my ads. The black background works for the brochure, but the text formatting doesn't look very professional. The print advertisement used a white background, with black text and a black border, while the brochure had a black background with white text and a white border, establishing thematic unity. They also have the same general central image. The ads seem uniform, but could have been improved. The flow of my print ad could have been corrected by reducing the image size. The action step is well placed and stands out as the main title, but the image would make the reader stop and focus on it for far too long. It takes up almost half the page and dominates the important text at the bottom. In my brochure, I should have used a.