Clearly you haven't. I'll give you a hint. Check out post number 37. That's the post that RCS finds difficult
They still have to be willing to work with and in the system.
Who? The sufferers? I don't know how it works in the military (compulsory courses on mental health and how to identify PTSD, posters in mess halls, booklets, pamphlets or other advertizing?), but in the civilian world, it is poorly done. Many have heard of mental illness and mental health services, but how well do they understand it?
As an example, let's say I'm an alcoholic and see an ad concerning mental health services. Will I understand that addiction is a mental health problem or will I believe it to be an unrelated problem?
If I believe it to be separate, then I won't seek help believing that a mental health professional can't help with addiction.
Now if I see an ad for addiction therapy, that might attract me. But again, let's say I'm poor and am under the false impression that I must pay for the service. This means that the ad might need to make its prices clear somehow.
Or let's say I suffer sex addiction but am unfamiliar with the term and so while self-identifying my behaviour as compulsive, I somehow fail to recognize that I've just defined an addiction, and so erroneously conclude since whatever I'm suffering is not an addiction, an addiction therapist can't help me with my problem.
A good example that I'd seen was an ad for gambling addiction. It addressed gambling addiction specifically and explicitly and provided a website for further information.
Any gambling addict would understand that it addresses him directly. Though a mental health professional will understand that all addictions, both chemical and behavioural, are all forms of the same problem or, more precisely, symptoms of a common mental illness (PTSD, BPD, or OCD usually), the common addict might not understand this and view gambling addiction as distinct from drug addiction, internet and gaming addiction, etc. and fail to see the addiction, though a problem in itself, as also a symptom of a deeper mental health problem.
As for its location, it was on a public transit bus. A somewhat good location given that a gambler might not have money for a car, but let's not assume that all gamblers take the bus, even on occasion. A rationalist approach would suggest putting the ad precisely where we know the gambler will look: on the lottery ticket itself.
Aside from that minor point, that was an exemplary ad campaign in my opinion. I've also seen a Narcotics Anonymous ad that was equally well done, again directed at a specific audience that would easily recognize itself in it.
Simply offering the services does not suffice. Making people aware of the existence of such services does not suffice either. It is important for the ad to make the target audience understand that the service applies to it.
I would not be surprised to find the military doing a better job of it due to a captive audience (in a classroom setting teaching them about how to recognize the symptoms of PTSD dor example). The closest we could compare I civilian life might be a high school course that would cover various addictions. Though even then, what of the student was I'll for that course or is an immigrant?
Yes he must operate within the system, but the system must also reach out to him in an adequate manner. Advertizing 101.
Clearly you haven't. I'll give you a hint. Check out post number 37. That's the post that RCS finds difficult
They still have to be willing to work with and in the system.
Who? The sufferers? I don't know how it works in the military (compulsory courses on mental health and how to identify PTSD, posters in mess halls, booklets, pamphlets or other advertizing?), but in the civilian world, it is poorly done. Many have heard of mental illness and mental health services, but how well do they understand it?
As an example, let's say I'm an alcoholic and see an ad concerning mental health services. Will I understand that addiction is a mental health problem or will I believe it to be an unrelated problem?
If I believe it to be separate, then I won't seek help believing that a mental health professional can't help with addiction.
Now if I see an ad for addiction therapy, that might attract me. But again, let's say I'm poor and am under the false impression that I must pay for the service. This means that the ad might need to make its prices clear somehow.
Or let's say I suffer sex addiction but am unfamiliar with the term and so while self-identifying my behaviour as compulsive, I somehow fail to recognize that I've just defined an addiction, and so erroneously conclude since whatever I'm suffering is not an addiction, an addiction therapist can't help me with my problem.
A good example that I'd seen was an ad for gambling addiction. It addressed gambling addiction specifically and explicitly and provided a website for further information.
Any gambling addict would understand that it addresses him directly. Though a mental health professional will understand that all addictions, both chemical and behavioural, are all forms of the same problem or, more precisely, symptoms of a common mental illness (PTSD, BPD, or OCD usually), the common addict might not understand this and view gambling addiction as distinct from drug addiction, internet and gaming addiction, etc. and fail to see the addiction, though a problem in itself, as also a symptom of a deeper mental health problem.
As for its location, it was on a public transit bus. A somewhat good location given that a gambler might not have money for a car, but let's not assume that all gamblers take the bus, even on occasion. A rationalist approach would suggest putting the ad precisely where we know the gambler will look: on the lottery ticket itself.
Aside from that minor point, that was an exemplary ad campaign in my opinion. I've also seen a Narcotics Anonymous ad that was equally well done, again directed at a specific audience that would easily recognize itself in it.
Simply offering the services does not suffice. Making people aware of the existence of such services does not suffice either. It is important for the ad to make the target audience understand that the service applies to it.
I would not be surprised to find the military doing a better job of it due to a captive audience (in a classroom setting teaching them about how to recognize the symptoms of PTSD dor example). The closest we could compare I civilian life might be a high school course that would cover various addictions. Though even then, what of the student who was ill for that course or is an immigrant?
Yes he must operate within the system, but the system must also reach out to him in an adequate manner. Advertizing 101.
