‘Practice social distancing’ is terrible messaging; the government needs to communicate better
We learnt how to stop infection and change behaviour 30 years ago, Deborah Soden argues. And the advertising and comms messages learnt during the AIDS crisis need to be applied by the government now to COVID-19.
‘Practice social distancing’? That’s message distancing. Now isn’t the time to foist vague new phrases on a population either too fearful to take it in, too confused to know what to do, or too full of bravado to care.
We know how to communicate clearly and effectively to stop a deadly chain of infection. We did it 30-something years ago.
When AIDS was rife in the 1980s, the government’s first awareness campaign was the 1987 Grim Reaper ads. It got attention, but didn’t change behaviour. It scared the bejeezus out of people – but didn’t tell them what they could do about it. There was no safe sex message, just fear creation.
What worked was the follow up ‘Beds’ campaign: ‘How many partners has your partner had?’ and ‘Next time you go to bed with someone, ask yourself: How many people are you really going to bed with?’.
That rammed home the implications of the chain of infection in graphic fashion. Shot by film director Ray Lawrence, the TVC pulled back from showing two people in one bed to 800 people in 400 beds. It made it everyone’s problem, not just the gay community’s. We needed to pull together (no pun intended) to address it.
We got clear safe sex messages about what to do: ‘If it’s not on, it’s not on’ and ‘Cover yourself from AIDS’ among them.
Clear messages reached specific audiences, from TVCs to posters on the back of toilet doors in bars.
It had its critics, but it worked. Behaviour changed. Condom sales went up. Infection rates went down.
It helped stop the chain of infection that was killing people.
In today’s COVID-19 crisis, we understand washing our hands for as long as it takes to sing happy birthday. That made it clear, understandable and actionable.
Now we need clear, engaging messages to make ‘practice social distancing’ meaningful too, not vague requests and lectures.
My kids’ primary school once tried to get students to practice restorative justice by telling them to ‘practice restorative justice’. Yup, that’s what they said. To five-to-12 year olds. Parents were baffled too. Only the teachers who had done a two-day workshop knew what the heck it meant.
The restorative justice process itself was okay. Calling it that was the ineffective bit.
Likewise, the problem with ‘practicing social distancing’ isn’t the process. It’s the language.
Just because the pandemic is extremely serious doesn’t mean we can’t be clever. Clever and clear aren’t mutually exclusive. Clever and clear will get attention – and results.
Get our attention with a better line than ‘practice social distancing’ and then make it clear what we need to do during this ‘gap year’ we’re all on.
We might have a shortage of toilet paper, but we don’t have a shortage of clever people who can get a more effective message out to change behaviour. To draw on another time honoured slogan, ‘It’s Time’. Because that’s another thing we don’t have much of.
And for those still lining up for a takeaway coffee? Try the ‘Gapaccino’.
Deborah Soden is a Sydney-based writer
Agree. How about ‘Stay one and a half metres away from anyone.’…
User ID not verified.
ScoMo didn’t invent it. It’s a bad idea to have multiple competing key messages.
User ID not verified.
No one said he invented it, just that there needs to be a better way of expressing it to be more clear and concise.
User ID not verified.
Bollocks!
The message is perfectly clear. As a bell
Dickheads are simply not taking notice, most especially younger, ‘indestructible’ people
What the guvment & chief medical officer should not do is so frequently say “Please”. They should convey “Do it or else”
chrism
User ID not verified.
Go Deb! Great to see your name again!
User ID not verified.
So if ‘practice social distancing’ fails to be the right fit whats your message solution?
I read a whole lot of past successful campaign references but at no point did you clarify what an actual message would be beneficial for society of today.
User ID not verified.
A crisis is a time for clarity, globally.
The phrase is understood and working worldwide.
Can it be extended? Yes? But replaced? No
User ID not verified.
Come on!
It’s not rocket science. If you expose yourself to someone in close proximity, you’re at risk.
If you’re dumb enough to get a hair cut, go for it.
They said enough.
Media commentators who are always looking for opportunity to get on an invisible high horse are the worst. The ones who apply personal anecdotes, even worse.
User ID not verified.
Some people won’t get it no matter what message you send.
Policing is the only way in this situation and making people aware of the fines involved if they don’t comply.
User ID not verified.
Of course he didn’t invent it but he does have the power to get his comms team to create a much better message.
User ID not verified.
As usual, NZ and more specifically Jacinda Adern, showing ScoMo how it should be done.
“Act as if you have COVID-19” is pretty clear. As is ‘go out only to buy food or to get exercise (alone and near your house)’
User ID not verified.
Play your part. Keep apart.
User ID not verified.
You should be in advertising.
User ID not verified.
Great article. We most certainly need clear, concise and consistent communication. A better phrase is physical distancing, social connection, as coined by the Danish prime Minister. People also need clear call to action messages, as this article points out. That is the only to get behavioural change. And it takes time …
User ID not verified.
God forbid someone should disagree with Saint Jacinta, but…
while at first blush, “act like you’ve got COVID19” sounds like neat cut-through, it’s nonsensical in practical terms
go on, try it.
If you have COVID 19, you go to your bedroom and don’t have contact with your household for at least 14 days, with your mobile fully charged and ready to dial OOO
that is NOT what non-infected, prudent people need to do
User ID not verified.
Ok so, I have COVID-19. According to health dept that means I should isolate myself and not go out in public expect to attend medical treatment ONLY (no shopping, no public exercise).
Food is running a little low. Can I go shopping? SM says its ok for me to go shopping so long as observe social distancing…
Both are easy to understand, but they are in conflict – you can’t stay at home and physically go out to the shopping center at the same time ….. (in case people didn’t realize that)
“Act as if you have COVID-19” shouldn’t be taken LITERALLY …
The health department is basically saying good hygiene, social distancing, self-isolation if you have any symptoms, etc. These are general and apply across the board. In themselves, they only have to do with preventing the spread of the virus.
When a politician comes out saying X industry will be restricted to Y customers at a time, they imply that limiting the X industry to Y customers is the best way to archive those health dept recommendations.
The confusion then is in how they pick seeming arbitrary and/or inconsistent values for X and Y.
With just a little common sense you could probably have Y+2 customers so long as observe hygiene and social-distancing – and the heath dept advice will still be served. BUT if the government applies a $11000 penalty for exceeding Y customers then people get the message that it’s not about common sense its about doing what government tells you to do – regardless of weather you have followed the health dept recommendations.
The problem is the health dept is pretty general about what is needed. But SM / his advisers are micro-managing the implementation. Breaking from their standard ‘until moral improves, the beatings will continue’ approach would help allot too.
User ID not verified.
When it seems they are selecting items/industries arbitrarily and/or coming up with seeming arbitrary/inconsistent restrictions many people begin to wonder if they are out of touch with reality (as usual) or begin to doubt their own common sense (after all our politicians wouldn’t enforce anything that is not already common sense – right?).
User ID not verified.