i just saw a blip on the news. apparently the drug czar thinks the reason anti drug ads are popular with parents, but not kids, is because they simply aren't done well. apparently all anti-drug commercials are done pro bono. ~180 million is spent on ad space, but they get the ads created for free.

he is proposing they start paying to have the commercials done. i guess it's the 'you get what you pay for mentality'. i think he's right, that they might be able to get better commercials out there and reach some more kids, but i think he's missing the picture that an anti-drug commercial just isn't going to make most kids stay away from drugs. i don't think they will at least. i was exposed to plenty of anti drug messages i saw growing up (and there were a lot of them) from school, tv, parents, etc...and it had literally zero effect on me. well, it had an effect, but pretty much only made me question authority more...hardly their aim.

any other opinions on this angle?

andy

i think it's pretty pointless... these people mean well (even if superficially), but no matter what they do they are still stuck in the same box of a mentality.

I think light drug use isn't bad at all. If one of my friends (let's say) is growing plants and we smoked in on the weekends, what harm is that causing. Keeping us in his backyard smoking is for sure keeping us off the streets. What they should show people is actual footage of 'bad shit.'

to explain: when people are sitting around and someone pulls out a pipe and starts smoking, that is okay. If some friends decide to give some white rock opium a try, I am not going to say it is the right thing to do or anything, but it certainly isn't wrong. These are the wrong kids to target because they still go to school, and they can still make something of themselves. This is a lot different than someone who binges weekly or pushes close from the source.