Government spending on advertising and PR is extremely unpopular in recession Britain. The Central Office of Information, which co-ordinates Government social marketing and communications spending, was one of the first branches of the state to be cut with 300 staff going back in Summer 2010. And why not? Why should the taxpayer pay for groups of well heeled marketing and PR execs to be creative when what they really need are teachers and nurses?
Social Marketers – professionals who use their marketing and communications expertise to effect behavioral change in society, would no doubt beg to differ. The ‘Fire Kills’ campaign conducted by a small team in DCLG but supported by the COI, use the full plethora of communications tools to raise awareness of Fire safety amongst the parts of society that are most susceptible to be involved in fires. With fire damage costing the UK economy £3.6 million pound a day surely raising awareness about ways to stop the spread of fire is money well spent.
When these rules are also applied to public health issues (a key area for social marketing) the economic benefits are also apparent. Obesity and lung cancer are an expensive drain on NHS resources, costing £6.2 billion and £5 billion respectively. Again, targeted social marketing to the effected demographics is surely worth the relatively small amount of Government spending that has been set aside for social marketing campaigns over the past decade.
Whilst it is understandably politically hard for Ministers to argue that the state should pay for marketing campaigns, the social and economic benefits are clear. Social marketing should be at the heart of public health concerns and we cut these campaigns at our peril.
