Perhaps she needed a chauffeur strapped to her ankle instead (yet ANOTHER opportunity for MADD).

Scanning through the headlines I'm amazed that Lohan was arrested yet again early this morning for drunk driving (after 6 weeks in rehab). While she's been touting her alcohol-detecting ankle bracelet it seems what she--and so many of today's 'it girls' need--are chauffeurs (cuz rehab and jail ain't doing the trick).

I've said it BEFORE and now I'm saying it again: MADD, this is a golden opportunity--and judging by the number of arrests of Lohan, Hilton and Ritchie, the opportunity is being sent by heavenly forces--for an innovative, relevant viral campaign to drive awareness and adoption of your cause. I'd love to see drunk driving down (or designated drivers up, that's where I would focus). And, like I said BEFORE...I'm happy to spend an hour with you on a call and give you free suggestions to help your cause. I'd sure like to see some good come from all the madness.

If you folks have some suggestions, feel free to leave them in the comments.

PS: Yup, that's her (latest) mugshot.

Comments

[David Reich]

If I were the folks at MADD, CK, I would stay a mile away from Lohan and all the other spoiled young celebs like her. Because they are pampered and yessed to death by the handlers and hangers-on, they seem to think theycan do whatever they like and that laws and human decency simply don't apply to them.

Lohan is a prime candidate for a court-mandated alcohol interlock device top be put on all her cars. It will not allow the car to start if the driver blows above a certain alcohol content. Many states now allows judges to order the use of these devices, and they prettyu much work.

[CK]

@David: I would use them as an example--being that the majority of offenders (18-25) aren't watching MADD they're watching a lot of these celebs...what's worse the younger kids are watching them. And I would go back to focusing on designated drivers a la the "maybe they should have designated a driver, too" ("they" being the celebs). If done well, it's got a great shot at truly going viral.

Net/net: correct me if I'm wrong but the other campaigns aren't doing the trick...we've still got a major problem with this issue (not just the celebs). The current campaigns seem out-of-touch to me, they're just not resonating. I need to get the current figures on this issue to see how well they are/are not working.

[Cam Beck]

It's a difficult problem to tackle for MADD, because the problem of drunk driving is not caused primarily by willful intent to harm others, but by distinctly egocentric thinking. To these people, MADD will have difficulty appealing.

However, where they can have an impact is through lobbying for tougher laws against drunk drivers and by appealing to those who would exert pressure on potential drunk drivers to make them social pariahs... thus making even the self-centered consider the personal social consequences of doing something inherently foolish, such as this.

Then again, egocentric people have difficulty dealing with criticism, and I see them as likely to shun the shunners and instead hang around others who will not place such moral barriers on their potentially destructive behavior.

Jail time, however, is concrete and its undesirability is right next to universal.

[CK]

@Cam: "It's a difficult problem to tackle for MADD, because the problem of drunk driving is not caused primarily by willful intent to harm others, but by distinctly egocentric thinking."

Great point...I see the problem (of not designating a driver which is where I'm focusing since cutting-out drinking doesn't seem to be falling, but soaring) as simply not thinking. Right now MADD's got a campaign to eliminate Drunk Driving--I appreciate it, but don't see it as realistic (unfortunately). But awareness--and getting creative on the "halo" effect of all these arrests--might prompt that thinking.

"Don't pull a Lohan, Lohan, Hilton or Ritchie. Get a driver." Ya know, "think before you drink (cuz it ain't likely you'll think after)".

I've no idea how many times Lohan has been arrested now but I put her in there twice on purpose. Or maybe a new walk of Hollywood Fame that highlights those who've been pulled-over in Hollywood. Something that gets people to start thinking 'we need a driver' while the lobbyists/etc. do their jobs to make jail sentences tougher.

[Tangerine Toad]

@CK: I think MADD would need to come up with something (video footage most likely) that made Hilton, Lohan et al look uncool. Because to the demo you're referencing, all that the DWI arrests are doing is cementing her "bad girl" rep. She's out on bail, the lawyers intervene, and there are no visible negative consequences.

Now for a story about the negative consequences of drunk driving, check this out: http://www.nypost.com/seven/07232007/news/regionalnews/dwi_drag_death_regionalnews_selim_algar_and_leonard_greene.htm

[CK]

@Toad: Mugshots, as I understand, are public domain. I'm telling you they could get creative...and soon enough, Lohan will be facing some jailtime, too -- as will likely a pregnant Ritchie.

I'll check out your link now...

[Roger Anderson]

I know this is extremely cynical, but could the Ritchie pregnancy be a means to keep out of jail? Will she bring it to full term if it works?

The fact that MADD says nothing tells us a lot about MADD. If they go after people like Lohan, Hilton, or Ritchie might that hurt their donations?

MADD does not have to speak to the losers of Hollywood - they are supposed to speak to the rest of us. I attended a High School program where my son played one of the students killed (In the US, every 15 minutes a teenager dies from a drinking related accident.) At the event a young man spoke about losing his sister a few years ago. She died from injuries that were the result of riding in a car with someone who had been drinking. Every one of the 1,500 students was crying. Maybe they got they message.

[CK]

@Roger: I sure hope those students got the message. My concern is the facts--drunk driving, especially in that target, is a very real issue. I think that MADD needs to be as heartfelt AND as creative as possible in getting the message out. I find that audiences are much more prone when they're given a realistic message--appoint a driver (yes, best case is not to get drunk but a driver seems more realistic). I can't see not using the press of late to their advantage to raise awareness and do so in creative ways to meet the end result.

Will it hurt their donations? Good point and I don't know...but I would be thinking if they used these power celebs that the celebs would do right by themselves to say something like "I'm glad I could be of help" (cuz it would look REALLY bad for them to rage against MADD for using their senseless acts to good means). Make sense?

Actually, your feedback on Ritchie is not cynical as I believe many are thinking just that. I like those images of Hollywood "back when," it just seemed so magical...now it looks so tragic and polluted.

[David Reich]

Actually, the anti-drinking & driving campaigns have had tremendous impact.
DUI is still a problem among younfer drivers, but it's incidence has gone down.
Many more young people assign a designated driver, and they're not shy about
takingthe keys away from a friend who is clearly too drunk to drive.

Why reward bad behavior with more fame? What credibility would Lindsay Lohan have
as a spokesperson if she can't even get her own act cleaned up?

Sorry, but I would advise MADD to stay away. Through my work in the traffic safety
arena, I know the people at MADD and I'd be surprised to see them use someone
like this.

MADD and SADD, by the way, are out there in the community in a widespread and personal
way. So they actually are reaching young people, just not exclusively through mainstream
media.

[CK]

@David: Thanks for the stats (especially since you work with initiatives in this area). FYI, I understand that MADD has used Hilton's ignorance in email campaigns to raise awareness/support/funding.

The coverage--apart from the 'it girls'--that I've caught has confirmed that drunk driving for the 18-25 segment is still a very real issue. Still think they need to get creative in getting their message "out" there (social media/viral campaigns would be a cost-effective route to hit that 18-25 target and by creative using these examples to their benefit). Would love your feedback on their current campaigns (right at their website).

[Mack Collier]

Someone from MADD needs to get with you because a video such as you are talking about would be a slam-dunk to go viral.

[Jonathan Trenn]

I don't know here...to me the most compelling way to get through to people is, quite frankly, tragedy. Arrest records of Lohan, Hilton, Ritchie, and Spears may have some effect (hence the emails), but, well, it isn't as compelling as true stories of death. Witness the story that the young man told regarding her sister.

Take a look at some of the ads here regarding meth:
http://www.montanameth.org/View_Ads/index.php

Wondering what everyone's take is.

[Mario Vellandi]

Heck yeah, they should get more creative. I'm not sure who does the anti-marijuana ads on tv, but I do find many of them quite effective because they portray how laziness, slowed thinking, and inhibition leads to a dull life.

[Ryan Karpeles]

Great discussion here as always. For what it's worth, drunk drivers (or any type of social deviant) can often be much more impacted when their peers disapprove of their actions.

Campaigns against these types of things are inherently top-down models. The real effect has to take place from the bottom-up. Kids who screw around in school don't usually care that they annoy their teacher. But when they find out that their classmates are frustrated by them, they start to shape up.

I think the same thinking needs to be applied to this issue. Peers need to speak out and influence each other. You know how traditional advertising is dying and word-of-mouth is all the rage? The same concept applies to the spreading of socially responsible behavior.

In essence, MADD needs to find a way to influence the influencers. Preaching is a slow and often ineffetive method of inciting change. Their real task should be to develop ways of encouraging peer groups to discourage this type of behavior from the inside out, rather than the outside in.

[CK]

@Jonathan: I hear you on tragedy...my fear is that the doom and gloom images are just not resonating--especially since we have so many awful images of the War and terrorism circulating the airwaves. I worry we're becoming desensitized. I don't at all say that lightly--as you know all the theme park tragedies have really taken me back and wonder why we're not better regulated (as you so astutely pointed out).

@Mario: Yeah, I vote for creativity.

@Ryan: Cialdini talked of these social influences in peer groups (I think in the chapter on "social proof") as did the Freakonomics guys. So if p2p (peer2peer) is the way to go then I agree the best way to facilitate those convos is to get creative--and to get viral. Instead of more news on these 'bad girls' behavior, switch the spotlight to better behavior using these it girls as an example...and in a way that's catchy and encourages action.

[vaspers the socnet specialist and blogocombat sissy]

In rehab, these celebrity cretins just make new drug connections.

Who cares? The age of celebrity worship is dead. Now it's a communal media of 24/7 lifecasting, YouTube, blogs, Twitter, Spock, 8apps, all the socnets, presencing streams, status updaters and so on.

End of Stardom, Rise of Everyone.

Good riddance celebrity schmucks.

[CK]

@Vaspers: Hi there, pal. Good to see you. I wish (wish!) I could say that it's the End of Stardom...but we're still at the beginning of that end. The younger demos are definitely producing their own--but many are watching the old garbage. I say, use the old garbage to advance some good initiatives.

Otherwise, hope you're well and you keep saying you might be around NYC -- so get on over here and we can make fun of celebs together.

[Tangerine Toad]

The problem CK, is that the press, until now, has pretty much glamorized these idiot "It" girls and made their drinking and drug problems part of their mystique. And since (Paris aside) they don't seem to have suffered any real consequences- no movie deals lost, no decline in press ink- the message to teenagers is that this sort of behavior is just "wacky" - not fatal.

The Montana meth ads that Jonathan cites are quite powerful. But almost all the anti-drug work on TV is ineffectual because kids don't like being lectured to and because they kind of imply that one hit of pot and the next day you're a heroin addict. (Kids see through that.)

About 7 years ago, there was a campaign done in Australia about drunk driving and speeding. It inspired the VW "Safe Happens" campaign but was far, far, far more graphic. You really thought you were watching documentary footage of a fatal car crash where teens found out their friends were dead and the police had to restrain them because they were so distraught. I remember seeing it at and award show and the whole audience was stunned into silence. There was another that followed the family of a drunk driving victim over the course of Xmas week, with the funeral and the aftermath. Very raw, well-done, shocking. I still remember it all these years later and I only saw it once.

[Tangerine Toad]

Okay: I found the Austalian Christmas spots on YouTube.

They are still very emotional and powerful, so be forewarned
You need to watch these in order:

1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jWV7Mvkhf0
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9RVt2GdWI4
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTR_Sovypzo

[Nathan]

I think she's just upset that Paris' publicity stunt that lead her to the slammer got Paris more press and money than Lohan's original crack/dui one. Might as well try it again, right?

[Roger Anderson]

CK,
One more comment here if you care to keep this thread alive. As illustrated by the sentiments of a 16 year-old in her letter in today's local newspaper OC Register (yes the Real OC), we have a long way to go to get the message to them.
(http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/irvine-years-animals-1788132-iraq-qaida)

Teens feel attacked by news

I am 16 years old, and I agree with writer Sara-Ellen Amster that young people are, as a whole, not interested in news. ["No surprise youth aren't into news," Opinion, July 25]. Of course, teens are not interested in reading articles that criticize their clothing, speech or pastimes, especially when so many other forms of information are available. Teens are much more likely to read People magazine than they are to read the newspaper, because they do not feel bored or attacked when they read it.

Although it is probably unintentional, many newspaper articles pass judgment on our apparently "reckless behavior," "careless activity" or "risky lifestyles." We are all entitled to our own opinions, but don't expect teens to read the paper just to be torn down by it.

Grace Galloway

Ladera Ranch

[CK]

@Toad: The spots were indeed powerful (and terribly sad) but they don't, IMO, speak to the 18-25 (and younger) target. They do speak to older demos very well. And I thank you for searching for them ;-).

@Roger: First, of all, our girl Ritchie just got 90 in jail for 2 DUIs...and driving the wrong way down a freeway. I can understand a street but a freeway?

Oh, 90 hours that is.

Thank you for the input from the 16 year old, it is very telling to me that she can read people without feeling attacked. Use the tools she's comfortable with is what I say. Yep, I really feel there's an opp in using these "it girls" to do some good.