Wednesday 30th June 2004

New Drink Drive Campaign

£1.4 million on TV adverts - best use of the money?

---

Just a few days after publishing figures showing deaths are rising on Britain's roads, the Government has launched a new campaign against drink driving. 

The theme of the campaign is that it takes less than you might think for your driving to be impaired by alcohol.

Costing £1.4 million the TV, radio and cinema campaign, is aimed primarily at 17-29 year olds and will run over the summer. The TV campaign will run nationally for three weeks and be aired again in the build up to the Christmas/New Year period for three weeks.

The TV ad was filmed entirely in a pub using state of the art editing. A car reaching speeds of between 10 and 20mph was used inside the pub to capture the accident's impact. A pub table was then transposed over the moving image to create a dramatic scene.

In 2002, 560 people were killed in drink-drive related accidents and 2,820 were seriously injured. 20,140 people were slightly injured.

The Government aims to maximise the existing social stigma around drink driving.

Given that most drink-drivers' concerns are more about being caught than the dangers of driving under the influence, perhaps £1.4 million would have been better spent on police traffic patrols...

[Mr Whippy]

Well it's a step in the right directon at least. I always think showing that Dave guy being spoon fed by his wife after crashing through drink driving scared people into not wanting to drive drunk.

At least we are seeing less emphasis on speeding being the cause of all accidents!

Perhaps we are beginning to see a U turn after the poor results for road deaths from 2002-2003.

Now these "safety partnerships" are taking responsibility for road safety, they are now accountable when the results come back like they have! We actually might see them doing something useful this year to curb this distressing trend in increasing road deaths!!!
Drink driving adverts are just the start I hope.

More coppers on the roads would do the best job though... like we've been saying all along!

Dave

[annodomini2]

I've got an idea how to better spend the money! how bout taxi's at turfing out time are subsidised, its spreads the wealth instead of one probably already very rich advertising company getting the money, loads of taxi drivers would benefit (i am not a taxi driver!) and there would be a reduced risk directly because it would encourage more people to use a taxi rather than their own car.

[Rob_the_Sparky]

At least they are admitting that speed is not the only cause of accidents for a change!

[danger mouse]

Mr Whippy said:

Now these "safety partnerships" are taking responsibility for road safety, they are now accountable when the results come back like they have! We actually might see them doing something useful this year to curb this distressing trend in increasing road deaths!!!

That is an excellent and important point.

Put into this context the RSP's might start to make sense as long as they are held responsible and accountable for the continuous improvement in their own performance in decreasing road deaths each year.

Eventually they will be forced to be proactactive instead of take the easy "Let's throw up loads of Scameras" way out, as this approach has proven to be consistantly inaffective.

As said below, I too hope this will see a move towards more human policing and education of the motoring public through the media.

[sagalout]

Just read last night about the habitual drink driver (known alcholic) estate agent from Newcastle who knocked a schoolboy off his scooter(?) and killed him whilst waiting for trial on another DD charge. He got 5 years his victim got life and so apparently have his family.

On the police tack,saw for the first time two days ago, a copper nick someone using a mobile phone whilst driving. 'bout time too. If he was not paying enough attention to see the battenburg he wasn't paying enough attention to driving.

[TimW]

Is it that advert where there in a pub? sat at a table and it all goes wierd like uve had a crash??

that really makes me think.
'Dont drink and drive''You might spill your drink'

[Hoover33]

I am convicted drink driver.... Add. campagaigns in my opinion are a waste of time. I always preached not to drink and drive until I had had a drink.
The only way to deter is the increase the risk of being caught.
I am now a VERY good boy.

[the pits]

I know the guys who wrote that ad. If any of you would like me to pass on any opinions, I'll be happy to do so. Having written a drink drive ad myself, we're (quite wrongly) all a lot more concerned with winning awards than cutting drink drive deaths. Though it has to be said 580 is probably a lot less than the number of deaths caused by 'sheer idiocy' on the roads every year.

Of course one road death is too many if you're related to the victims and I in no way want to trivialise this issue. Some credit must be given for this number coming down. When I wrote my ad it was over 1000. NB I mean credit due for all those who got tanked up and decided not to drive - not credit due to advertising writers.

[lucozade]

I think the ad is very good actually. A step in the right direction indeed. A few "less" than clever folk might not get it though and that's the bit I'm worried about.

Some good advertising aswell as more Policing would start to get the message across.

[rev-erend]

Personally hate the ad .. they should only be shown after closing time ..

Sick advert - I know it's reality (kind of) but I choose not to view it - I turn over.

[mudge]

Hoover33 said:

I am convicted drink driver.... Add. campaigns in my opinion are a waste of time. I always preached not to drink and drive until I had had a drink. The only way to deter is the increase the risk of being caught.

Indeed - people never think it will happen to them until it actually does.

Knowing someone else who has been caught can also be a good deterrent.

But as traffic police are replaced by cameras that seems to be less and less likely