Getting us to ‘mask up’
On a pretty chilly day in March this year I remember being really taken aback when staff in our local coffee shop first donned face masks, gloves and gowns to deliver - with surgical precision - my daily latte with one sugar (correction - I needed two sugars and two shots that day to cope with the growing restrictions on daily life and the fact that national policy was seemingly changing every 60 seconds.)
It felt so sci-fi, sudden and culturally alien. But it was the right course of action.
Face coverings for the public are here to stay – in all shapes and forms: the more sophisticated kit that looks a bit warrior-like, the cute Spiderman bandanas for children, and not to forget the fabulous DIY mask attempts using old t-shirts – rescued from seeing out their last days as dirty dusters.
Recently both Boris Johnson and the World Health Organisation have recommended the use of face coverings for the public in areas of life where social distancing may be difficult to achieve – such as public transport and shops.
It’s a classic area where science, data, public opinion and intuitive common sense have melded to form pragmatic policy. As an ex-colleague said to me last week: ‘Face coverings just make common sense. If I have COVID without knowing it I’m probably going to transmit less virus to others wearing a mask than without one. Simple. So, I wear a mask.’
Campaigns and communications to promote face masks for the public need to communicate a myriad of things – the requirements of the new policy, the objective of the mask, where, when and how to use it - and what type of mask should be worn (and how to make one). They should also inform people that coverings are part of a package of measures including hand hygiene, physical distancing etc which work optimally together and reinforce each other.
So, lots and lots to communicate. Tricky!
Perhaps the first thrust of any campaign should be to tell people about the new policy - but even more critically - why should they use a face covering in the first place? What’s in it for them?
This is what social marketeers call the positive exchange – the benefits to a specific audience of wearing a mask must outweigh any potential cost of doing so (too much time & planning needs to be invested, comfort or health issues, social or stigma barriers, financial cost etc).
Some evidence shows that if we wear a face covering – it may be more effective at stopping the virus (especially if we have it but don't know it) from infecting others than protecting us from getting the infection in enclosed public places. Indeed, some commentators have seen public mask-wearing as an altruistic endeavour as well as a symbolic act of ‘doing our bit’ for the national effort.
But an altruistic message won’t appeal to all. Some people may want to protect themselves first and foremost.
This is where campaign messaging needs to stress that if we all wear masks together, individuals WILL benefit as well as the wider community. Our creative team at Audience Social Marketing has worked on a number of different campaign executions in this vein –including ‘I protect U protect me.’
Ultimately, it’s a classic campaign conundrum – face coverings will work best if we all do it. But the behaviour and attitudes of different segments of the population is varied and different messages, levers and interventions will be needed to persuade more of us to get onboard.
The fact that we are being told to 'mask up' by Government and transport agencies will persuade many. But others will require different approaches and more persuasion. The hope is once we reach a tipping point where the majority are covering up – it may become a ‘social norm’ which will then influence others. Conformity can be a forceful lever for social good.
One thing is for sure – in 2020 it's not just swash-buckling comic-book super-heroes who are wearing masks out and about in public these days. Maybe campaigns and wider measures can persuade us all to be ordinary heroes - playing our own very small part in helping society to combat COVID.
Draft campaign creatives by Ed Gyde and Andrew Pate www.audiencesocialmarketing.com
Behaviour Change Consultant I Mindful Business Communications Specialist I
4 年Segments that are going to hard to reach are education and children. If teachers are bubbling and not wearing masks with their class why should a child/teacher where a mask on the bus later? Those children not able to go to school dont know what is right as they see friends through the school gates without masks, see their football team in close contact without masks and then replicate this in the park and then are told put your mask on on the journey home....
Client Partner @ 23red | Inspiring Creative Comms Solutions
4 年Thanks for this Ed. We're currently working with the DfT to consider how people can travel which is obviously a huge obstacle for Londoners. I've opted for a lovely design for my face mask so perhaps uniqueness, fashion etc will all start to factor in. I hope all is well with you. Sadie
Founder of Claremont + independent consultant
4 年Will making more people wear masks give them a false sense of protection that causes them to neglect other important protective behaviours like hand washing and physical distancing? A key challenge with promoting mask-wearing is mitigating unintended negative consequences. Studies show that boxers who wear head shields are more likely to sustain head injuries than boxers who don't wear them; wearing the head shield gives boxers a false sense of safety and causes them to punch each other in the head more and harder. (https://twitter.com/theeconomist/status/848936384610025473?lang=en) There's some evidence of a similar thing also with bicycle helmets, albeit with only certain segments of bicycle users. With this in mind, as you say in your most excellent article Ed Gyde, perhaps the campaign proposition needs to embed mask-wearing within a package of protective measures that only work properly when they're all done in concert. Needless to say, three would be an ideal number of elements in such a package (stop-look-listen).
it's not the correct use that concerns me, but the wrong use. Lots of careful education here in order mitigate collateral damage of misuse and instilling risky behaviour. And for a 100 nanometer particle, perhaps only surgical grade? And that leads to the question do we have enough.....
Really like the 'I protect U protect me.' and the heart mask logo is strong too. Great work Ed.