Media Message: Second-hand Smoking is Bad for Children

Answer

Media Message: Second-hand Smoking is Bad for Children

Introduction

The prevalence of chronic diseases in the contemporary society is alarmingly high. Today, diseases such as cancer affect people of all ages without being especially selective. Naturally, there are certain risk factors, that if avoided, would reduce the widespread nature of this illness. In Canada, there are several media health messages and campaigns dedicated to the cause of minimizing the rate at which cancer affects Canadian nationals by encouraging people to shun from avoidable risk factors (Semple et al., 2012). This paper provides a comprehensive analysis of one such media campaign designated for the purpose of curbing lung cancer, a major threat to the health of Canadians.

Media Health Message

The media health message is mainly focused on lung cancer. It primarily issues a warning to adult guardians and parents urging them to stop exposing their children to second-hand smoking. The direct reason provided as to why parents should stop smoking before their children is that second-hand smoking results in severe and frequent asthmatic attacks in children. There is an image of a child with an inhaler to emphasize the message that parents should not intentionally cause harm to their children; rather they should take measures to protect them. The message is followed by an encouragement that smoking is a habit that people can quit if they want to. Importantly also, the campaigners offer their help by providing a hotline that people can use in case they require assistance in coping with their situations. Notably, the advertisement campaign is facilitated by Health Canada (Rosen et al., 2012).

Theories

There are various theories that this particular health message relates to. The first theory is self-determination theory. Self-determination theory is commonly perceived to be a macro theory related to human personality and motivation (Ng et al., 2012). Essentially, it involved the intrinsic growth propensities and inherent psychological needs of human beings. The self-determination theory primarily involves the motivation that lies behind the decisions that individuals make without being influenced by external forces. Primarily, self-determination theory centers on the level to which a person’s behavior is self-determined and self-motivated.

The self-determination theory is applicable in the health message indicated above. The reason for this supposition is that the advertisement simply points out that the smoking behavior of parents has an influence on the health of their children. While asthma is mentioned, there are also worse implications such as lung cancer that may result from such exposure at an early age. It is notable that parents and guardians are not being coerced into terminating their smoking behavior. The campaigners simply point out the possible implications that may accrue if these individuals continue smoking while in the presence of their children. It is also a noteworthy fact that the campaigners do not make it mandatory for parents and guardians to reach out to them for help. On the contrary, they simply provide contact information and urge those who encounter difficulties in their endeavors to quit smoking to call them and seek help. The application of the self-determination theory is evident in the way that parents and guardians are not forced to quit smoking. They actually have the choice to continue with their misguided lifestyles. However, one’s children are an integral part of oneself. Therefore, the parents and guardians are urged to draw on this factor for their motivation and determination to stop. The most crucial self-determination factor in this case is that regardless of how parents and guardians feel about their own children, the choice to stop must still be a personal one due to the fact that there is an option to continue smoking in the absence of one’s children. It would take an inherent drive and personal determination for one to actually stop smoking altogether.

In addition, another theory that applies is the crisis theory. A crisis in this context is understood as the threat to homeostasis. In essence, a crisis is a situation whereby a state of imbalance is created and the outcome is disorganization and confusion. According to the crisis theory, people are capable of coping with crises in stages (Moos, 2013). The crisis presented in this case is that parents and guardians are exposing their children to secondhand smoking and hence placing their children’s health in jeopardy. Therefore, since this situation is highly undesirable changes must be implemented. Generally, the illness in this case can be termed as addition to smoking. This addiction is deduced because the message is fundamentally aimed at people who are having problems with regards to quitting smoking.

Moreover, the addiction has evidently impacted on their lifestyles since they are placing their children in harmful situations by exposing them to secondhand smoking. Subsequently, the coping process centers on those who have made the decision to quit smoking altogether. The process is extensively difficult although with the right mechanisms in place, one can quit smoking. One of the mechanisms provided in the advertisement is help from the campaigners (Health Canada) who provide their contact information to help those who are encountering problems in their withdrawal journey. Lastly, the outcome of the crisis is implied that one’s quality of life will improve as well as that of the children. Basically, the children will not suffer from asthmatic attacks as in cases whereby they are exposed to secondhand smoking.

Critical analysis of the message

Perceptibly, the message is effective in the delivery of its message. It is short but precise. It directly urges parents to quit smoking in the presence of their children by stating: “Your kids are sick of your smoking” (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011, p. 1). This message alone is effective in capturing the attention of parents and children who allow their children to be exposed to secondhand smoking from any source. Since one’s children are arguably the most personal and sensitive topic, the presumption is that many of the targeted audience will be attentive to the message after such an opening. Subsequently, the message proceeds to provide reasons why one’s children are ‘sick’ of one’s smoking. “Second-hand smoke causes more frequent and severe asthmatic attacks in children” (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011, p. 1). The provision is this reason is even more captivating to the audience because it enhances an understanding of the initial statement. Therefore, parents and guardians can decipher the message as: they should stop smoking before their children to avoid exposing them to diseases such as asthma.

Lastly, the advertisement delivers its final message by indicating: “You can quit. We can help” (Daily Mail Reporter, 2011, p. 1). Afterward contact information is provided on how this help can be accessed. This is highly effective because it delivers a third message in a single advertisement. First, that parents should not smoke before their children. Second, that secondhand smoking affects children’s health. And lastly, that parents can simply quit altogether with the help of the campaigners. The effectiveness of this message is unquestionable, despite the fact that it is concise and simple in terms of wording.

Recommendations for Improvement

Altogether, the message of the advertisement campaign can undoubtedly be improved in order to make it more effective. The advertisement indicates that children are opposed to parents smoking in their presence. However, the message only provides a single reason why second-hand smoking is harmful to the health of children. Factually, there are worse implications of second-hand smoking on the health of children. Lung cancer is one of the deadliest diseases in the modern world. Children who are constantly exposed to secondhand smoking are at risk of being affected by this disease. Therefore, the advertisement campaign should have provided more information concerning other diseases that may occur as a result of secondhand smoking, not only to children but to the smokers as well (Rosen et al., 2012).

Additionally, another shortcoming of the message is that it does not provide sufficient incentive for smokers to actually quit smoking. It only provides the incentive for them to quit smoking in the presence of their children. In this regard, an addict’s first impulse would be to smoke elsewhere, so as to not harm one’s children. However, the point is to drive more people to quit smoking entirely. Hence, the advertisement campaign should have included a message that would also motivate people to stop smoking for their own sakes as well.

Conclusion

Conclusively, the message in the advertisement campaign urges parents and guardians to consider the safety of children while smoking. Fundamentally, they should desist from exposing their children to secondhand smoking. Some of the applicable theories are: crisis theory and self-determination theory. They both reflect the in-depth inferences that the message attempts to make to its target audience. Despite the commendable effectiveness of the paper, one recommendation would be to add more severe implications of secondhand smoking to both the smokers and the children in order to urge people to quit smoking entirely.