FALSE ADVERTISING

At 9:25 p.m. last Tuesday night, I lost my cool.

It had been a long time coming, I think, because as I launched into the
violent and extremely loud tirade, I found myself citing sources for my
anger over a year old. And what are those sources? Commercials: really
bad commercials.

Not bad in terms of direction, cinematography or anything like that,
but in how they convey their often narrow and naive opinions based on
medical and moral dogma. Opinions sometimes expressed with at least
some negligence.

So who are the damnable culprits responsible for this? The Partnership
for a Drug-Free America and the White House's Office of National Drug
Control Policy, that's who.

If you haven't seen the commercials I'm about to spout off about, or
don't know anything about the organizations responsible, let's recap:

The PDFA, according to their website www.drugfreeamerica.org, is a
co-operative of communications industry professionals that "exists to
help kids and teens reject substance abuse by influencing attitudes
through persuasive information." Sounds like a reasonable goal.

Closely linked to the PDFA is the Office of National Drug Control
Policy. The ONDCP was created in 1988, but has roots in the
big-government explosion of the early twentieth century. The Harrison
Narcotics Act of 1914 was the seedbed for what became the nation's
first drug czar some 20 years later. That man was Harry J. Anslinger.

After prohibition was ended in 1933, the energy that had been put into
the futile enforcement of it was redirected to the "problem" of
marijuana. The Narcotics Bureau, under the leadership of Anslinger,
was responsible for the spread of stereotypes depicting
African-Americans becoming beasts after using marijuana, among many
others.

If any of this comes as a surprise, it shouldn't. The issue is dealt
with by such organizations as the National Organization for the Reform
of Marijuana Laws (norml.org); websites like the Oppressive Network
Drug Content Propaganda (ondcp.com); and even in the documentary
"Grass," which was narrated by pothead extraordinaire Woody Harrelson.

The sad part is that the tactics employed then (namely shameless
propaganda), are flourishing today under the current czar, John P.
Walters. Walters is the man we can thank for reviving the "climate of
fear" tactic with his award winning ads linking drug trafficking to
terrorism (a proposition that received some laughs from both sides of
the aisle). They are some of the sources for the anger that prompted
me to write this column.

But what really set me off is the latest round of commercials from the
National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign (headed by the ONDCP and in
cooperation with the PDFA).

Continuing the revival that began last year with such ads as "Den" (a
PDFA ad in which two stoned, white teenagers happen to find a loaded
and cocked handgun just sitting out in the open of the house they're
in; you can imagine where it leads) the Anti-Drug campaign is running
a new ad campaign, one depicting a toddler about to get into a pool
unsupervised while a scolding voice tells us to "just tell her parents
you weren't watching her because you were getting stoned."

Of the new commercials, this is by far the worst in terms of
capitalizing on people's fear. And while I'm making concessions, the
majority of commercials that come from the organizations I'm writing
about are very useful towards their end - curbing drug use before it
happens. I don't know about you, but when I see Chuck D talking about
how drugs are bad, I'm inclined to listen.

And the commercials directed at parents (though the toddler spot and
other fear inducing ads have different effects on different age
groups) are great too. It seems more useful to prod parents into being
parents than to plant ungrounded and unrealistic images into their
heads.

I just wish the government felt the same way. Unfortunately, it's been
decided that images like the ad "Drive-Thru", a PDFA dramatization of
three African-American teens plowing a Camry over a child on bike, are
the messages best suited to the prevention of drug use.

The great ads of the past like "This is your brain on drugs" have
given way to the new ads telling us to be afraid. And they do it in a
way that begs criticism. Although I won't inundate you with the
arguments about alcohol versus marijuana, let it suffice to say that
the toddler and "Drive-Thru" spots could easily be about the danger of
cell-phones or complicated car or home-stereo controls instead of pot.