Elizabeth Rohr

Rhetorical Analysis

WRTG 3020: The Comic Frame

Draft One

July 26, 2011

Not Even Once

“I am only going to try meth once, I am only going to sell my body for meth once, I am only going to steal from my mother once, I am only going to shoot up just once, I am only going to…”[CW1]are the phrases that are captured in my mind after viewing “Meth Project” commercials (Meth Project Ads).

The United Nations International Narcotics Control Board cited methamphetamine as the top drug problem today in the United States, more serious than cocaine and marijuana combined. Board members were concerned, and did not know how to approach such a lethal drug. At least not , until Thomas M. Siebel came into the picture.

What started off as a cry for help, later turned into an idea. Businessman and Montana rancher, Thomas M. Siebel had a plan to reduce first time meth use through public service messaging, public policy, and community outreach. Siebel’s plan has now escaladed into a seven statewide prevention program (American Meth), including, Arizona, Colorado, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Montana and Wyoming.

The Meth Project is a saturation-level advertising campaign of television, radio, print and iInternet ads that graphically depict the negative consequences of methamphetamine use (American Meth). Common elements are the deterioration of each teenage subject’s health and living conditions, amphetamine psychosis, moral compromise, and regret.

“That’s great and all, but what impact are these advertisements truly having on teenagers throughout the United States?” questioned Amy Wilkins [CW2]at a board meeting for the United Nations International Narcotics Control Board. “Can these simple ads really change the mind, of young teenagers who want to experiment with methamphetamine?” Amy Wilkins questions are like every other normal American citizen interviewed in the American Meth documentary; “Are these frightening billboards really going to stop my child from smoking meth,” or or,“is that TV commercial really going to prevent kids from experiment with deathly drugs?”

In my opinion the answer is YES.The short answer: absolutely yes. [CW3]

UBy using consumer marketing and advertising strategies as the basis for its outreach, the Meth Project has been repeatedly cited as a powerful private sector response to a devastating social problem (The Meth Project). In 2005 when the campaign started,; over 83,500 TV ads, 77,100 Radio ads, 140,000 print impressions and 2,425 billboards were distributed. ,implying that Oout of those 300,000 advertisements at least one individual had to have been affected, right? After 2 short years of these advertisements, a huge change in Montana’s drug problem had drastically declined. The Meth Project stated that Teen meth used had declined 63% since the ads started to appear, adult meth use had declined 72%, and meth-related crime had decreased by 62%. That’s huge.[CW4]

But were all these decreases related to the “meth project”? Were all the drastic decreases in drugs use, and crime decline all because of the idea to create a realistic ad to show people the dangers of what a drug can do to you? [CW5]Many think no, but the data explains differently.

The Meth Project’s core message, Not Even Once , speaks directly to the highly addictive nature of meth. Through the use of a grotesque frame, tThe ads demonstrate a lifestyle of hate, neglect, pain, and suffering and more, followed by pictures of rotten teeth, bloody lips, scars, and bruises., by using a Grotesque frame. These alarming ads give teenagers and adults a sense of “what if”, “what if I used meth just once”. The Meth Project used periodic national and statewide surveys and focus group research to more thoroughly understand attitudes and behaviors related to the use of meth. They used an approach that would scare individuals in to not using meth, by leaving images of fear and inglectneglect. The research-based, high impact advertising graphically portrays the rages of meth use, with a saturation-level campaign reaching es 70-90% of teens statewide, 3-5 times a week with prevention messages spanning from TV, radio, billboards and the internet.

Still though, there were many individuals found in the documentary “American Meth” that were not convinced. “How can something so small as a TV commercial, make such a huge decrease in drug related crimes, and drug use in Montana” questioned Martha [CW6]in an interview.

It’s that simple. The Meth Project doesn’t know. They do not know if the billions of dollars they put into this non-profit organization is truly making an impact on the drug related issue. They would like to think so, but no one can be sure to knowentirely sure. They cannot go around asking individuals questions, “hey did you not try meth because of the prevention plan”. Instead, they can just hope they have made an impact. Because truthfully no kid is going to agree with, “yes, I didn’t smoke meth, because two minutes before I left for a party I saw an ad” explained Charley in American Meth. “It just doesn’t happen that way, kids wont admit to something saving their life. They are too focused on being a kid”.

Overall statistics have shown that since the Meth Project started in 2005, -meth use has declined. Even Dr. Melissa Thompson stated in an article that without the help of the Meth Project, I do not know where our country would be[CW7]. The meth outbreak was a huge scare in America, and with a project like this, it has changed lives that we don’t even know.

Meth ads are horrifying, scary, alarming, fierce and real. They show you the dangers of what JUST ONE time of using meth can do to not only yourself, but also the ones around you. To this day, the prevention program is being put in action with thousand of ads daily.,Aalthough there are some who still do not believe, you have to be the judge. Does watching an ad of someone being homeless, having scars all over their bodies, having bruised faces from being raped and bloody lips make you want to try meth…just once? [CW8]

Liz --- Great job thus far, I like how you include statistics and use them to back up your claims. I think that is a definite strength in your paper. I would say that you should include better descriptions of the ads. Maybe take one or two specific ads and deconstruct them: describe what you see, what grotesque images are being displayed, what are the exact consequences the ad creators wanted to communicate to their audience? If you do that, your paper will be even stronger, and will make it so that we focus in on crucial examples. I would also suggest honing in on one or two more rhetorical strategies. Definitely would make it so that your audience knows exactly what you are talking about, and how YOU see the ad being effective.

Works Cited

American Meth. Dir. Justin Hunt. 2008. Film.

Elizabeth, Dickinson. “The Montana Meth Project.” Communication Teacher July 2009: Vol. 23 Issue 3, p126-131. EBSCOhost. Web. 23 July 2011. <

Hang, Charles, Melissa Thompson, and M. Hayashi. “Methamphetamine-Info Facts.” National Institute on Drug Abuse. N.p., Mar. 2010. Web. 26 July 2011. <

The Meth Project. Meth Project Foundation, n.d. Web. 24 July 2011. <

“Meth Project Ads.” YouTube. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 July 2011. <

International Narcotics Control Board. Web. 24 July 2011.

1

[CW1]I think this opening is good, but would be stronger if you just let it stand on its own. Leave it here like this, italicized, and separate from your first paragraph. This gives your audience a punch right off the bat, I was already drawn in with those words alone, don’t add to it.

[CW2]Who is she?

[CW3]Liz --- you said you were concerned about your opinion in the paper. Yes, opinion is necessary, after all we are analyzing and trying to show our audience the effects of rhetoric. So opinion is important! However, I have always learned that using personal pronouns in writing weakens your argument. You can have opinion, but do it in a way that is hidden, so to speak. Notiee what I did here. Instead of saying, “I THINK YES!” I just rephrased it so it has no pronouns.

[CW4]I don’t think you need to say that. Your stats speak for themselves.

[CW5]This is awkward to me, it read funny and was confusing for me.

[CW6]Who is this?

[CW7]Quotations, citation?

[CW8]Nice concluding sentence, drives home your entire argument.