This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by DeJong, W. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by DeJong, W. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

MADD Massachusetts Versus Senator Burke: A Media Advocacy Case Study

In 1991, the Massachusetts legislature considered a bill that would have allowed a drunk driving defendant's refusal to take a breathalyzer test to be admitted as evidence in a criminal trial. After the measure passed in both houses, a state senator used a parliamentary maneuver to prevent it from being prepared for the governor's signature. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) employed media advocacy techniques to alert the public, but the senator was unyielding and the legislative calendar ran out with the bill unsigned. Because of MADD's efforts, however, the senate president put the bill on a "fast track" the following year. The news media's focused attention on MADD's protests exposed deep schisms among its volunteer leadership regarding the nature and purpose of the organization and the appropriateness of using confrontational media strategies to advance its agenda. Paralyzed by the lack of consensus, MADD Massachusetts was rendered a far less effective advocate for policy change.

Health Education & Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 3, 318-329 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/109019819602300304


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?