The worst cervical cancer campaign ever...

[PizzazzRoxyStorma]

...well isn't this one special?

https://x.com/northwestcancer/status/1724378139059503400?s=46&t=FvzNePXGikWIJeOA86F8cg

Perfect explanation, NeighbourhoodWatch - I think you've said everything that needs to be said. If only the charity would hire you or someone like you to advise them.

Honestly, Neighbourhood, you most excellent post will simply be continued to be ignored. Because all the previous posts have been ignored. No. Apologies, I think one poster admitted that if women didn't know they even had a cervix, then yeah... maybe money should be spend to educate them.

The issue is that there seems to be some people out there who think that 'carry on' film type humour is an appropriate in raising awareness in women who are NOT aware they have a cervix OR have cultural, trauma, time constraints, or a huge number of reasons to not attend their appointments. And this supposed ummm... risqué , was that how it was described?, approach is simply going to fail to reach them.

Yes, some people might get a laugh out of it.

People laugh at rape jokes too, don't they?

I don't consider that some women laugh at this as a convincing argument that it is successful at reaching the people they need to.

Again, we have been told we should accept a very low bar for success here. 'If it saves even a few lives, the denigration of women through the dismissal of their experiences should be considered worthwhile.' Fuck that.

Great post, very well explained. 👏🏻

As well as using clear language, cervical screening ads need to reassure women about the procedure. That advert fails on both counts.

Thank you, all of you! You're very kind!

Unfortunately, these campaigns seem to be developed by people whose social circles are somewhat limited. It's painfully obvious that to many in marketing, people with learning disabilities and illiterate adults are theoretical concepts they've only ever read about, which is fine when they're advertising high-end consumer products to wealthy young professionals.

Cancer screening campaigns, however, should be targeted at a much wider audience.

NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision

Your post explains this so brilliantly. This is the level of knowledge, compassion and understanding that gets lost when feminist thinking is stifled and faux feminist voices are amplified in order to not upset men.

The second group includes women who've suffered sexual trauma in the past. Even if every smear is actually fine and every HCP turns out to be a lovely, caring woman (this is my experience) it is still a very difficult procedure to force oneself to attend.

Beautifully put @NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision

I have a relative who works in advertising, broadly speaking

I remember her talking about a seminar/webinar where the participants were urged to talk to people outside their social circle and to read things other than the Guardian.

I don't know how many people in advertising get this sort of advice, or heed it even if they do. Very frew, I suspect.

Thank you for clarifying that. I was far too roundabout in that section, even though I have come to realise that the only way the impact of sexual abuse on women will ever be acknowledged, is if women force the ignorant to think about it.

It's been a hard habit to unlearn, and I still unthinkingly fall back on allusion to the impact of sexual violence instead of spelling out clearly what I mean.

Once again, thank you. It was a very good spot.

Excellent post @NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivisionI’ve not been for screening for years. My last one was so awful that I ended up in tears. It’s even worse now I’m post menopause. I’m probably also neurodiverse and can’t bear being touched by people.

What might encourage me to go is:

A decent practice nurse who treats me with care and understands my fears.
Minimal touching which I appreciate is difficult but maybe being allowed to insert the speculum myself.
More than a tiny piece of blue paper to cover myself with.
A bed that doesn’t face straight out onto the corridor that also has no curtains around it. How am I supposed to relax when someone could open the door at any time.
Not being told off when I do finally go which happened last time.
Not being weighed the minute I go in - yes I know I’m overweight but that isn’t the time or place for such discussions.

All very simple and pretty cost free things that would make a world of difference to me.

An advertising campaign telling me to uncross my legs. Nope, that’s totally inappropriate and just makes me feel sick.

Thank you. I absolutely do not think some women will find that particular campaign empowering, it suggests to me that the advertising agency involved has zero understanding of the factors influencing non-attendance, which should have been a key part of their brief.

What most women who don't access cervical screening need is either education (because they don't know what it is, why they might need it or how to access it, or to help remove stigma and cultural/language barriers) or support and reassurance to know that healthcare staff will take their fear or pain seriously and treat them with compassion.

For those of us who are willing to go for screening, there are of course as several other people have mentioned the practical issues around access, not being able to get appointments at convenient times etc.

This campaign doesn't address any of these issues, so I can't imagine how the charity thinks it's going to achieve anything.

Great post neighbourhood. Sums it up 👏👏👏

Iheartmysmart

If you should decide to go in the future (and please, please, please don't take this as an instruction that you should - it is your choice and your body), here is a great tip I got from MN, that came in very useful.

Wear an incredibly long skirt, and only remove your underwear. You feel so much more covered and dignified on the bed; it's so much better than a blue piece of paper over your legs.

And for examples of just how false 'there is no such thing as bad publicity' is: any one doing a Marketing degree gets a list of them. Top ones include things like :

Nestle pushing formula into the African nations while completely ignoring that those nations had limited access to fresh water to make the formula. That took decades of work by health professionals and mothers groups to work through the damage and some families were destroyed by this.

-Pepsi and Kylie Jenner
-McDonalds in 'supersize me' forced positive changes however, this had long term ramifications.

Here is another that hit an industry rather than a company:.

-Sideways movie - Merlot sales in the USA were impacted for years for absolutely no fault of any Merlot producer. Pinot Noir sales did amazingly well. All because Merlot was dismissed by someone on the movie as not being a wine that they would ever drink.

There are many examples in large companies who had the financial foundations to weather the damage.

Does any person on this thread supporting 'no such thing as bad publicity' honestly think that a charity should ever spend their money on a campaign that is likely to deliver 'bad publicity' and very little positive results?

As it is also likely to have tax payer support, should tax payers be paying for divisive and polarising campaigns?

Brilliant explanation, very much agree with this and the person who said ad agency people need to get out of their bubble. Yes, there are budget restrictions but if you're creating a campaign like this without doing qualitative work with the target groups, you're wasting your client's time and money anyway.

I really hope there will be a roll out of self testing at some point as an additional strand to the screening programme at least - it may not be perfect, but it allows women who otherwise wouldn't participate to at least clarify their HPV status and make informed decisions about their risk level.

I don't know. Most of my marketing friends don't really need to be told that, but then again, we tend to not be working in FMCG or prestige sectors anymore. As a comms person, I am always very conscious of the final message and whether it will or will not achieve the objective, this was drummed into us at uni three decades ago. Maybe that part gets missed these days?

That's the kind of thing you need in information around screening (glad to say we have this very tip in our resources!), practical advice on how to make it more comfortable, and reassurance, not stupid jokes.

Women who find it painful need to know they can ask for a smaller speculum, they can ask to insert it themselves, they can lie on their side rather than their back - all options to make it more comfortable. They don't need to be told to just spread their legs and suffer.

I actually find it ridiculous that there is any expectation that women should need to know they have a cervix at all. The ‘let’s educate the significant proportion of women who don’t know they have one, or what it’s called’ argument to be in the missing the point camp of interventions.

The messaging around this stuff should be clear and relayed in ways that are meaningful (and appropriate) to the audience.

I don’t, for example, need to know that I have villi in my intestine to seek help for gastrointestinal issues. In fact, I only know this now because my son has coeliac disease. Tying his ability to be diagnosed in any way to knowledge of villi would be a completely unreasonable barrier.

Just as women’s access to healthcare screening shouldn’t be in any way contingent on them Knowing the antaomical names for internal parts of their reproductive system. Why do we need women to know they have a cervix to deliver appropriate healthcare?

I've remembered another cohort of forgotten people: those with acquired brain injuries or cognitive degradation, e.g. the many types of dementia.

Right now I know exactly where a cervix is. But sadly, we're all one accident away from a life-changing injury. If a speeding car jumps a red light while I'm crossing the road tomorrow and I'm lucky enough to survive, not remembering the word "cervix" could be the least of my problems.

I posted earlier in the thread with a link to an update about self sampling. The screening programme is working on it.

Sorry, haven’t RTFT. Just parts of it. Does the UK not have self administered cervical screening? In Australia we have it. You go to your GP or wherever you’d normally go, a nurse explains how to do it, then you head off to the clinic toilet to do it yourself. Hand it back to the nurse and done. Nobody has to see any part of your naked body. My mum is very reluctant about cervical screening but once she found about self administered tests she was happy to do it, and then encouraged her sister to get screened too. Hopefully it’s on its way to being available in the UK seeing as it’s here.

The ad campaign in the OP is appalling. No way would it encourage me to get my screening done and I’m pretty relaxed about cervical/vaginal medical things with no trauma. It makes me cross my legs and think no way, fuck off you dirty pervs. Also no use of the words women or females is a big fail.

@NeighbourhoodWatchPotholeDivision your posts and this thread should be used in every marketing degree at university as a case study.

At first glance the sexy disembodied legs and bright colours look like a win to male marketers.

Now I will move on to the second group of women who don't engage with the screening programme. They doknow where a cervix is and who has one: that'swhythey're not booking appointments to have a screening. Perhaps they have already experienced painful or traumatic screenings, or perhaps they have good reason to expect that any future one will be painful or traumatic.

Either way, they have plenty ofawarenessalready.

What they need is reassurance that they will be taken seriously and treated with respect during an appointment. They want confirmations that they will be treated with gentleness and compassion; promises that the nurse or other HCP won't be dismissive. In short, adverts for screening need to build trust with prospective patients.

This would be me - and despite some awful experiences of smears I did try and get one booked at last GP for over 6 years - and was constantly thwarted and yet it was brought up at every other appointment as if it was my fault.

I'd have much less of an issue I think doing a regular HPV tests and then doing a smear if needed - rather than battling to have a traumatic smear that may well just be thrown away and never looked at.

I just saw this thread and honestly I am just in shock seeing this campaign. Who made this? does anyone know?

The amount of women who are victims of sexual assault, rape or even just coercive behaviour from men/boyfriends is astonishing and then someone does this kind of campaign?

This just shouts queer theory... Seriously who made this and thought it was great???

That would be much better.

Always nurse does it often short tempered - my fault if things aren't easy - only once have I not been told I had to have a student there as well - any pain is imaginary on my part or really discomfort -one one time there was office door opening and closing to rest of complex as well as staff wondering in and out.