Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
False
General
Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
Discuss non-medical topics
Celebrity involvement in public health campaigns – does it ever deliver long term benefits? In the past, celebrities have been hired by governments to front public health campaigns. They have b
0
Cat:OffDutyForum:General
Cat:OffDutyForum:GeneralDiscussion:c4fda6df-9937-4f70-b2a4-2c4d3e1276d5
|
Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 17/4/2012 10:01 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 1488
First: 7/4/2011 Last: 17/6/2013 |
Celebrity involvement in public health campaigns – does it ever deliver long term benefits? In the past, celebrities have been hired by governments to front public health campaigns. They have been hired on the premise that they may be able to connect with the masses. Then you have celebrity chefs, like Jamie Oliver who tried to revolutionise school dinners in the UK and US, with mixed success and Hugh Fearnley Whittingstall who has promoted sourcing local produce or even going vegetarian. But how much really changes? I’m slightly cynical when celebrities get involved. I believe they are there just for the pay cheque and their involvement has no real lasting benefit, because a lot of these celebs have mostly ephemeral careers – how can we expect their message to stick? http://bit.ly/xWtxRF However, I am more sympathetic with Jamie Oliver who has campaigned a lot for school dinners to be more healthy and gone some way in educating people. Food is just one area, but what about other health-related endorsements by celebrities – how much really changes in the end? |
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 17/4/2012 10:05 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 3059
First: 27/3/2012 Last: 13/6/2013 |
It may apparently look so! But in fact it is not true. The general public does get attracted by the glamour of the celebrities.It does not necessarily mean that they actually get influenced by them. It appears that this policy is merely a businesses contract. |
|
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 2/5/2012 7:28 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 2
First: 2/5/2012 Last: 2/5/2012 |
Celebrity endorcement doesn't really help much in campaigns. Their sole purpose is to attract crowd but after that the crowd won't even bother so much with their talks. Speacking of celebs, their insurance are somewhat bizzare. Lloyd's of London offers specialized lines of insurance, as do select many businesses worldwide. Here are a few of the odd insurance policies such businesses offer. Notice what the prosperous and renowned value most. Source for this article: Strange insurance policies for celebrities and other rich folk |
|
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 2/5/2012 9:04 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 2133
First: 12/3/2010 Last: 16/6/2013 |
There are many celebrities who will take on a charitable cause and give their time, name and image to it, for nothing. Sir Jimmy Saville was the epitome of that, but there are many others who keep a lower profile in their work for charity. If such people require to be paid before they will endorse a good cause, then their support is worthless. John |
|
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 26/9/2012 10:32 AM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 1488
First: 7/4/2011 Last: 17/6/2013 |
A new BMJ Head-to-Head covers this topic. Does celebrity involvement in public health campaigns deliver long term benefit? In the 'No' camp, Geoff Rayner seems to say that celebrity involvement cannot deliver long term benefits because celebrity is essentially fleeting. I'm kind of inclined to agree but perhaps we are naive to assume that one celebrity would be able to raise sustained awareness about a health issue? How can we expect them to make a lasting impact? Jamie's school dinners campaign was brilliant but the government have thwarted him in terms of implementing lasting change. When there are so many external factors influencing how decisions are made at a high level, how can a celebrity's involvement simply change everything? |
|
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 27/9/2012 3:24 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 330
First: 12/11/2010 Last: 8/6/2013 |
If a celebrity tries to sell me yoghout or dodgy margarine that makes me less likely to buy it. Benechol & Pro-activ are a con: If they really worked to lower cholesterol they would be on prescription. |
|
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 28/9/2012 3:58 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
|
*Moderator*
Posts: 1488
First: 7/4/2011 Last: 17/6/2013 |
Also, as an aside, all of these cookery programmes are rarely about the food. I concur with much of the sentiment in the article below. These programmes are more about an unattainable lifestyle or recipies. You have food which art more than it is food on the great british bake off or masterchef, then there is the idyllic lifestyle of Hugh F-W in river cottage and most of the recipies have such obscure but expensive items! http://www.telegraph.co.uk/foodanddrink/9535676/Xanthe-Clay-Why-Im-fed-up-with-Nigella-Lawson-Jamie-Oliver-Mary-Berry-and-fake-food-television.html I don't think cookery shows promote health behaviours or even necessarily inspire people to cook for themselves more. In a way these programmes are a bit of a distraction... |
|
|
Re: Does celebrity endorsement change health behaviours?
posted at 28/9/2012 7:11 PM BST
on bmj.com
|
Posts: 1213
First: 19/4/2010 Last: 14/6/2013 |
I think a celebrity cancer makes a difference, for a while. When Kylie got breast cancer, there was immediately a big push for younger women to self examine, and present early. There was a noticable spike in early diagnoses. There's no celebrity lung cancer case, that I know of, unfortunately. |
