I’m posting this article in my blog for three reasons: first, many parts of the article are based on personal communication with me. Second, most of the campaign materials reviewed have been conceived and produced by myself. Third, it’s indeed a comprehensive review from an anthropological perspective which is interesting for sociologist like me.
On the other hand, some weaknesses in the article need to be pointed out, particularly for the reader who isn’t familiar with the various campaigns that were simultaneously aired during the period covered in the article:
- The article is limited to the campaigns that were implemented during the tenure of the author in Egypt. There were campaigns that preceded and others that followed that time span.
- The article confused campaigns which I developed with ones that I didn’t, and some criticisms were therefore quite vague and misleading as to which campaigns they applied to.
- In a comment on one TV spot, the article didn’t comprehend that the objective of the message was to encourage the use the IUD instead of the pill.
- The article ignores the fact that no claim can ever be made by anyone that 100 percent of the audience will act correctly upon any TV spot in Egypt or anywhere else.
- Finally, the article criticizes KAP surveys despite their huge samples, and ignores the fact that we also employed anthropological and other types of qualitative research. Some of the article’s grand conclusions, on the other hand, were based on samples of one or two women which is unscientific by any standard.