Bureaucracy, rule bound, limited, hassle, cost focused, profit, uncompassionate and paper work.
Those are just a few words that are associated with healthcare by the general public. Healthcare companies usually do not have a ravishing and helpful image among patients.
Yummy, money, profit, wealth!
But what if a company actually really did care about your well-being and promoted healthy living and had a positive image? Would you be excited to apply for healthcare with that company? Would truly believe that your well-being was their first priority?
A couple of nights ago at the dinner table I was talking to one of my friends (who is a PR major) about PR and social change. We discussed what kind of routes you could take with PR to help society -- like nonprofits, healthcare, etc. (you get the gist). I asked her if she had any suggestions on campaigns she learned about in any of her PR classes that I could research. She suggested Kaiser Permanente's "Thrive" Campaign, saying that it was "a really good PR campaign." The $40 million "Thrive" campaign appeared for the first time during the 2004 Olympics with nothing but a picture of broccoli. The commercial stated (in summary),
The whole gist of a remarkably brilliant campaign was to show that Kaiser, a [hence] health care company really cared not only about "protecting" one's life, but also cared enough to advocate and condone healthy living. I definitely have to give the PR practitioners credit who worked on this campaign credit; the campaign is very creative.
Not surprisingly, Kaiser launched this campaign to "change perceptions among people whom might not be familiar with the organization's benefits or might have negative impressions about the company," said a PR practitioner who worked on the Thrive campaign to the Oakland Tribune. Well, there you have it. A PR practitioner hard at work, glitz n' glammin' Kaiser Permanente's image to the mass media.
The quote sounds so constructed and easily brushes over the facts -- the real reason why Kaiser launched this campaign -- which many that formerly worked for Kaiser would consider it to be a "dirty PR tactic."
According to a Kaiser presentation on "Brand Positioning Discussion," a key bullet point states:
Translation: 75% of people will reject Kaiser. How can a positive image help us profit? If Kaiser is really worried about the amount of people that will not consider them for health care then why would they spend millions of dollars on this PR campaign? Just compare the two quotes. Obviously the 75% was left out of the quote to the Oakland Tribune -- 75% of people is a lot, and Kaiser knows that and that those people equal an abundance of money!
I understand one would never quote the 75% in any interview with the media because it will give the health care company bad publicity. But if it's all about profit for these health care companies (we can't forget Michael Moore's movie Sicko) I would have to believe that inviting the public into a friendly campaign for health isn't really about helping others. Kaiser's last PR campaign before Thrive, "KP Promise" was actually not that successful with recruiting new patients.
This kind of throws me off thinking that working with the health system and PR could help society. If Kaiser had as many patients (or clients, as you may call them) that they need, do you think they would have launched the Thrive campaign?
I'm thinking no.
Those are just a few words that are associated with healthcare by the general public. Healthcare companies usually do not have a ravishing and helpful image among patients.
Yummy, money, profit, wealth!
But what if a company actually really did care about your well-being and promoted healthy living and had a positive image? Would you be excited to apply for healthcare with that company? Would truly believe that your well-being was their first priority?
A couple of nights ago at the dinner table I was talking to one of my friends (who is a PR major) about PR and social change. We discussed what kind of routes you could take with PR to help society -- like nonprofits, healthcare, etc. (you get the gist). I asked her if she had any suggestions on campaigns she learned about in any of her PR classes that I could research. She suggested Kaiser Permanente's "Thrive" Campaign, saying that it was "a really good PR campaign." The $40 million "Thrive" campaign appeared for the first time during the 2004 Olympics with nothing but a picture of broccoli. The commercial stated (in summary),
"We stand for broccoli. For pilates. And dental floss. We believe in the treadmill and its siblings Stairmaster, and elliptical. In SPF 30 we trust. We stand for safe sex, seat belts, and mammograms . . ."
The whole gist of a remarkably brilliant campaign was to show that Kaiser, a [hence] health care company really cared not only about "protecting" one's life, but also cared enough to advocate and condone healthy living. I definitely have to give the PR practitioners credit who worked on this campaign credit; the campaign is very creative.
Not surprisingly, Kaiser launched this campaign to "change perceptions among people whom might not be familiar with the organization's benefits or might have negative impressions about the company," said a PR practitioner who worked on the Thrive campaign to the Oakland Tribune. Well, there you have it. A PR practitioner hard at work, glitz n' glammin' Kaiser Permanente's image to the mass media.
The quote sounds so constructed and easily brushes over the facts -- the real reason why Kaiser launched this campaign -- which many that formerly worked for Kaiser would consider it to be a "dirty PR tactic."
According to a Kaiser presentation on "Brand Positioning Discussion," a key bullet point states:
"75% of people who are offered Kaiser Permanete probably or definitely would not consider us for their health care coverage. The goal of all our communications and operational efforts is to positively impact these negative perceptions."
Translation: 75% of people will reject Kaiser. How can a positive image help us profit? If Kaiser is really worried about the amount of people that will not consider them for health care then why would they spend millions of dollars on this PR campaign? Just compare the two quotes. Obviously the 75% was left out of the quote to the Oakland Tribune -- 75% of people is a lot, and Kaiser knows that and that those people equal an abundance of money!
I understand one would never quote the 75% in any interview with the media because it will give the health care company bad publicity. But if it's all about profit for these health care companies (we can't forget Michael Moore's movie Sicko) I would have to believe that inviting the public into a friendly campaign for health isn't really about helping others. Kaiser's last PR campaign before Thrive, "KP Promise" was actually not that successful with recruiting new patients.
This kind of throws me off thinking that working with the health system and PR could help society. If Kaiser had as many patients (or clients, as you may call them) that they need, do you think they would have launched the Thrive campaign?
I'm thinking no.
No comments:
Post a Comment