Montana Meth Project Research Paper

As the number of meth users grew in Montana, Thomas and Stacey Siebel decided action need to be taken. As a result the, Montana Meth Project was birthed. The Montana Meth Project intended to show the public the horrors of meth use. This project used scare tactics, in the hope of steering young adults away from the substance. According to the Montana Meth Project’s official website, they were able to decrease meth use in Arizona by 65 percent, in Montana by 63 percent and Idaho by 56 percent (Montana Meth Project). But, do these scare campaigns actually work? Does exaggerating information have any consequences? Do these tactics undermine young adult’s trust? And was this campaign actually successful? Many people, as well as I, agree negative campaigns do not decrease drug use. When referring back to the film, Reefer Madness one will realize scare tactics never actually worked. As in the case of Reefer Madness, the film was viewed as propaganda and considered a joke among its watchers. According

Yes, the official website report of decreasing meth use in Arizona by 65 percent, in Montana by 63 percent and Idaho by 56 percent is true (Montana Meth Project). However, researchers report that “meth use had been declining for at least six years before the ad campaign commenced, which suggests that factors other than the graphic ads caused a reduction in meth use. Moreover, these researchers discovered “teens who had been exposed to six months of the project 's graphics ads were three times as likely to say they did not believe meth use was risky behavior and four times more likely to strongly approve of regular meth use. Half of the teens said the ads exaggerated the dangers of meth use” (Smith). These findings indicate that the Montana Meth Project was not as successful as they claimed to be. Due to the fact, the exaggerated drug information, what is preventing them from not exaggerating their success