So I’ve always thought this “Weed and Feed” TV commercial produced by the city of Austin, TX and the Texas Cooperative Extensions is just terrific. So I was relieved to see the Due Diligence Test Panel agrees with me.
This month, I’m conducting my first round of field trials for the Due Diligence Test Panel. To start, I pulled “Weed and Feed” and 9 other pieces from EPA’s Nonpoint Source Outreach Toolbox. These pieces are offered up as models for others to use or emulate, so they’re fair game for some public critique.
As you can see from the attached memo, the DDTP gives the “Weed and Feed” piece above average marks on almost every criteria. And when invited to share their opinions in their own words, they offer praise like this:
- “The piece is put together well. The problem is explained clearly. I like the way the young girl asks the question about the herbicide contained in “weed and feed” and then has the question answered as the piece proceeds. The piece also tells you what you can do to help eliminate the problem (spot weed or pull weeds by hand), which is very helpful in getting people to do something.”
- “The strongest evidence is shown clearly when they discovered this chemical in many major rivers lakes and streams.”
- “It’s great that it uses real people, not celebs.”
Here’s the method rundown:
- Step One: Begin with Behavior. Check — pull weeds and spot treat with small amounts of pesticide, rather than using toxic “weed and feed”
- Step Two: Foolproof Photos. Check — family, faces, babies, the works
- Step Three: Swap the Shoptalk. Check — the only unfamiliar word is “atrazine,” but in this context, it sounds like what it is: a nasty toxic chemical
- Step Four: Insert the Words That Work – they get a half-check here. They use words like “sick” and “toxic,” which imply that avoiding weed and feed is a healthy choice. But they don’t come right out and say that.
Good job, Texans!
Subscribe via RSS
Fan Our Facebook Page
Connect on LinkedIn