Media Advocacy

Controlling a Media Interview

As seen on GovLoop.

A number of things can happen that will cause a media interview to backfire, but there are ways to avoid having it become a complete disaster.

Any type of public speaking is perhaps one of the most intimidating things that a person can do. As a matter of fact, the Wall Street Journal reports that more Americans are scared of public speaking than they are of dying. And it’s no wonder why: any mishap or gaffe can live on in infamy on social media.

When going into a media interview, it helps speakers to have a “hope for the best, expect the worst” mentality. Reporters can intentionally or unintentionally try to trip up an interviewee. After all, it is their job to get to the bottom of a story. Therefore, preparation is key to making sure that everything you say is fair game for the news reporter to include in their broadcast or article.

Here are a few tricky scenarios that reporters may use and solutions on how a spokesperson can handle them.

Scenario 1: They ask questions that stump you.

The reporter asks a question in which you generally do not know the answer. This one easily catches spokespeople off guard and can easily lead to an uncomfortable silence as you scramble through your thoughts on how to best answer it.

Solution: Only tell the reporter what you know, not what you don’t know. If you are not the right person to answer a given question, it’s okay to say so. Offer to connect the reporter with someone who does know the answer.

Scenario 2: They ask you to speculate.

Among tricky questions reporters ask, predicting the future is a popular one. In trying to answer, you may inadvertently escalate a situation unnecessarily, provide incorrect information and be proven wrong.

Solution: As you prepare for your interview, write out two or three key messages, or sound bites, that you want the audience to walk away with. When you are asked this type of tricky question, you have a “transitional” or “bridging” statement prepared that will then lead the audience to your key message. For example, you may say, “That’s a good question and I won’t have a good answer to that until I receive further information (the ‘bridge’), but the most important thing that the public needs to remember right now is ……….. insert key message here.”

Scenario 3: They ask for your opinion.

Conflicts between personal opinion and agency policy can occur. But you have to be careful: Organizations have distanced themselves, often with dire consequences, from numerous public figures and celebrities due to statements that run counter to their values and brand. So you have to remind yourself of who is being asked the question: you as Jane Citizen or Joe Public, or you as the representative of your agency?

Solution: To navigate this question, address the request, create a bridge (have one ready!) and stay vigilant that you don’t say anything that contradicts your organization’s views.

Scenario 4: They ask questions out of left field.

Sometimes a question is asked that, although related to the topic at hand, is irrelevant to the final message that you hope to deliver. It’s the curveball of media interviews.

Solution: You can try to anticipate these questions by putting yourself in the reporter’s shoes and have an answer ready. Or, you can create a bridge and lead the audience to your two to three key messages that you already have prepared.

To summarize, remember these four points:

  • Pause before answering a question. Feel comfortable with silence. Take the time to collect your thoughts. Pauses can always be edited out in post-production if the interview is recorded and not live.
  • Don’t acknowledge points that you might contradict.
  • It’s okay to say you don’t know the answer to a question. But do offer to get back to them if they’d like.
  • Decline or refer questions to someone more knowledgeable if you have to.

Media interviews do not have to be as daunting as you think. A bit of preparation and practice can be the difference between one that succeeds and one that becomes a social media sensation for all the wrong reasons.

Author:
Meredith Gibson
Media Director, IPS

Meredith Gibson is the Media Director for the Binge and Underage Drinking Initiative, Countywide Media Advocacy Project and Partnerships for Success. She generates news articles to promote awareness of public health issues, collaborates on opinion editorials (op-eds) with community leaders, and pitches ideas and spokespersons to news outlets, amassing media coverage at the local and national levels.

Allies

Businesses and Public Health: Allies, Not Adversaries

The storyline has been consistent throughout the pandemic: economic and public health interests are fundamentally at odds. The reality is quite different. Business and public health have always been intrinsically connected, with shared mutual interests.

One such interest is having a healthy workforce. Employees that maintain good health are more cooperative and productive. They improve companies’ public personas. Alternatively, if employees are unhealthy, they are more likely to call in sick, costing U.S. businesses $225 billion annually. This has long been a real concern in the U.S., where many workers experience preventable health problems.

Consider the following statistics: about 17% of adults smoke, costing businesses an annual average of more than $5000 per employee in smoking breaks and health costs. About 70% of Americans over 20 years old are overweight or obese, costing businesses well over $4000 per year in additional health care costs. And 25% of Americans 18 years and older had at least one heavy drinking day in the last year, costing businesses an estimated $179 billion annually in lost workplace productivity.

These numbers reveal a significant opportunity. By developing an intentional and strategic focus on health factors for employees, such as stress, excess alcohol consumption, and smoking, businesses could be reducing their expenses and increasing their profits.

A business-health collaboration is not unusual for successful companies. In 2016, Target chose to look outward. As a centerpiece of its Corporate Social Responsibility strategy, the company invested $40 million in 50 nonprofit organizations across the U.S. to increase the physical activity and healthy eating habits of children and their families. This type of investment hinges on the premise that healthier American communities are fundamental to the future of all profitable companies.

Such business-health collaborative efforts can happen on a smaller scale. The University of Washington, together with the American Cancer Society and eight employers in the Pacific Northwest, launched a promotional program that encouraged employees to utilize the preventative aspects of their health insurance, such as cancer screening and flu vaccines. The program increased targeted preventive behaviors among employees from 38 to 61 percent.

There are also a growing number of businesses that directly support health and well-being through their products or services. Tech companies excel at this. They create applications that more effectively support exercise, nutritional products and services, and healthy homes and neighborhoods. These social-entrepreneurial businesses could be natural partners for public health organizations, as they are already focusing on improving peoples’ health.

More and more so, business leaders are seeing the importance of health and wellbeing in everything from driving up profits to attracting and retaining talent. Conversely, healthy communities lead to stronger workforces and economies. In other words, business and public health are natural allies. Even a pandemic doesn’t change that.

Author:
Eric Collins
Vice President of Programs, IPS

Eric Collins has thrived working in the communications, nonprofit and government sectors for three decades. He rejoined IPS in 2020 as the Vice President of Programs. In earlier roles with the organization, he directed the activities of the Alcohol Policy Panel of San Diego County and served as a project manager on county and federal grants focused on public health and safety, community revitalization, and substance abuse prevention.

GIS in Public Health

The Role of GIS in Public Health

As seen on GovLoop.

Geographic information systems (GIS) answer the question of where: where diseases are prevalent; where vulnerable populations live; and where resources are most needed to improve health conditions. GIS consists of the data, technology and people who answer these questions. And it has never been more relevant than it is today.

In the past year alone, health professionals have used it to address the COVID-19 pandemic, opioid epidemic, vaping-related respiratory illness and other diseases and injuries.  GIS is helping public, private and non-profit organizations make effective and efficient decisions, from collecting data to analyzing it to presenting it in a user-friendly manner.Snow Cholera Map

History of Mapping and Public Health

In the nineteenth century, John Snow was the first to use mapping in epidemiological research. In 1854, London suffered from an outbreak of cholera, and Snow mapped the locations of those stricken by the disease. By looking at where cholera victims lived, he observed a spatial pattern and identified the water source suspected of being responsible for the outbreak. This event marked the founding of epidemiology – the study of patterns, causes and distribution of diseases and health-related events.

This image is of John Snow’s map of cholera cases in London 1854.

Uses in Public Health

GIS benefits public health by:

  • Collecting information. The prevention of disease is paramount in developing healthy individuals and communities. But first, we need to understand what conditions exist that compromise health and safety. Policymakers cannot make evidence-informed decisions without qualitative or quantitative data to back it up. To collect the data, for example, an app can be created in which users report signs of blight in their neighborhood, which municipal agencies can use to prioritize cleanup crews.
  • Analyzing spatial patterns. Instances of disease can be mapped and analyzed to reveal patterns in its distribution, as evident in John Snow’s cholera map. But this just scratches the surface of GIS’ analytical capabilities. For example, you could use a proximity analysis to identify “food deserts” — an area that has limited access to affordable and nutritious food — in relation to schools or youth-centered establishments to help school districts create policies that make accessible nutrition a priority for students.
  • Allocating resources. You wouldn’t want to build a hospital in an area where there are several others. Nor would you want to deprive a rural community of access to much needed health care. GIS enables planners to figure out the best location for health care services based on the population served.
  • Presenting data in an easy-to-understand way. Most humans are visual beings, and looking at a map or data dashboard compared to reading rows of numbers is a good way to help users understand the distribution of health issues. For instance, it is easier to tell where there are cancer clusters in a region by a heat map than by looking at a spreadsheet.

GIS Tools

No matter which GIS software you use, four basic tools can help any public health professional in their role as a disease-fighting superhero:

  1. Maps — the most basic of GIS tools. It can contain geopolitical layers such as census tracts, zip codes, city council districts or health agency sub-regions. It can include layers of demographic data, such as the number of households that live below the area’s median income. And it can also include health data, such as the percentage of the population with a substance use disorder.
  2. Story maps. As the name implies, they narrate a story in a compelling way with maps, photographs, text, videos and charts.
  3. Crowdsourcing apps. These apps are a great way to collect data in the field by being accessible on a mobile device. The methodology in collecting the data is a good way to encourage people to be active and engaged stakeholders in their community.
  4. Data dashboards. These provide key insights on data. You can combine maps, charts, gauges, lists and text on a single computer screen to present data.

Even with all these tools, the most valuable asset in GIS is the public health professional – the one with the innovation and creativity to collect data, map it, analyze it and present it.

Author:
Meredith Gibson
Media Director, IPS

Meredith Gibson is the Media Director for the Binge and Underage Drinking Initiative, Countywide Media Advocacy Project, and Partnerships for Success. She generates news articles to promote awareness of public health issues, collaborates on opinion editorials (op-eds) with community leaders, and pitches ideas and spokespersons to news outlets, amassing media coverage at the local and national levels.

Equitable Housing

Equitable Housing: A Place-Based Solution to Racism

Since the beginning of 2020, we have become acutely aware of how systemic racism has impacted people of color in America. With far greater percentages of Blacks and Latinx succumbing to COVID-19, the disparities in health and health care among these populations have been laid bare. And with elevated rates of infant mortality, heart disease, and other chronic illnesses among communities of color, some health experts and lawmakers call racism a public health emergency.

This extends to housing. People of color have been forced to live in concentrated poverty areas far more often than their White counterparts. According to a study by the Brookings Institute, poor Blacks were almost five times as likely as poor Whites to live in an extremely poor neighborhood. Poor Latinx were three times as likely.

With fewer social services and limited access to health care, lower-performing schools, and fewer job-seeking networks, most residents of poor neighborhoods get trapped in a cycle of chronic poverty that is often perpetuated through generations.

Aggravated by these conditions, higher rates of crime are also common to such neighborhoods. Police working in extremely poor neighborhoods often live in a completely different area and have little connection with the people they serve. They also have little understanding of implicit bias and the historical racist practices that their agency still upholds. Therefore, in responding to a bad situation, police officers seek only to suppress and return conditions to “normal.” But in a community struggling for the basic necessities of life, America’s normal for people of color is unacceptable.

We need to remember that the frustration and hopelessness expressed by communities of color are not just about police brutality or even chronic poverty. Their origin lies in the systemic racism that has continued to keep Black and other people of color separate – physically and otherwise – from the rest of society and excluded from its benefits.

More than anything else, it was a series of public policies, conceived in an era known as “separate but equal,” that allowed racism to become institutionalized throughout American neighborhoods. It began early in the 20th century when Black Americans migrated from the rural south to cities in the north. Desperate to maintain the status quo, policymakers created zoning codes that specified where Blacks could not live, aggressively funneling them away from white neighborhoods.

Later came the process of redlining, introduced by the Federal Housing Administration in 1934. The agency was created to advance homeownership through loan guarantees, but it explicitly refused to back loans to Black people or even other people who lived near Black people. Although the Fair Housing Act of 1968 was passed to stop redlining, this behavior still continued through restrictive covenants, discriminatory steering by real estate agents, and restricted access to private capital. All of this has circumvented any investment where Black people and other communities of color live, making their homes and communities a product of racism.

When a specific group of people has been separated by geographical boundaries, as Black people have now for hundreds of years, racial stereotypes grow, eventually becoming entrenched in the culture. Today, Black stereotypes are commonly linked to violence and criminality. We are witness to such beliefs almost daily through movies and cop shows.

However, through social media, we also witness people calling for equity in America. This includes equal access to quality health care and social services, good education, a right to fair representation in law enforcement, and especially a place where home is just as safe for a Black family as it might be for others.

It’s time to rewrite the rules to support affordable housing being built in wealthy neighborhoods. A 2015 Supreme Court ruling made this possible by affirming that the Fair Housing Act could be used to actively promote racial integration. Ensuring that people of color have access to better health care, education, and job opportunities is perhaps the one thing that could make America whole again.

Author:
Brenda Simmons
CEO/President, IPS

Brenda Simmons began her career at IPS in 2003 as a community organizer in San Diego County. She was promoted multiple times before she was elevated to CEO/President in April 2019. She has a broad range of experience working in very conservative rural and frontier communities in Montana, ultra-progressive communities including Los Angeles and West Hollywood, and everything in between. Brenda has been involved in projects ranging in focus from substance abuse prevention to community revitalization to child-sex trafficking. As CEO, Brenda oversees more than a dozen IPS projects in Southern California.

GIS Disparities

How GIS Exposed Racial and Socioeconomic Disparities in San Diego’s South Bay

As seen on GovLoop.

Geographic information systems (GIS) is playing an important role in helping San Diegans address health inequities along the U.S.-Mexico border.

An Upstream Approach to Substance Use Prevention

The Partnerships 4 Success (P4S) project uses geospatial technology to map conditions in San Diego’s South Bay. This area is known for its diversity and Latino cultural heritage. However, it is also known for its binge and underage drinking along the U.S.-Mexico border as well as methamphetamine use and cross-border juvenile drug smuggling.

The project aims to advance opportunities and policies that create a healthy and vibrant South Bay by reducing substance use. The team does this by addressing the factors that lead to the region’s harmful conditions, specifically among the Latino population.

P4S takes a community-level approach to substance use prevention, because the neighborhood where a person lives often determines if they experience positive or negative health outcomes. It influences their quality of life and even their life expectancy.

Communities of color historically experience greater health disparities than their white counterparts due to factors such as a lack of access to transportation, health care, quality education, housing security and economic opportunity. These communities also may experience more crime, violence, blight and exposure to high-risk businesses such as bars and liquor stores.

Moreover, all these factors are heavily influenced by racism, discrimination and social injustice. They can create what is referred to as community trauma. It is not surprising then that all this toxic stress can lead to a high risk of substance abuse.

Using GIS to Guide Policy Decisions

By using ArcGIS Pro, the P4S team identified the census tracts in the South Bay most in need of intervention by creating a trivariate choropleth map. In laymen’s terms, this is a map that depicts three different data layers in an easy-to-interpret map. The map shows the Hardship Index, Child Opportunity Index and the percentage of the Latino population.

The Hardship Index is a composite of six scores:

  1. Unemployment rate
  2. Dependency (% of the population older than 65 or younger than 18)
  3. Low education attainment (% of those over the age of 25 with less than a high school education)
  4. Per capita income
  5. Housing overcrowding (more than 1 occupant/room)
  6. Poverty level (less than 100% of federal poverty)

The greater the hardship, the darker the color of the census tract on the map.

The Child Opportunity Index is an index that captures neighborhood conditions that matter for children’s healthy development in terms of education, health and environment, and social and economic opportunity. The lower the childhood opportunity, the darker the color of the census tract.

The Hardship Index and Child Opportunity Index were combined into one color scheme. The third data set is the Latino population. The larger the point symbol, the higher the Latino population.

With this GIS map, the P4S team identified two distinct areas in the South Bay where there was low childhood opportunity, high hardship and a significant Latino population where intervention would be most valuable.

Supporting Positive Outcomes 

A core group of experts in public health, social services, education, faith organizations, mental health and government will lead the project and work with these communities to advocate for improved community conditions.

By giving the South Bay the chance for greater health opportunities, the project hopes to build a community where everyone has an equal chance at the type of life they want to live.

Author:
Meredith Gibson
Media Director, IPS

Meredith Gibson is the Media Director for the Binge and Underage Drinking Initiative, Countywide Media Advocacy Project and Partnerships for Success. She generates news articles to promote awareness of public health issues, collaborates on opinion editorials (op-eds) with community leaders, and pitches ideas and spokespersons to news outlets, amassing media coverage at the local and national levels.

Grocery Worker

Essential Workers Risk their Lives and We Benefit. What Can We Do in Return?

COVID-19 has made it clear that many of our cities have built their communities along the same racial and economic divide that has disadvantaged communities of color for centuries. And yet, these same communities of color house our essential workers. There live our grocers, truck drivers, custodians, meat packers, and other unsung heroes. They are risking their lives, and their families’ lives, when they enter their work place every day.

Those who benefit must consider this question: Do our essential workers have the resources they need to cope with the disproportionate impact COVID-19 is having on their communities? Do we care enough?

The answer to both questions, unfortunately, is no.

In San Diego, the communities in the South region – where 78% of the county’s minority residents live  — have the highest rates of infection. Health officials are seeing similar trends in cities like New York, Chicago, Milwaukee, and Los Angeles. It is clear that the virus is disproportionately affecting black Americans, Latinx, and Native Americans in the US.

These statistics are a reflection of society’s inherently racist infrastructure. The infection rates highlight the inequities that these communities face nationwide. And as COVID-19 spreads, our nation’s health disparities are simultaneously exposed and worsened.

Officials all over the country are demanding that testing sites be placed in infection hot spots. And while getting more testing nationwide is crucial to reducing our COVID-19 numbers, the reality is that our communities of color are more susceptible to the virus because of the environmental conditions they live in.

Public health officials directly correlate physical health with many environmental factors. Neighborhoods riddled with poor air quality, broken or missing sidewalks, no safe green spaces, and a lack of grocery stores make residents susceptible to poor health. Additionally, the combination of low living wages and poor access to health care or healthcare services contributes to the likelihood of a person deciding to skip a doctor’s visit – and its co-payment – to buy food for the week.

These social and environmental circumstances are the reason why chronic conditions such as diabetes, heart disease, and advanced stages of cancer are much more rampant in communities of color. Further, all of these conditions make a virus like COVID-19 far deadlier. And yet, we continue to ask our essential workers living in underserved communities to show up to work every day despite the augmented risk. Because without them, our society crumbles.

The truth of the matter is that our essential workers are living in places where their zip code has a greater impact on their lives than their genetic code. And this needs to change. These communities are the backbone of our country. They are our essential communities.

Where do we go from here? What can we do to help the essential workers who risk their lives every day for our benefit? We can support the change that’s underway. Counties all over the nation accelerate their funding to programs that provide bilingual assistance to all those navigating the county’s system for relief resources. We can demand the same from our elected officials. We can demand that more resources flow to disadvantaged neighborhoods, not just during this time of crisis. We need to take advantage of this momentum and ensure these programs continue on, even after COVID-19.

Programs like these are the foundation needed to keep working families sheltered, fed, and connected. They help ensure our essential workers and their communities stay healthy enough to protect us.

We owe them that much.

Author:
Breny Aceituno
Prevention Specialist, IPS

Breny Aceituno is a Prevention Specialist for Partnerships for Success, a program that aims to disarm the health disparities present in Latino communities living near the San Diego border. Breny graduated from UCLA with a bachelor’s in Political Science. She earned a master’s degree in Conflict Management from the University of Haifa in Israel. Breny considers herself a life-long learner who is driven by the actionable accountable measures that can improve our communities.

Covid-19

Has COVID-19 Evened the Playing Field?

Most of us couldn’t predict the head spinning change that would come with the advent of COVID-19. We are living in unprecedented times where terms like “social distancing” and “stay-at-home orders” have become household terms across the nation.

It would seem COVID-19 has placed us all on the same playing field. For the first time in recent history, a deadly virus that knows no boundaries, transcends all borders, and discriminates against no one has taken the world center stage, and we are all sitting in the front row. Rich and poor people alike are being subjected to stay-at-home orders and are sheltering in place. From Prince Charles, to British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, to the tens of thousands suffering in the developing world, this virus has proven it is not a respecter of persons.

In reality, however, the playing field isn’t even at all. While the virus itself does not discriminate against anyone, the distribution of resources does. Those with greater opportunity also have better access to quality health care and testing. If they need a ventilator, they are more likely to get one. In other words, they are more likely to survive.

Conversely, people of color are more likely to die. A study conducted by a team of epidemiologists and clinicians from four universities suggests that more African Americans are dying from the coronavirus in the United States than are whites or other ethnic groups. They found that counties with higher populations of Back residents accounted for 52% of coronavirus diagnoses and 58% of COVID-19 deaths nationwide.

Additionally, people of color across the country are those more likely deemed essential because they hold frontline service or retail jobs. They often work for minimum wage, and with no health benefits, yet are incurring greater exposure to the deadly virus. Many feel compelled to work even if they are sick because they have no other means to pay the rent or put food on the table. Plus, they are more likely to use public transportation, putting themselves and their families at greater risk.

Staying at home while recovering from the virus is not the same for the poor. While the wealthy and middle class can safely stay in the privacy of their own home and even enjoy the luxury of a backyard, with a tutor helping their children learn from home, it is not uncommon for Latinx to live in households of more than five in small quarters. This living arrangement makes it dangerous for the entire family, and overwhelmingly stressful, especially if they do not have sick leave.

People of color have historically been marginalized and in many ways, they have been socio-economically quarantined. They do not have the same access as the wealthy to resources that would improve their health and quality of life.

This is a travesty not only for them but for the nation.

Maybe we can all learn something good from this pandemic. If we all advocate for policies and economies that are more inclusive and promote equity in the areas of life that matter most, we would be doing our country and our economy a great service.

Maybe then we can finally even the playing field for everyone.

Author:
Susan Caldwell
Senior Program Strategist, IPS

Susan Caldwell, Senior Program Strategist, started her career with IPS in 2005. Her experience includes program development, project management, media advocacy, grant writing and policy strategy. Susan values diverse relationships and working to advance initiatives in unique communities through multi-sector partnerships.