Some time ago a group of unhappy and grieving mothers decided to form Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD). They wanted to use TV, radio and music to caution teens about the danger of driving while intoxicated. Those mothers formed MADD well before the appearance of online ads for the alcohol detector. The appearance on the Internet of advertisements for the Personal Alcohol Detector could cause those mothers to alter the focus of their campaign. Such ads do not really give teens an honest appraisal of the value of the detector. Such ads might have too many teens thinking that their personal assessment of their readiness to drive can be as good as or better than the signal from such detectors. MADD must re-educate the confused teens who read such ads.
Should Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) get mad about appearance on the internet of ads for the alcohol detector? In order to answer that question, one should really examine the mentality of the users of the standard alcohol detector. Do such users tend to abandon use of a motor vehicle following even a hint that there is alcohol on their breath, or do such users frequently discount the signal from such a detector?
A device such as the BT5500 Personal Alcohol Detector fits easily into a pocket or a purse. It is about the same size as a cigarette lighter. The user of the BT5500 can quickly obtain information about the possible presence of alcohol on his or her breath. Such a user can not, however, know whether or not the detected presence of alcohol in some exhaled air rises to the level one would find on an intoxicated individual.
A close examination of the ads for the Personal Alcohol Detector suggests that the absence of such information might discourage caution on the part of the detector users. The information in those ads suggests that too many users simply discount the signal from the personal detector, because they realize that detection of alcohol in exhaled air does not always mean intoxication. Ads warn the detector users not to think of the detector as a device with the same precision as the analyzers used by law enforcement workers.
Of course, such warnings usually appear in a smaller print. A larger print is used to imply that the detector will help the detector user to avoid a confrontation with the law. The ads suggest that the detector will prevent a drinker from getting into a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated state. Yet, there is no explanation of how the inability to identify a state of intoxication can prevent an intoxicated driver from getting behind the wheel.
The absence of such an explanation, in combination with the obvious promotion of the alcohol detector, could raise the ire of more than one member of MADD. The absence of such an explanation could lead a gullible teen to assume that a signal from the alcohol detector resulted from the intake of only a few drinks. That same teen could incorrectly assume that his or her blood did not contain a dangerous level of alcohol. That teen could then choose to drive home, and even to offer a ride to others at a party.
The possible occurrence of such a potentially harmful series of events would give members of MADD plenty of reason to become more than a little mad about the effort to encourage teens to use alcohol detectors. MADD must now put money into educating teens about the limited information coming from such a detector.
Should Mothers Against Drunk Drivers (MADD) get mad about appearance on the internet of ads for the alcohol detector? In order to answer that question, one should really examine the mentality of the users of the standard alcohol detector. Do such users tend to abandon use of a motor vehicle following even a hint that there is alcohol on their breath, or do such users frequently discount the signal from such a detector?
A device such as the BT5500 Personal Alcohol Detector fits easily into a pocket or a purse. It is about the same size as a cigarette lighter. The user of the BT5500 can quickly obtain information about the possible presence of alcohol on his or her breath. Such a user can not, however, know whether or not the detected presence of alcohol in some exhaled air rises to the level one would find on an intoxicated individual.
A close examination of the ads for the Personal Alcohol Detector suggests that the absence of such information might discourage caution on the part of the detector users. The information in those ads suggests that too many users simply discount the signal from the personal detector, because they realize that detection of alcohol in exhaled air does not always mean intoxication. Ads warn the detector users not to think of the detector as a device with the same precision as the analyzers used by law enforcement workers.
Of course, such warnings usually appear in a smaller print. A larger print is used to imply that the detector will help the detector user to avoid a confrontation with the law. The ads suggest that the detector will prevent a drinker from getting into a motor vehicle while in an intoxicated state. Yet, there is no explanation of how the inability to identify a state of intoxication can prevent an intoxicated driver from getting behind the wheel.
The absence of such an explanation, in combination with the obvious promotion of the alcohol detector, could raise the ire of more than one member of MADD. The absence of such an explanation could lead a gullible teen to assume that a signal from the alcohol detector resulted from the intake of only a few drinks. That same teen could incorrectly assume that his or her blood did not contain a dangerous level of alcohol. That teen could then choose to drive home, and even to offer a ride to others at a party.
The possible occurrence of such a potentially harmful series of events would give members of MADD plenty of reason to become more than a little mad about the effort to encourage teens to use alcohol detectors. MADD must now put money into educating teens about the limited information coming from such a detector.
No comments:
Post a Comment