PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF POVERTY QUALITATIVE RESEARCH FINDINGS: WAVE 3

1. PUBLIC PERCEPTIONS OF POVERTYQUALITATIVE RESEARCH FINDINGS: WAVE 3 Prepared for:Comic Relief Prepared by:Alice Fenyoe, Mary Battley:Synovate Job number:06-0047 Date:February 2006

2. PRESENTATION STRUCTURE • Background and objectives • Research approach and sample • Defining the sample • A review of 2005 (and MPH’s position within it) • Campaigning and the general public • Comic Relief and Red Nose Day • The trade issue • The corruption issue • A note on the role of government • Conclusions

3. BACKGROUND • ‘Public Perceptions of Poverty’ (PPP) is a research programme designed to evaluate the progress of MAKEPOVERTYHISTORY in terms of both the ‘brand’ itself and its objectives • PPP designed to run over three years, and utilises a multi-faceted research approach including qualitative research, desk research, and an omnibus tracking survey • This debrief deals with Wave 3 of the qualitative research • Wave 1 conducted in February 05 • Wave 2 conducted in October 05

4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVES: WAVE 3 Exploring … • Final reflections on 2005 • Further actions people are likely to take and why (or why not) • Views on Comic Relief/Red Nose Day and longer–term campaigning • Messaging on corruption and trade And building on understanding gained from earlier qualitative and quantitative research

5. RESEARCH APPROACH AND SAMPLE • Men and women aged 16-50 • All concerned about poverty in poor countries, and aware of MPH • 3 groups with MPH involved (mix of wristband, text, email) • 3 groups with RND involved (mix of watched the show and donated, bought a red nose, organised or took part in a fund-raising event) • 2 groups aged 16-24 • 2 groups aged 25-34 • 2 groups aged 35-50 6 x 2 hour group discussions conducted in January 2006 in Borehamwood (London), Manchester, Coventry Groups moderated by Alice Fenyoe and Mary Battley of Synovate

6. DEFINING THE SAMPLE

7. Attitudes towards poverty Global poverty features highly on their political radar Another part of the ‘political animal’ self identity High knowledge of intricacies of trade, debt, and aid Knowledge and the passion with which it is expressed can be a status symbol Can patronise or denigrate people who are not as interested, not as knowledgeable SEGMENTING THE AUDIENCE: RESPONDENT TYPES IDENTIFIED IN WAVE 1 Active Engaged Passive Engaged Active Disengaged Passive Disengaged Attitudes towards poverty • Tend to have ‘room’ for one or two issues that they are really interested in • Have read about, and are aware of poverty in the third world – some more interested than others • Know that they have knowledge gaps, and always mean to find out more • Often don’t realise how interested and aware they are until they start talking about it Attitudes towards poverty • Very cynical about poverty issues – likely to espouse theory that the problem will never be solved • Feel very resigned about being able to do anything personally • Too busy to be able to learn, find out more – got lots of other things to worry about (like supporting their families) • Don’t believe that govts will be able to sort out problem – enjoy seeing them as fairly futile • Opinionated about poverty as an issue – and will confidently express opinions, and find it difficult to back down even when challenged • More interested in the scare stories than the facts Attitudes towards poverty • Aware that there is lots of poverty in Africa – but knowledge stops here • No interest in talking about it, interest tends to stop at local issues, or issues with personal relevance to them • Believe that this is an issue ‘that other people are worrying about’ – no need for them to get involved Behaviour • Talk with passion – lots of gesticulating • Express their feelings physically via campaigning – marching, rallying, emailing, letters, • Aware of most campaigning tactics and how they work • Unlikely to be a make or break issue in terms of voting – these are probably not floating voters, but committed to either a particular party, or spoiling the ballot paper • These tend to be existing activists Behaviour • Likely to be supporting an international charity • By now, may have done MPH campaigning (and likely to be proud of it) • For many this will be the first campaigning they have done (beyond ‘easy’ actions like Fair Trade, organic) • May have considered this issue when deciding who to vote for – likely to be floating voters • These tend to be younger, professional Behaviour • Some will be supporting international charities as part of collection of regular support – and effort will end there • Others won’t support beyond RND • Issue of poverty less likely to be a driver to real support – than just having a portfolio that covers key issues (i.e. third world tick, cancer tick etc) • Will not have been consideration when deciding how to vote • These tend to be family dads Behaviour • Unlikely to be supporting international charities beyond RND • Will not have been a consideration when deciding how/whether to vote • These tend to be family mums In Wave 3 all segment types except for the Active Engaged identified

8. SEGMENTING THE AUDIENCE: RESPONDENT TYPES IDENTIFIED IN WAVE 3 (ACTIVE) (Oct’05) • Wave 2 identified anecdotal evidence that the Passive Disengaged had gained knowledge and interest in global poverty since Feb’05. • However, in this wave of research, they appear to be reverting to type – both knowledge of, and interest in the issue is reducing as there is less feeding it. • Some (very) latent interest is available to be tapped, but indications are that this will not be the case for much longer. • Passive Engageds present a more positive story in that, although not actually ‘active’ in terms of behaviour, persuading them to take action may not be too difficult to achieve. PASSIVE ENGAGED PASSIVEDISENGAGED (Jan’06)

9. A REVIEW OF 2005, AND MPH’S POSITION WITHIN IT

10. KEY EVENTS OF 2005 • The Tsunami (the aftermath) Top of mind • Pakistan earthquake • London bombings • Live 8 Under the surface • England win the Ashes • Local or personal stories (i.e. West Ham to premiership) • Continuation of Iraq War • (G8 sometimes mentioned in relation to Live 8 or the London Bombings) Live 8 is still fairly top of mind for 2005 – but Make Poverty History never mentioned spontaneously

11. 2005 AND GLOBAL POVERTY • 2005 already receded into history • 2005 just like any other year (except it also had Live 8) • Now, almost new news that 2005 was supposed to be the year for Africa/global poverty Asking people how they feel about 2005 in relation to global poverty/third world countries was almost a redundant question The only issue/event dealing with poverty was Live 8, an event which dominated June/early July, but not 2005

12. LIVE 8 AND MAKE POVERTY HISTORY “Live 8 was the event, and Make Poverty History was its slogan.”

13. TOP OF MIND ASSOCIATIONS WITH LIVE 8/MPH Oct ‘05 Jan ‘06 MostPeople Raisingmoney Raisingmoney Live 8/Aid Bob Geldof/Bono Wristbands Live 8/Aid Bob Geldof/Bono Wristbands Debt Texting GordonBrown MidgeUre Debt TonyBlair Raisingawareness Raisingawareness(Poverty) G8 Something inEdinburgh (G8) ê PoliticalPressure(Prompted) Email petition Politicalpressure The march Trade/aid LeastPeople Live 8 dominates anti-poverty activity in 2005, and it’s difficult to hold a discourse about Make Poverty History without talking about Live 8 first

14. WHAT IS THE LEGACY OF LIVE 8 (MPH) IN THE PUBLIC MEMORY? • Raising money for Africa (the third world) • Raising awareness about global poverty (it’s still there) • Telling governments to drop the debt Trade and aid have dropped off the public consciousness

15. WHAT IS THE LEGACY OF LIVE 8, MPH, G8 ON AFRICA/GLOBAL POVERTY? Evidence that the more engaged people are, the warmer they feel towards ‘05 activity and its impact on poverty MOST PEOPLE (Passive/Active Disengaged) LEAST PEOPLE (Passive Engaged) “They didn’t do everything they wanted to do, but at least I think they dropped some debt.” “ I don’t think anything’s any different tohow it was this time last year.” RAISING MONEY … don’t know how much raised or where it went (-) … wasn’t the core focus, so something of an aside (+ and -) RAISING AWARENESS … lots more people know that there’s poverty in the world (+) … had some impact on G8, and started a public dialogue (+) DROP THE DEBT … not sure, think some may have been dropped but not much (+ and -) … dropped some debt, so some countries better off (+) Better than nothing, but barely impactful It could be the start …

16. WHERE DO WE THINK THE PASSIVE ENGAGED/MPH INVOLVED ARE NOW? • See Live 8/MPH as the start of a journey • No sense of being under any illusion that poverty would be made history in a year (very pragmatic) • 2005 has seen some (small) achievements • raised awareness (including theirs) • dropped some debt Feb 05 The future These people do not see 2005 as a failure – but rather as a step in the right direction

17. WHY WASN’T MORE ACHIEVED? • “ … because they didn’t ask people to buy tickets for Live 8 …” • “ … because Live 8 didn’t raise as much money as Live Aid …” Not enough money Politicians don’t care • “ … because the public only really care about taxes …” • “ … because politicians won’t lose elections over poverty in third world countries …” • “ … because the London bombings took over …” Live 8 takes most of the blame for a lack of achievement – because people don’t understand why it didn’t aim to raise money

18. TALKING ABOUT LIVE 8/MPH AND 2005 “Everyone knows about it (global poverty), but it’s become even more clear that no one cares” 16-24 MPH involved “At the end of the day, I don’t see the point of doing something just to make people aware of it, you want to make people aware of it to raise money” 35-50 MPH involved “You’ve lost me, the interest, the debt, I just thought they were raising money for the Third World countries and that was it” 16-24 RND involved “I think it fell flat because Bob Geldof couldn’t pull it off a second time. A lot of people thought it was going to be like Live Aid but it wasn’t” 35-50 MPH involved “What difference have I made to making poverty history just by listening to the message?” 25-34 RND involved “I don’t really remember the Make Poverty History campaign. I can’t remember who set it up or who supported it, so you don’t remember who communicated the message back to say whether it was a success ” 25-34 MPH involved

19. CAMPAIGNING AND THE GENERAL PUBLIC

20. LIVE 8/MPH AND CAMPAIGNING (1) • Worn as demonstration of support, because other people wore them, because they were pretty! • About raising awareness (of poverty) • By making people aware of poverty, more people might do something about it in the future (i.e. give money) • Wristbands dominate memory of Live 8/MPH actions, and even people who did text/email have almost forgotten that they did it • Emailed because they were asked to (by friends, colleagues,unions) • Demonstration of support • Read about it in magazines, saw it on Live 8 • Demonstration of support

21. Emailing and texting actions were taken as part of the ‘event’ of Live 8/MPH People were askedto take action by familiar sources (this can include the media – one 17yr old read about it in Bliss) … and within a context where they had many related reference points (friends’ wristbands, Live 8 in the papers, Bob Geldof on the news, etc.) Probably – but only in the context of another ‘event’ that penetrates their world (RND mentioned spontaneously) … and as a passive act of support (for the event/organisation/ issue) rather than as a proactive political action TEXTING/EMAILING Why did they do it? Will they do it again? • These actions are taken as part of a ‘collective’ and the point of the actions is rarely interrogated • When people start exploring the reasons behind taking these actions, confusion and defeatism quickly set in (in the absence of a real understanding of how campaigning actions work and no evidence that they work)

22. RND, CIN, ‘another Live 8’ could provide the opportunities for more campaigning ê everyone knows about it, water cooler, can seeit on TV, can see results Less requirement to explain campaigning (and in fact this may over politicise) Much more difficult to achieve with these audiences don’t understand campaigning (what’s the point of sending an email?) less sense of mass involvement less engaged because issue rather than event led Cancer and kids currently have the best opportunities (highest engagement at the moment), but point of actions need to be explained first TAKING ACTION FOR MPH: IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE ACTIVITY Anecdotal evidence suggests that campaigning actions DO have future potential with the mass public … although currently only in a specific context ‘Event’ actions ‘Ongoing’ actions Mass public still a long way from this type of campaigning at the moment These are the campaigning entry points for the mass public

23. Get people used to physically taking the actions Results and feedback subtly educate re political pressure Something else you can do as well as giving money Dependent on engagement with issue (hygiene factor) Requires education around whyand how actions work (i.e. MPs haveto log every single email) Require evidence it works A CAMPAIGNING STRATEGY How can we get the public engaged in campaigning in the future? Active and Passive Disengaged Active and Passive Engaged ‘Event’ led campaigning ‘Issue’ led campaigning Over thenext few years

24. POTENTIAL FOR SPECIFIC ACTIONS More likely Older Younger Texting Postcards Letter Emailing Emailing Texting Demo Postcard Letter Demo Likelihood of taking these actions entirely dependent on levels of engagement and focus within personal worlds Less likely

25. OVERCOMING BARRIERS TO TAKING ACTION • Lack of understanding around conceptof campaigning • Ubiquitous sense of cynicism in relationto politicians • No sense of real democracy working (from me to my local MP) BARRIERS SOLUTIONS • General actions • Evidence that governments dolisten to their backbench MPs, general public • The mechanics of campaigning • Specific actions • Email/text: security and privacyconcerns (for older). Why do I have to give my name, address, email, phone number? • Postcard/letter: an anathema to younger people who rarely visit a post box • Reassure people why you want the information you’re asking for • Reassure over privacy/selling information

26. THE MECHANICS OF CAMPAIGNING: WHAT DO PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW? I receive a request to send an email/text … I want to know: Who reads it? (Tony Blair, his minions, or no one?) What happens to it after its been read? (Deleted, stored, counted or ignored?) When has this worked before? (Am I wasting my time?) What was the outcome? (Did Tony Blair take any notice? Did it have any effect?) Take first action Continue to take action

27. THE MECHANICS OF CAMPAIGNING: WHO DO THEY NEED TO HEAR IT FROM? Mostimpact Friends, colleagues (depending on friend and how often they send junk/jokes) Celebrities (depending on relevance and credibility) Magazines, TV programmes, newspapers (Bliss, T4) RND, CIN Charities (sense that charities continually ‘badgering’ and therefore people more closed to further requests) Least impact

28. TALKING ABOUT TAKING ACTION “I only wore the band because I didn’t want to be the only one who didn’t” 16-24 MPH involved “Emailing is pointless because at the end of the day the email is only going to go to his (Tony’s) administrators, and he’s not going to see them so everyone is just wasting their time” 16-24 MPH involved “I think we’ve tried the money route and it doesn’t seem to work – there’s still debt and there’s still poverty, so if I text my name, what’s the hardship? I’m willing to give it a go” 35-50 MPH involved

29. THE TRADE ISSUE

30. An organisation that provides fair wage for producers Coffee, tea, chocolate (stuff I buy) In my supermarket/school (my world) Trade rules Embargoes, subsidies TALKING ABOUT TRADE The term Fair Trade has been claimed by the public to talk about all issues relating to trade For everyone AND for some Trade Justice does not appear to have broken into the public lexicon

31. TRADE MESSAGING It is difficult to talk about trade with this audience (except the most MPH engaged), and they are fairly resistant to trade messaging. Few of the articles/posters/DM we put in front of them really cut through. • As we have found in previous research, people are easily thrown by anything that looks as though • it requires time, concentration, or effort • might be complicated or confusing • What people are drawn to are messages that • talk about trade in a personal context • simplify the trade issue (rich and poor, right and wrong)

32. IMPACTFUL TRADE MESSAGING (1) • Use of coffee has a dual benefit • Immediate connection to Fair Trade which people know and understand • A common product that connects our behaviour to hard working poor people in the third world • A direct connection to our behaviour and consumption • Talking about something that we can easily change/do • Hints at possibilities and implies that making poverty history is possible • Sets out a list of what could be done in simple language, with a hopeful tone of voice

33. IMPACTFUL TRADE MESSAGING (2) • Clear contrast between the rich and the poor (and not us and them) • Here, we feel more empathy with a poor, rural boy than we do with the ‘corporate millionaires’ • Clearly explains the impact of world trade rules on the individual • Places trade in a personal context • Connection between ‘business’ and the third world surprising!

34. TALKING ABOUT TRADE “It annoys me but there’s nothing you can do about it” 16-24 MPH involved “It’s just like murder. If the only thing they’re growing is being charged at 200% tax, then they’re not going to sell anything, then they’re all going to die!” 16-24 MPH involved “Fair Trade also affects the fact that British farmers have surpluses that they sell to third world countries, which means they can’t sell as much as they would normally” 16-24 RND involved

35. THE CORRUPTION ISSUE

36. UNPICKING CORRUPTION Corruption (specifically in relation to donating) is often a default word used to describe an uncertainty or lack of knowledge about what happens to aid once it leaves my hands • Running costs, overpaid staff, social events It has three key strands: Charity overheads • Political corruption • Mugabe, palaces, arms, feeding soldiers, lots of wives • … and also a sense “that everyone is out for themselves” and therefore no-one can really be trusted • More of an issue for older (16-24 yr olds often never even contemplated it) • Aid agency disorganisation • Money for the Tsunami still unspent, one woman in Pakistan being given 12 cooking pots etc.

37. FROM ME TO THE POOR: PERCEPTIONS OF THE DONATION JOURNEY How does it travel? Who receives it? Who administers it? Charity Third world The people Charity overheads • High salaries • Big luxurious offices • Social events • Inefficiency/wastage (aid agency disorganisation) Political corruption • Paying off officials/ warlords/anyone Can talk about this with confidence All guesswork/media driven perceptions of third world countries/no change Have difficulty talking about this as no real knowledge about how money gets into corrupt hands

38. RESPONDING TO THE CORRUPTION ISSUE • Charity overheads • Choose a smaller charity • Choose a charity that shows the results • Choose a local (domestic) charity ê This is happening already because people have choice and control • Political corruption • Stop giving to international charities ê Indications that this is beginning to happen, but it’s a slower process as there is no choice or control, and stopping altogether too much for most people The public’s lack of agency in relation to political corruption is making it harder for them to opt out (at the moment)

39. RAISING THE ISSUE OF CORRUPTION IN COMMUNICATIONS • Showing information and articles about corruption raise awareness, but feed negativity and defeatism (even for the most issue engaged) • However, there were a couple of surprises (from what people were shown) … • Ghana has a democratic government and improved human rights • Africa does not have all the most corrupt countries in the world • Africa is a continent not a country • African countries are not necessarily more corrupt than other countries

40. TALKING ABOUT CORRUPTION “I think Comic Relief should be more honest about corruption. I think they should tell us what’s getting through. I think the reason that people are suspicious is because it’s dripped into the media and no one knows exactly what’s happening” 25-34 RND involved “If the message was that your money is not getting through, then I think it might have a detrimental affect on charities” 35-50 MPH involved “As the years go by I get more and more cynical in that I think that you do drop the debt and then the governments will just rearm themselves, it will go on their internal wars” 35-50 MPH involved “My problem with phoning up and giving your £20 to the tsunami or whatever is that I think ‘how much of my money is actually getting to that kiddy on the telly’ ” 35-50 MPH involved “I like it because it said ‘you’re pissed off because your money’s not getting there, and they’re pissed off because your money’s not getting there’. It’s putting you on a level with the people that you’re donating to, and it’s saying that your common enemy is the small group of corrupt people so let’s stamp it out” 25-34 RND involved

41. ROLE OF GOVERNMENT

42. THE GOVERNMENT AND GLOBAL POVERTY • People are still very unsure about the government’s role in either contributing to, or alleviating global poverty beyond • Providing aid after disasters • Being third world creditors • There is very little sense of ongoing aid • There is a resistance to believing that the government might be involved in a positive sense • tax my charity donations • tax me • in bed with multi-nationals • Only help third world countries if something in it for them

43. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

44. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS (1) • Passive Disengaged are reverting to type both in terms of knowledge and interest. However, opportunity still remains to mobilise Passive Engageds. • Live 8 dominates perceptions of Make Poverty History, and perceptions of anti-poverty activity in 2005. Indications are that recall of Make Poverty History is on the decline, and it is now seen as the slogan for Live 8’s ‘event’. • People took action for Make Poverty History as part of a national event, rather than because they were particularly engaged in the issues. • Event based campaigning such as this appears to be the easiest way to mobilise Active and Passive Disengageds into campaigning. Active and Passive Engageds by their very nature are more open to campaigning around salient issues per se.