The campaign approach to publicity using mass media has dominated in the Netherlands for many years. Publicity was seen as practically the same as conducting campaigns. In the course of time, doubts have increasingly arisen among traffic policy makers about the working of campaigns on a large scale. At the same time, the correctness of the implicit model underlying these campaigns was increasingly doubted by social scientists. It is proposed in this note to apply publicity from another point of view. Publicity should no longer be directed at changing the human factor in the traffic system in a sustainable way, but has to be one of the elements in playing a role in the decision process of road users. Using this approach to publicity, the topics of traffic safety publicity are mentioned. These topics or "spearheads" derived from the Dutch Multi Year Programme on Traffic Safety (MPV-3) are: (1) heavy traffic; (2) cyclists; (3) dangerous locations; (4) safety means; (5) speed; and (6) driving while under the influence of alcohol. The 'heavy traffic' and 'cyclists' "spearheads" can also be the target groups of publicity. Moreover, the MPV-3 contains other topics at which publicity should be directed, namely: (i) consciousness-raising among all the road users; (ii) daytime running lights; (iii) lighting on the rear side of cars; and (iv) new traffic regulations. Besides, such a publicity can also have a valuable function in supporting other policy means, such as police enforcement and institutional traffic education. On the organizational level, a distinction is made between publicity activities characterized by only a regional approach and publicity exceeding the regional borders. For this last mentioned form of publicity, the General Road Safety Directorate of the Ministry of Transport and Public Works has a clearly controlling and co-ordinating task and should keep on administering an apart budget. In order to make certain that regional organizations can have their influence on the phasing of national publicity themes, a national platform should be set up in which, for instance, all the Regional Organizations for Traffic Safety (ROV's) will be participating. The ROV's having a freely disposable budget should be responsible for the co-ordination of publicity activities directed specifically at their regions. With regard to the quality control of publicity activities, a yearly evaluation of them should take place for which The General Road Safety Directorate should be responsible. Furthermore, it is recommended to look for new measures and approaches in the area of publicity. Perhaps, more uniformity and coherence can be brought into the approach to publicity, by co-ordinating publicity activities.
Samenvatting