Openly gay NYC councilman, GMHC, GLAAD ask for removal of HIV prevention ads targeting gay men

Clip taken from a segment shown to NY1 viewers in Queens on Dec. 13, 2010 (Additional info: "New Health Department Initiative Facing Opposition").

If you've lived in NYC over the last few years, particularly if you are a smoker, you are probably highly aware of a series of increasingly graphic print and television campaigns the New York City Department of Health developed to discourage people from smoking and encourage smokers to quit.

In its first incarnation, you saw "Ronaldo Martinez" speak to the camera and talk about getting a cancerous growth removed from his throat and taking his ability to speak away without the help of a machine (surprisingly, I haven't been able to find the televised version of the ad anywhere except in a different version apparently appropriated by an anti-smoking agency in Australia of all places).

I'm not a cigarette smoker but that specific ad seemed to have a punch to it. Sure, I changed the channel every time it came on, but you could certainly understand the ad's plausibility when it comes to long-term cigarette smoking.

The ads made an immediate impact, specially among friends who smoked.  They called NYC's #311 help line and ordered the expensive smoking-cessation kits that the Department of Health offered on a limited basis.

Researchers called the campaign a "huge success", at least in its early stages.  But it's not clear to me whether they took into account that the Department of Health was initially offering access to nicotine patches for free nor the fact that the city was increasing taxes on cigarettes

Not that I'm complaining. As an infrequent cigar smoker, I can say that one of better legacies of the Bloomberg administration is having barred smoking in bars.  And, apparently, some statewide programs still offer free nicotine patch or gum "starter kits" (click here).

But then came the other ads. The ones that said that smoking would make you lose your fingers (I kid you not). Or give you brain tumors. Or promote cavities. And I personally thought they'd gone off their rocker and gone punch-happy on negative messaging. Truthfully, the more graphic and preposterous it got, the less effective I felt the campaign was.

They even tried to replicate the scare tactics - laughably some may say - with campaigns to stem consumption of sugary drinks and the way they make people fatter. Gross, yes. Effective? Eh...

Which brings us to...


I've long been a critic of the public health policies developed by the New York City Department of Health under the Bloomberg administration and their reliance on scare tactics. And yet, I am inclined to like this ad. Why?

Well, it's certainly graphic and gross. But it speaks to the potentially horrible side-effects of being HIV positive. Does it say that everyone with HIV will develop these symptoms? No. But the ad does strongly imply that people with HIV are at a higher risk of being at risk of these illnesses - which I believe does act as a forceful HIV-prevention message.

Now, call me when the NYC Department of Health starts running messages saying that people with HIV are more prone to cut off their fingers as a scare tactic but, if memory serves me well, just a couple of years ago HIV prevention advocates were bemoaning that HIV prevention messages portrayed people with HIV as being all happy-happy and ultra-healthy when the reality of living with HIV wasn't nearly as cheerful.

Interestingly, a few of Michael Bloomberg's most vociferous critics seem to be backing this campaign while a number of advocates and organizations are calling for the Department of Health to pull the ads.

As the leading video attests, openly gay New York City Councilmember Danny Dromm is asking for the ads to be removed immediately as does the  South Asian Lesbian and Gay Association (SALGA).

Tonight, they've been joined by the Gay Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) and the Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC) which released this statement. An excerpt:

Gay Men's Health Crisis (GMHC), the nation's oldest HIV/AIDS prevention, care and advocacy provider, today joined the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD), the nation's leading lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) media advocacy and anti-defamation organization, to demand that the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene pull a sensationalistic and stigmatizing television public service announcement aimed at gay and bisexual men.

The PSA, which is intended to encourage condom usage among gay and bisexual men, claims that those with HIV face a higher risk of bone loss, dementia, and anal cancer.  While older adults living with HIV may be at greater risk of these conditions, the PSA creates a grim picture of what it is like to live with HIV that could further stigmatize HIV/AIDS, as well as gay and bisexual men.

"We know from our longstanding HIV prevention work that portraying gay and bisexual men as dispensing diseases is counterproductive,"  said Marjorie Hill, PhD, GMHC's Chief Executive Officer.  "Studies have shown that using scare tactics is not effective.  Including gay men's input, while recognizing their strength and resiliency, in the creation of HIV prevention education is effective.  Gay men are part of the prevention solution, not the problem."

Both GLAAD and GMHC have reached out to the department to demand that the commercial be pulled and to offer assistance with framing the conversation around HIV/AIDS more accurately.

"While it's extremely important that we continue to educate New Yorkers about HIV/AIDS prevention, the sensationalized nature of the commercial, including its tabloid-like fear tactics, misses the mark in fairly and accurately representing what it's like to live with HIV/AIDS," said GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios. "It's our hope that the department will work with us to create a PSA that promotes safety and solutions, rather than stigma and stereotype."

The funny thing (as funny things go when discussing these issues) is that one of the top Bloomberg administration critics when it comes to HIV prevention seems to  be bending over-backwards not to say a bad thing about this.

Housing Works doesn't take sides at all but provides all the links to anyone wishing to defend the Bloomberg administration's side of things.

And that, my friends, is truly as bizarre as it gets.  As for the ad... do you think it's effective? Do you think it sucks?  I am inclined to like it but haven't yet made up my mind. What are your thoughts?

Update: Via my friend Michael Petrelis, Larry Kramer chimes in:

to the nyc dept of health:

thank you. it's about time. this ad is honest and true and scary, all of which it should be. hiv is scary and all attempts to curtail it via lily-livered nicey-nicey "prevention" tactics have failed. dr hill knows this and her remarks below, once again, show her to be living on another planet. and since when is GLAAD in the hiv-prevention business? god help us if it is. gmhc is bad enough.

can we finally get real here? we are in the 32nd year, more or less, of a plague.

ONE OUT OF EVERY FIVE GAY MEN IN AMERICA IS HIV POSITIVE. AND FIFTY PER CENT OF US DON'T KNOW IT!

these are appalling statistics.

And dr hill and some dude at glaad is telling me that prevention efforts, as they are presently constituted, are working.

of course people have to get scared. i have said this since day one and i say it today. they need to be scared into using condoms. into getting tested, into being responsible human beings. nothing so far has been able to bring a sufficient result to these requirements. why can't anyone see that? why can't our oldest aids organization see that? to say as dr hill does below that "studies have shown that using scare tactics is not effective" is, i believe, an out and out lie. i have never seen such research. if it exists, then it is as irresponsible as dr. hill and mr/s glaad.

i see a lot of doctors regularly during the course of looking after my own health. every single one of them is telling me that they are seeing more and more young and usually white men who are educated and should know better, sero-converting.

and with all the hoopla over hiv negative people taking this new once-a-day truvada "miracle cure" just so they can have sex without a condom, is going to be a nightmare of the highest order. i firmly believe this.

just as i firmly believe that NO prevention efforts can be rendered with the sugar coating it has been receiving since 1981.

i congratulate the nyc board of health for finally getting real. i look forward to even more and scarier public service announcements.

larry kramer

Michael actually does not like the ad.  For his comments, go over to his blog.

Related:

• Why can't we create an HIV PSA that doesn't suck? (this is fyf)
• GLAAD & GMHC call on NYC to yank graphic new HIV prevention ad (Joe.My.God.)
• Thought police go after NYC Health Department anti-AIDS PSA (Mike Tidmus) 
• Black gay HIV/AIDS agency applauds graphic PSA (Rod2.0)
• NYC Department of Health Graphic PSA: "It's never just HIV" (Rod2.0)
• GMHC, GLAAD want graphic HIV-prevention ad pulled (Towleroad)
• NYC Health Department releases graphic HIV PSA (Towleroad)
• Analysis of NYC'sWrong-Headed HIV Ad, and a Call for Accountability (Trevorade)

What you learn from Twittering, Pt. 1: Maxwell is possibly probably not gay

Lord knows we have been waiting for a megazillion years for something new from neo-soul God Maxwell. Over on MySpace, when MySpace was hot, he kept promising that a new release was in the works but the years passed and... nothing.

Finally he posted a snipped from what he said would be his new single and, unfortunately, it was fairly disappointing (the video is out: "Pretty Wings").

Now comes word that Maxwell is about to release three albums over the next three years titled BLACKsummersnight, blackSUMMERSnight and blacksummersNIGHT. Yes, he's always had a way with words.

Also, Maxwell is on Twitter. And he's been trying his damnest as of late to prove that he is the 'real' Maxwell by uploading Twitterpics of himself misbehaving.

Which means him, rapper Nas, a big bottle of champagne, Cuban cigars, and three scantly clad girls partying like some cheap-ass rap video in Turks & Caicos Islands.

Me thinks the man is trying hard to fight back all the gay rumors that surfaced back in the day as well as more recent gossip that his new music had been pushed back from being released because the lyrics of some of the songs were explicitly homoerotic.

That might all be nothing more than online chatter. Not sure I care if Maxwell is gay, bi or whatever. I will say, though, that he remains an incredibly beautiful man. I just hope the new music is good. Just a suggestion: You don't need to pimp it up to prove yourself.

Here's Maxwell talking about his new project with the Associated Press:


Related:

• Maxwell's official webpage here
• Maxwell's MySpace page here
• Maxwell on Twitter here
• Maxwell on YouTube here
  

Who is Luis Barrios? Why isn't he in jail?

Let me tell you a couple of things about the Reverend Luis Barrios:

• In 2006 he was honored by the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation when they named him the Outstanding Spanish-language Newspaper Columnist of 2006. For years Reverend Barrios has written an influential weekly opinion column in the New York daily El Diario La Prensa which he has often used as a platform to advocate for LGBT rights.

• In July of 2006 he spoke up against the New York State Court of Appeals' decision that the state is not required to provide equal access to marriage for same-sex couples. In an Empire State Pride Agenda statement, the Reverend was quoted as saying:

"It is a shame that the Court made a decision to not protect the rights of all people. This unfavorable decision affects people that love and take care of each other. Family values lost out today. However, just because the court did not require the legislature to act does not mean that it should neglect its duty when it comes to lesbian and gay couples and their children. We now call upon the legislators to pass a law that allows loving same-sex couples to marry so that they have access to the same life-and-death legal rights and responsibilities that are given to all other families."

• In a 2006 profile from the Columbia school of journalism news service he tells Alison Ogden the reason why he allows condoms to be distributed at his church services: Three of his brothers died of AIDS in the mid-1980's.

• In May of 2006 he spoke movingly of long-time gay activist and journalist Juan Mendez upon his untimely passing when I asked him to reach out to Gay City News for an obituary they were drafting in Juan's honor.

• In 2004 he accepted my invitation to participate as a panelist at a Hostos Community College forum on the issue of marriage rights for same-sex couples and riled against homophobic Reverend (and state senator) Ruben Diaz, Sr. for the pro-Bush and anti-gay rally he'd organized weeks earlier at the Bronx Courthouse.

• In 2001, he accepted my invitation to say a prayer in memory of Eddie Garzon at a memorial vigil that I organized in Queens a couple of days after Eddie died from injuries he sustained when he was beaten up on the streets of Jackson Heights as he walked home from a nigh out at the gay bars.

• Hm, he also was kind enough to bring me some Dominican cigars from a trip to the Caribbean island last year.

Still, I swear that I am not being biased in my suggestion that he shouldn't go to jail.

You see, ever since he attended an anti-Bush demonstration at the United Nations in September of last year, Reverend Barrios had faced charges of assaulting an officer, of disorderly conduct and of resisting arrest; charges that could have sent him to prison for five years (or more).

Fortunately on Wednesday the court decided that some of the charges had been less than credible and dropped all charges except "violation of disorderly conduct" for which he was charged with time served and a fine of $95 dollars.

Reverend Barrios maintains that he was innocent of all charges and says that the disorderly conduct charge is the price to pay nowadays for civil disobedience.

All in all, we are happy to still have the Reverend amongst us, free to predicate his inclusive sermons.

Around the neighborhood: Cigar Bollywood

It's been a while since I spoke about the neighborhood so allow me to comment on a trend that seems to have come and gone quickly. Jackson Heights is home to one of the most diverse communities in the world and that is one of the big reasons why I love living here. One of the largest is the Indian community which is why the neighborhood is sometimes called "Little India." So if you walk down 74th Street off Roosevelt Avenue you will probably see some of the best Indian food restaurants in the city, glittering jewelry shops, Indian-owned and Indian-staffed supermarkets and, of course, a dozen Indian movie DVD and VHS shops carrying the latest Bollywood blockbusters. Then there's The Eagle movie palace on 37th Road which runs the biggest blockbusters from India, often on the same day that the film opens there (never mind that when I first got to Jackson Heights in the 1990's, the theatre used to be called The Earle and used to run straight porn films).

Anyhoo - Not a cigarette smoker myself but someone who enjoys a cigar once in a while, I have always been struck by what seems to be Indian smoker's allegiance to Dunhill cigarettes or Silk Cuts. Sure, they smell better than any menthol cigarettes such as Newport (which unfortunately seems to be the smoke of choice among city Latinos and blacks) but don't they carry some colonial British baggage? Also, tell all those 'NASCAR dad' political prognosticators that here is where the Skoal and Coppenhahgen dip tobacco cans truly sell out.

In any case, last year I started noticing that some of the Bollywood film posters began to feature some cigar imagery used to portray either a rugged hero or a bad guy, as cigars have been used in popular culture in the United States. And I was fascinated by the fact that these movies seemed to be adopting some of the same language used by US blockbusters (not necessarily a good thing).

One of these films, "Family: Ties of Blood," used such imagery in a "Sopranos" kinda way but aparently drew the wrath of anti-smoking advocates in India according to this BBC report. Now, one of India's best known and loved actors, Amitabh Bachchan (known as Mr. B), is embroiled in the fracas and India is involved in a discussion on whether to ban any depiction of smoking from film screens. Mr. B has apologized for smoking a cigar during the promo shoots of the movie and said that he was not a smoker himself. Others feel that eliminating any depiction of smoking in a film is mere censorship.

The movie, since released, did not get great reviews, but the uproar that followed its release in India might mean the end of the cigar trend in Bollywood..

Last Night - Union Square