Controversial anti-DUI campaign costs topped $450,000

• Critics called the anti-DUI campaign sexist.
• Original budget, including advertising expenses, was $725,934.
• By the time the state halted the campaign, $456,923 in federal funding was spent.

The final invoices are in for the controversial state anti-DUI campaign that many called sexist. The cost: more than $450,000, a state official said Wednesday.

The Governor's Highway Safety Office apologized for the campaign in mid-July and took down its website after coming under intense criticism for the slogans — including those that referred to girls looking "hotter" to guys under the influence and being "chatty” or "clingy."

The office said materials distributed in bars and restaurants — including fliers, coasters, tents and other items — cost $77,096 to produce. But the actual costs were much higher.

Documents obtained by The Tennessean through a public records request show that those materials represented only a portion of the campaign’s total cost. Office Director Kendell Poole said Wednesday the projected budget for the campaign, including television and radio ads, video production and design expenses, was $725,934.49. By the time the state halted the campaign, $456,923 had been spent, he said. The extra costs for television advertising and other expenses was first reported by WSMV-TV.

The 306 pages released detail the development of the campaign and the correspondence between state officials and Jay Sokolow Sr., vice president and account supervisor for The Tombras Group, the Knoxville marketing firm paid to create it.

The documents indicate the slogans, drinking stories and materials many would later find offensive were vetted and at times praised by GHSO officials, who often approved the material with such comments as “looks good” and “love it.”

In one section of the campaign’s website called "Legends of the Stall," behaviors such as binge drinking, promiscuity and cleaning up vomit with a cat are among the activities of featured graffiti characters who, at the end of the night, choose not to drive home drunk.

Still, there were some concerns raised by GHSO employees about the campaign’s slogans and the purpose of the message, which did not readily relate to each other.

The documents show concerns revolved around whether the messages would be understood, rather than whether they would be offensive.

In an exchange on June 8, 13 days before the campaign launched, Public Information Officer Amanda Brown expressed concern that people might not understand the meaning of the materials that would be distributed in bars if they did not also visit the campaign website explaining their meaning.

“I like the coasters, but (sic) am a little uneasy about the bathroom posters because they are essentially an advertisement for the website vs an actual message,” Brown wrote. “I know 'Booze It & Lose It' is there in tiny print at the bottom, but that’s about it.”

The email included Poole, Assistant Program Management Administrator Kevin Hager, Finance and Marketing Administrator Joseph Waldrum and Program Manager Beth Vernon.

In another email, sent June 15, Brown wrote again:

“We can't fund advertisements that don't include a message of any sort. If someone sees the (Legends of the Stall) ad and doesn't click on it, there is zero traffic safety takeaway,” she wrote.

In both instances, officials decided to make the reference to the website and the GHSO more prominent and gave the materials a go-ahead.

The documents show officials were concerned over the backlash after launching the campaign.

When Sokolow asked in a July 13 email how much of the remaining media buys — totaling $186,191 — the office should cancel, Waldrum replied:

“For now we can pull back $100,000 from the existing campaign...,” he said. “I apologize for delaying, but you know what we’ve been dealing with here and I think we’ve gained a little footing.”

The office pulled the entire campaign statewide later that day and issued an apology.

Poole said Wednesday that the office never meant to offend and was only trying to connect with a traditionally hard-to-reach demographic of young males.

“We are passionate about ways to reach them,” he said. "These are just different ways to reach them. We rely heavily on market research.”

As for the community outcry over the content deemed sexist, Poole and Tennessee Department of Transportation spokeswoman BJ Doughty said this is not the first time someone has thought an anti-DUI campaign crossed the line.

“Advertising by its very nature is sexist,” Doughty said on a conference call with The Tennessean on Wednesday. “This is not the first time a campaign has raised some eyebrows.  With a campaign a while back that showed a man in a tuxedo getting in a car with two women, people thought we were supporting threesomes.”

She said that a few years back the office won an award for its “kick a bear campaign,” that angered animal rights supporters. The message was that if you are drunk enough to kick a bear you shouldn’t drive.

Poole said the anti-DUI campaign was completely federally funded and was part of a $2 million annual advertising budget. The office typically receives about $12 million in federal grant money each year to address impaired driving, out of about $21 million in federal funding the office receives annually, he said.

The Tombras Group will refund $35,730 in fees paid for the hours the creative group spent working on the campaign.

Reporter Jordan Buie can be reached at 615-726-5970 or on Twitter @jordanbuie.