Communications GPG

“Does it matter to you if we’re not equal” campaign (Belgium)


Organised by the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men

1) Brief description of the campaign

In accordance with its mission, the institute launched a campaign in 2010 to raise public awareness with respect to people’s daily behaviour that can reinforce gender inequality and gender-based discrimination.

[*Main messages*] (the campaign used 4 images relating to 4 themes):

  • Intimate partner violence;
  • Sexist stereotypes;
  • The gender pay gap;
  • Discrimination against pregnant women.

[*Slogan:*] Is it the same to you if we’re not equal?


  • 4 public notices in French, Dutch and German;
  • A flyer in French and Dutch;
  • A video in French and Dutch;
  • A new website was created, offering a quiz on the main themes of the campaign. After filling out the questionnaire, surfers were redirected to the Institute’s webpage;
  • A profile on Facebook.
    The campaign started in June 2010, together with the distribution of the institute study Pregnant at work: experiences of working women (press statement will be attached shortly).

2) General objectives of the campaign

The general objective of the campaign was to draw attention and to make people aware of behaviour or gestures that may seem innocent but can lead to gender-based discrimination.

3) Specific objectives of the campaign

More specifically, the objective was to remind the population that the institute is the government body to turn to in cases of gender-based discrimination by contacting its legal unit through its toll-free number 0800 12 800.

4) Target audiences (primary and secondary)

[*Primary target group:*] the public opinion.

[*Secondary target group*]: employers, trade unions, pregnant women, victims and perpetrators of intimate partner violence, advertisers.

5) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining the relationship with them

The main stakeholders included organizations promoting gender equality, institutional partners (e.g. the Centre for Equal Opportunities and Opposition to Racism, the Regions, hospitals, public services, police departments, etc.), associations, social partners, sport centres, theatres, public welfare centres, libraries, schools, university campuses, cultural centres, school guidance organizations, family planning centres, and so on.

6) Resources and budget

The institute made use of a communication agency for the conception of the visuals and the supervision of the media plan. A team of 4 employees of the institute worked together to conceive the messages and manage the project.
The costs of the campaign amounted to around 80.000 Euros.

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

60.000 posters were distributed through the institute’s partner networks, 2000 of which in the country’s 176 police zones, 600 in the trams, busses and metros of Belgium’s five major cities (Brussels, Liège, Charleroi, Antwerp and Ghent), and 600 more in all Belgian train stations.

The institute also distributed information flyers explaining its different fields of action. The post offices also cooperated in this distribution.

8) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

Using Google Analytics, the institute analysed the traffic on the campaign website for each of the three languages (see attached reports for French, Dutch and German).

The institute also noticed a rise in information requests and complaints relating to pregnancy in the field of employment. The institute had focused its efforts on this theme within the context of its publication Pregnant at work: experiences of working women, and the launch of the campaign.

9) Lessons learned and pitfalls to be avoided

For a campaign of this magnitude the institute considered that it would have been useful to conduct a media analysis and to analyse traffic on its website.

As for the effect of the campaign, the institute noticed that it managed to draw the attention of the Frenchspeaking population in particular. Maybe a more in-depth analysis of the main themes of the campaign in the Flemish and German-speaking communities could have made it possible to have a better idea of the expectations and spheres of interest, allowing the use of different, language group specific approaches.

Furthermore, it would have been relevant to see to it that the communication agency developed the campaign starting from three languages separately, instead of translating the French version. The slogan was a lot less powerful in Dutch and German than it was in French. /]

Communications GPG

Integrated anti-discrimination campaign (Cyprus)


Organised by the Office of the Commissioner for Administration (Ombudsman)

1) Brief description of the campaign

Anti-discrimination campaign held between 1/12/2009 and 30/11/2010 that included several actions and targeted a wide range of audiences.

2) General objectives of the campaign

The general goals and objectives were, firstly and most significantly, to raise awareness and sensitize the general public on issues of discrimination; secondly, to inform selected stakeholders on issues of discrimination; thirdly, to identify – for policy making purposes – the needs of certain vulnerable groups; and, lastly, to promote some good practices in combating discrimination.

3) Target audiences

[*The general public*] (which was reached by a media campaign, a theatre play, information leaflets and the website of the Equality Body);

[*Journalists*] (who were targeted by the Guiding Principles on how the Media can Contribute and Assist in Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Discrimination);

[*Employers*] (who were reached by the Code of Good Practices on Combating Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in the Field of Employment and Occupation);

[*Trade Unions*] (that were reached through a seminar for training union members on antidiscrimination legislation, a Code of Good Practices for People with Disabilities in Employment, and a series of surveys – the results of which can be useful to trade unions);

[*Relevant Public Authorities,*] mainly the Ministry of Labour and the Ministry of Interior (that were targeted by two surveys – the results of which can be useful for policy making purposes, a training seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies and practices, and a conference on minority rights).

4) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining the relationship with them

The initiative had implications for a number of relevant stakeholders, as follows:

[*Policy Makers*]

The results of two surveys and of a training seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies and practices, as well as a conference on minority rights were useful for policies regarding migration and minorities.

[*Mass media – journalists*]

The media campaign involved the mass media of Cyprus in the initiative and ensured their contribution and assistance in the conveyance of the antidiscrimination messages to the general public. Furthermore, the Guiding Principles on How the Media can Contribute and Assist in Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Discrimination as helpful to individual journalists in their day to day work, as well as to owners and/or managers of media organisations.


  • Two of the actions were done in collaboration with two NGOs dealing with gender issues
  • In drafting the Code of Good Practices for People with Disabilities in Employment and Occupation, the views of the Cyprus Confederation of Organizations of the Disabled were taken into account. The Confederation consists of a number of NGOs dealing with disability issues. Several copies of the Code were sent to the Confederation to distribute to its members;
  • Representatives of selected NGOs were invited to participate in some of the events organised, such as a seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies, and the presentation of a survey’s results.

[*Trade Unions/Employers associations*]

  • The Code of Good Practices on Combating Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in the Field of Employment and Occupation was a helpful guide to both trade unionists and employers. Helpful information on
    antidiscrimination legislation was also provided to trade unionists in a seminar organized by the Ombudsman.

The [*main difficulties*] came in implementing the media campaign, mainly in relation to the media ads which had a message against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation:

  • On June 9th a press conference was organized for the launching of the campaign during which the media ads were presented. Some journalists expressed concern as to whether the sexual orientation ads were too “progressive” for the conservative Cypriot society and would cause negative reactions. One journalist even reacted herself negatively to the ads arguing that they were “encouraging” homosexuality;
  • During the campaign, our Office received some complaints – in total about 30 – regarding the sexual orientation ads – both in terms of their content as well as the “inappropriate” – according to the complainants – time of the day they were broadcasted.
  • One of the radio stations that were originally selected for the radio campaign was the Cyprus Broadcasting Corporation (Cybc –, which is the public broadcaster of the Republic of Cyprus. However, when the radio spots were sent to the Cybc and they were listened to, the general director of the corporation decided not to broadcast the radio spot on sexual orientation. Over a telephone conversation, he informed the Ombudsman that he could not allow the radio spot on sexual orientation to be played, because, as he said, Cybc is a public organisation. Immediately our Office decided to withdraw all ads from Cybc. Later on, and within the framework of an interview, the general director, referring to homosexuality, stated that the Cybc may accept that such “phenomena” exist and may tolerate them, but it has no obligation to put them on air.

Campaign_poster_Cyprus_.png The decision of the general director of Cybc and his above-mentioned comment sparked a public dialogue in the media and many columnists wrote articles in newspapers and magazines in relation to this matter (attachments soon to follow). The vast majority of these articles were critical of the controversial decision and in favor of the campaign. Furthermore, a group on Facebook was created, named “say no to all kinds of discrimination”, in which all the ads of the campaign were uploaded and people discussed the campaign as well as the decision of the Cybc.

In view of these reactions, on June 22nd the Governing Council of Cybc revoked/annulled the controversial decision of the general director and decided to allow the transmission/broadcasting of the radio spot against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. In light of this development the Ombudsman re-modified its schedule and for the rest of the campaign it transmitted/broadcasted the radio spots also on Cybc.

Some difficulties were also faced in persuading the major relevant stakeholders to support the effort with respect to the campaign booklets. Such stakeholders were the Union of Cyprus Journalists and the Cyprus
Media Complaints Commission, which is an independent press council, responsible for the self-regulation of the news media on the basis of a written “Journalists’ Code of Practice”. Their reservations were based mainly on their concerns for overlap of competences between them and our Office (as an Equality Body), as well as concerns for issues relating to the right of freedom of speech. After many efforts, though – which included exchange of letters, a meeting on June 16th 2011 and some modifications in the text of the booklet – the written support of the major implicated parties for the Guiding Principles was secured.

5) Resources and budget

Main sources of funding: the European Commission (79%) and the Republic of Cyprus (21%). These funds amounted to 196.761 Euros overall.

6) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

The Ombudsman:

  • organized a nationwide media campaign on issues of discrimination which included TV, Radio and Newspaper ads;
  • published a Code of Good Practices on Combating Discrimination Against People with Disabilities in the Field of Employment and Occupation;
  • published a booklet which codifies a set of Guiding Principles on how the Media can Contribute and Assist in Combating Racism, Xenophobia and Discrimination;
  • published two information leaflets – one for each department in the Office dealing with discrimination issues – in a user-friendly design and a size easy to distribute;
  • constructed a website specifically for the antidiscrimination spectrum of the Office’s competences and activities;
  • organized, in cooperation with the Cypriot Labour Institute, a training seminar to train union members on anti-discrimination legislation;
  • organized, in cooperation with the parliamentary representatives of the three recognized religious/ethnic minorities of Cyprus, a one day event that included a conference in the morning and a cultural event in the afternoon on the rights, protection and contribution of these minorities to Cypriot society;
  • provided financial support to: (1) a theatre group to produce a theatre play which addressed xenophobic attitudes towards immigrants and promoted respect for ethnic diversity; (2) an NGO working on gender issues to organize a training seminar on gender mainstreaming in migration policies and practices; (3) another NGO working on gender issues, to conduct a survey aiming to sketch the profile of the economic female immigrants in Cyprus and to identify their needs for personal and professional development; (4) the Labour Institute to upgrade its antidiscrimination website, and to conduct a qualitative survey aimed at identifying the forms of discrimination suffered by migrant workers in the hotel and food industries in

7) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

An officer from the Office was delegated with the responsibility of monitoring the campaign, the contacts with the European Commission, the management of the budget and the submission of the evaluation form. He was assisted by other officers and the Ombudsman herself.

8) Lessons learned and pitfalls to be avoided

The most important outcome of the initiative was the media campaign because, firstly, it managed to send its antidiscrimination message to a significant part of society and, secondly, because it was the action that was
most widely discussed – touching upon, explicitly and for the first time through mass media, the issue of discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. The fact that the negative reactions were not only less than previously feared, but that they provoked strong counter-reactions which benefited the campaign, was in a sense a “lesson learned” that the Cyprus society was/is, at the end of the day, readier than anticipated to accept the antidiscrimination message on this matter, which by many is still considered a taboo.

Another important outcome was that, for the implementation of the initiative, the Ombudsman was able to cooperate/work together with seven other national stakeholders. This cooperation has not only assisted the Ombudsman in better achieving the aims of the initiative, but it has also allowed it to build partnerships for combating discrimination in the future.

9) Additional information

The initiative could be considered sucessful considering that:

  • The media campain reached a significant part of the population and it received mostly favorable comments by the public and the media;
  • A very lagre number of people attended/participated in the events organised;
  • For the events for which evaluation surveys were distributed, the overwhelming majority of the responses were positive or very positive;
  • The Ombudsman was able to cooperate with a number of other national stakeholders and build closer relationships that could lead to effective partnerships for combating discrimination in the future.
Communications GPG

“Stop Hate Crimes” campaign (Denmark)


Organised by the Danish Institute for Human Rights

1) Brief description of the campaign

In Denmark it seems that more hate crimes are committed than reported to the police. Most hate crimes are committed in Copenhagen at night by young people. Therefore, the Danish Institute for Human Rights, the Copenhagen Police Department, the City of Copenhagen, and the City of Frederiksberg ran a campaign to stop hate crimes. The campaign was called “Stop Hate Crimes”.

2) General objectives of the campaign

  • To get victims and witnesses of hate crimes to report them to the police;
  • To prevent and combat hate crimes;
  • To increase the general public’s understanding of hate crimes;
  • To let people know where victims of hate crimes can get help.

3) Specific objectives of the campaign

The long-termed and more specific objectives of the campaign were to make people aware of the fact that hate crimes are committed in Danish society and that it is a serious problem, as well as to increase the number of hate crimes being reported to the police, but to decrease the number of hate crimes being committed.

4) Target audiences (primary and secondary)

Hate crimes make up a complex problem which is not solved on a short-term basis. Therefore, the campaign is only one of the efforts in the battle against hate crimes. During the next five years different initiatives will be
launched in order to reach different target groups, which are all crucial to the solution of the problem. However, the primary target group of the campaign ‘Stop hate crimes’ was the offenders and the victims, aged 15 to 30. Within this group, the campaign mainly focused on minorities who according to the Danish Criminal Code are the victims of hate crimes (i.e. persons of another race, belief, or sexual orientation than the majority).

5) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining therelationship with them

As such there were no difficulties encountered and cooperation between the partners went very well. This good cooperation can be attributed to the fact that from the beginning expectations and eventual issues were
discussed and cleared. The only problem that could be mentioned was tackling of the media – as the partners have different strategies and different ways of “wording” issues – but even this was solved by allowing each partner to “speak” on behalf of itself.

6) Resources and budget

The total cost of the campaign was 146.500 Euro. This covers the cost of the creative development of the campaign, production, and media. However, it does not include the time spent on the campaign by the employees of the Danish Institute for Human Rights, the Copenhagen Police Department, the City of Copenhagen, and the City of Frederiksberg.

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

The campaign focused on making an impression on people in places were hate crimes are committed. Thus, the campaign featured big banners at the front of buildings facing the town hall square of Copenhagen, as well as large posters at 100 stands around the city of Copenhagen and Frederiksberg and at the rear end of buses (photos soon to follow).

The campaign also featured posters at gyms (Fitness World) in Copenhagen and Frederiksberg where people age 15-30 work out on a daily basis.
The campaign also made use of social media. It had a Facebook Cause page, a Facebook campaign, and a homepage

A pamphlet about hate crimes and why it is important to stop them was produced for the campaign. The campaign also involved local businesses by mail with letters requesting them to put up stickers in their display windows urging people to stop these crimes. Local as well as national media also mentioned the campaign, and at a festival in Copenhagen celebrating diversity a tent was put up showing the posters of the campaign inviting people to come discuss the campaign with the campaign managers.

A special feature was made by an art duo at the main shopping street in Copenhagen. The art duo placed a glass case displaying a megaphone at a shopping street. Every day at noon for a week a man stopped by the
glass case, took out the megaphone and yelled: “It is never too late to say I’m sorry”. This was a loud comment on the way we treat foreigners and each other.

8) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

One of the main objectives of the campaign was to decrease the number of hate crimes being committed. However, since the campaign ran in 2010, it is not yet possible to measure if this objective has been met.

Nevertheless, the campaign was noticed by the press, which widely mentioned it and helped put focus on hate crimes. The Facebook cause gained almost 2.000 supporters, and the Facebook campaign generated 5.000

The campaign has also resulted in the police now investigating whether there is a motive of hate behind violent crimes. 25 police investigators in the Copenhagen police force have been trained in handling hate crimes, and a joint European database for registration of hate crimes has been launched.

9) Additional information

To access a slideshow of the posters used in the campaign, please click here ./]

Communications GPG

Communications activities under the “Iris Project” (Greece)


Organised by the Greek Ombudsman (GO)

1) Overall context

The Greek Ombudsman’s team of experts handling communication on anti-discrimination issues, while following the institution’s plan for Dec 2010 – Nov. 2011, with activities that have already been drafted in previous years, could not help but notice that, because of the changing socio-economic context, their messages where becoming increasingly irrelevant to their recipients belonging to the general public. Unprecedented economic decline, affecting especially the middle class Greeks, has resulted in resentment to any kind of privileges bestowed to particular people or groups, including the discourse on measures of positive discrimination.

In particular, a version of GO’s anti-discrimination leaflet which was published as a cover of a popular Athenian youth free press edition, attracted some negative public comments such as (a) “this doesn’t do any good to the average suffering Greek” since it advertises services affecting mainly minorities and immigrants (a blogger even dubbed the GO as “the ombudsman of the non-Greek“, and (b) “it was an activity which must have been costly and is unneeded, done by a public institution in a time of austerity” (note: the publication indicated that it was co-funded by the EU).

After evaluating such comments the leadership of the GO, following consultation with the anti-discrimination team, sought to shift the outlook of the institution’s anti-discrimination activities. As regards the printed and
electronic communication material, the emphasis would shift, giving more weight to discrimination issues related to the general population, e.g. starting a text by referring first to pregnant women cases or people with disabilities instead of Roma, immigrants, non Christians etc. Also, as regards consultation with local communities and authorities, the diminishing resources of state assistance (money and people) for social inclusion policies are becoming a prominent topic and the funding factor plays now a more important role in the Ombudsman’s outlook than it did in the past. In that context the Ombudsman is obliged to bind its proposals to the administration for social inclusion activities with logistic and funding solutions, bearing also in mind that such activities should be creating a visible output for the general population as well.

2) Brief description of the campaign

The Iris Project is funded by the EU PROGRESS Programme, managed by the General Directorate for Youth within the Labour Ministry, and benefits from the expertise of the Ombudsman, the Directorate itself and several NGOs specialised on youth. All parties are involved in the implementation of anti-discrimination activities.

In 2010 the Greek Ombudsman was responsible for the production of information materials about the body through youth press, the organisation of public information days on anti-discrimination legislation, the development of communication activities promoting the integration of Roma people and raising awareness of their rights.

3) General objectives of the campaign

Awareness raising and information against discrimination focusing on the mandate of the Greek Ombudsman (GO).

4) Details about the campaign’s activities

[*Activity 1 – Publication of leaflets on the GO mandate and circulation through youth press:*]

Roma_issues_handling_booklet_for_the_public_administration_officers.jpg Creation and publication of leaflets that described the GO competence on discrimination issues, the ways that the institution can mediate in cases falling within its mandate and the procedure of submitting a complaint. A
complaint form was attached, while there was also a provision for containing information on the Braille system.

The leaflet would be available in the Ombudsman offices and on every contact opportunity with the wider public (information field missions, conferences, festivals, etc.). It was also proposed that the dissemination of this material be made through the youth free press in Athens and if possible in other major Greek cities, as well as through publications referring to the groups that are covered by the antidiscrimination legislation.

The target is the provision of information to the wider public on the mandate of the ombudsman as a Specialised Equality Body for the promotion and implementation of the principle of equal treatment in the public sector. Also, to inform targeted audiences on the types of discrimination that are covered by the legislation and the means of remedy with an aim to increase the number of incoming complaints.

[*Activity 2 – Public information days on anti-discrimination legislation:*]

Four missions of GO staff in Greek provincial capitals: this activity draws from the long experience and common practice of the GO institution in implementing public information events with the participation of the local
administration, NGOs and local media.

There is also parallel functioning of a citizen’s reception desk where citizens can receive personalized information and can submit their complaints.

This is an effort to decentralize the services offered by the GO, but primarily it aims to inform the local societies on the mandate of the GO and come in closer contact with potential victims of discrimination.

[*Activity 3 – Roma integration informational guidebook for local authorities:*]

This refers to the creation and publication of a Guidebook on Issues of Marginalized Roma Populations specifically designed in order to answer questions posed by members of municipal councils and public servants. The aim of this publication is to gather and systematize the obligations of competent authorities on a local level, in order to facilitate the social inclusion of the Roma.

[*Activity 4 – Integrated interventions on Roma “hot–spots” settlements:*]

On the spot investigations in problematic settlements of Roma populations around Greece: meetings are held with Roma and local authorities on the current issues creating social frictions. Also, data is being collected and registered on Roma numbers, their housing situation, school attendance and other factors related to their social inclusion, such as local initiatives and possible projects that are being implemented. The collected data on the GO’s Roma issues will be published on a dedicated webpage. The aim of the GO is, on the one hand, to contribute to the solution of critical cases of social exclusion and address them in relation to the implementation of the national action plan for the Roma, while also collecting field data and disseminating them through the GO reports and internet resources.

[*Activity 5 – Creation of Greek Ombudsman internet resources for Roma integration:*]

Creation of GO special webpages on Roma issues, dubbed as “Ombudsman for the Roma” and their translation in English. These pages will contain an interactive mapping of the problematic areas, as they are deducted from the 12 years of GO’s case load. This will also be a place of promoting good practice in the field.


Communications GPG

Producing a brochure in Braille (Greece)


Organised by the Greek Ombudsman (GO)

1) Brief description of the initiative
Following certain requests from blind activists the GO has envisaged, for some years now, to make its internet material accessible to the blind and visually impaired people. With the help of its IT specialized staff this became to a significant extent a reality. Nevertheless, an initiative to translate any of its printed material to Braille language has never been undertaken or even explored up to now. The anti-discrimination team, starting from scratch, decided to seek advice from blind support groups as to the best suitable methods of printed communication with this group. Following a few e-mails and a productive meeting with the representative of a well established educational institute for the blind, the GO received enough information to make decisions and go ahead with the publication. It was most useful that, in parallel with the above, the GO received suggestions for a similar pattern of approach to this issue from the Northern Ireland Equality Commission, following our query on the Equinet forum.

On the leaflet design the GO’s options were limited since a Braille digit is of a standard size, that equals the length of a fingertip. Therefore, when translated the text of the short 3-fold leaflet became a 14 page A4 size
booklet. The printing is done by special printers that convert the normal documents (.doc, .txt, etc.) to Braille digits. In the GO’s case, before going ahead with the production, the services of a blind proofreader were employed. The GO opted also for the publication to have a normal printed cover in order for the text to be recognizable by any administrator.

The GO concluded that the production should be made by a specialized production unit using primarily blind personnel, in order to maximize the social output.

In order to pinpoint the exact users of Braille language who will benefit more, the GO utilized the senders lists of the blind support groups. A major part of the distribution was done directly by the support groups themselves and the publication was also advertised in their respective internet and periodical publications. Amongst the recipients were specialized and normal schools that have at least one blind student, public libraries and disability related social/medical services.


Communications GPG

Developing a website (Spain)


Organized by the Council for the Promotion of Equal Treatment and Non-Discrimination of People on the Grounds of Racial & Ethnic Origin

[**(Read the text below or download the report by the Race and Ethnic Equality Council)*]

1) What was the context at that time?

The Spanish Ethnic & Racial Equality Body was created in 2007 and formally constituted in September 2009 which is currently ascribed to the Ministry of Health, Social Policy and Equality through the Secretary of State of Equality. This body currently has 28 members from a variety of organizations dealing with race & ethnic non-discrimination policies (national, regional and local public administrations; trade unions; enterprises associations; NGOs).

At that moment in time, the information available to us gave us the following picture:

  • According to the Eurobarometer “Discrimination in the EU 2009”, citizens in Spain consider discrimination based on ethnic origin to be the most widespread in their country. In fact, one third of the respondents of the survey consider that having a different ethnic background puts people at a disadvantage position when looking for a job. Several studies (National Barometer, Spanish Observatory on Racism and Xenophobia) confirm this: more than 50% of respondents of the National Barometer consider that discrimination based on ethnic and racial origin is frequent or very frequent.
  • Although Spain doesn’t consider itself a racist or xenophobic society, there has been a raise in the past years of xenophobic and racist attitudes from certain groups associated with sports, music and social networks on the internet, especially since the beginning of the financial crisis. In fact, the Raxen report 2010 reveals that groups, platforms or political parties close to far right movements are gaining relevance within society by organizing demonstrations and using internet as a means to disseminate propaganda against immigration and diversity and justifying hate, discrimination, violence, racism and intolerance. Some target people from a different ethnic or racial background, whereas others target the Roma community; it is difficult to know what is more frequent: racism, xenophobia, etc. The main issues the Council is facing are the lack of consistent data around discrimination and a lack of awareness from society, especially from vulnerable groups in regards to their rights in cases of being discriminated against.

According to the National Barometer 2008, two thirds of the population is unaware of their rights should they be victims of discrimination and have very little knowledge of the existence of equality bodies. In addition, according to the Eurobarometer 2009, only 18% of respondents would turn to an equality body after being discriminated against, preferring instead to turn to trade unions or associations (probably due to a lack of knowledge about EBs in Spain). As indicated by several NGOs, vulnerable groups are frequently sceptical about trusting public authorities and the judicial system as their experience with these institutions when making a claim has failed in many cases.

For this reason, our strategy to reach vulnerable groups and gaining their trust was to build an effective channel of communication based on:

[*1. Going digital:*] through the Council’s website we wanted to reach (potential) victims of discrimination as well as professionals working in this field (as mentioned above).

[*2. Going local and in partnership:*] through the network of assessment and advice offices created with eight NGOs with experience in either dealing with cases of discrimination or dealing with target groups, we aimed at achieving a double objective: working in partnership with organizations that were in contact with (potential) victims at the same time as reaching the target group at local level.

By combining a digital approach with a local partnership the Council expected to reach those (potential) victims that were familiar with new technologies at the same time as reaching people who prefer one-to-one contact, through local offices.

In January 2010, we therefore started implementing the first action plan 2010-2012, with a key focus on assistance to victims, data collection and new statistics, and information and awareness-raising. This led to the launch of:

  • The Network of Assessment and Advice offices throughout Spain (July 2010).
  • The website (November 2010):

The starting point

Before designing the website’s design, structure and content, we did a brief analysis to check whether we had selected the correct target audiences. According to this brief study:

  • The vast majority of stakeholders were not aware of the existence the Council:

– Education centres (schools/universities)
– Police forces
– Judges/prosecutors/lawyers
– National, regional and local government
– Media
– Medium and small NGOs
– Victims of discrimination
– General public

  • The organisations with more knowledge on the existence of the Council were people working or volunteering in:

– National, regional and local governments’ departments involved in equality, nondiscrimination and immigration/Roma policies
– Main national trade unions
– Main national NGOs especially involved in activities targeted at immigrants and Roma or social inclusion, particularly those that are members of the Council (10 NGOs)
– National NGOs working in the field of equality, non-discrimination and hate crimes (3-4 organisations)

This analysis led the Council to the conclusion that even if on the long-term the duty of the Council was to communicate with all stakeholders, the limited resources available did not make it possible. It was therefore necessary to prioritise the two most important:

  • Workers/volunteers dealing with equality and non-discrimination
  • Victims of discrimination

The reasons for choosing these two audiences were based on the idea that by reaching the organisations closer to you, one can multiply its communication impact:

  • Reaching workers/volunteers that are already aware of the existence of the Council would not need a lot of communication effort or resources as they already have an interest on the topic and on the activities and information delivered by the Council.
  • Workers/volunteers of national, regional, local authorities and NGOs dealing with equality and non-discrimination are more likely to be in contact with victims of discrimination or discriminators but also other key stakeholders.

  • Planning Phase: content of the briefing

After selecting the audiences, the Council drafted a briefing, which identified the following content.

[*1. Objectives*]

  • Workers/volunteers:

– Increase their understanding/knowledge of anti-discrimination legislation and policies
– Create a section with practical tools on how to better deal with/prevent

  • (Potential) victims of discrimination:

– Increase their understanding/knowledge of their rights and where to go or
who to contact to receive assessment and advice.
– Encourage them to complaint.

[*2. Communication style and language*]

Taking into account the audiences selected, it was considered appropriate to use simple language as well as a direct tone (one to one) to give a sense of closeness. The idea was to keep institutional text to the minimum.

[*3. Key messages*]

The Council agreed 3 messages that would have to be taken into account when drafting the content:

1) Discrimination is illegal.

2) People have the right to complaint when discriminated against.

3) Diversity is an asset of our societies: managing it is enriching.

[*4. Content and structure*]

Taking into account the previous information, it was decided to develop a structure through which the target audiences could identify themselves through the content. We therefore created two boxes at the right part of the home site (as shown in the image): the first one targeted at (potential) victims of discrimination “Have you been discriminated?” and the second one targeted at professionals “Do you work in equality?”. In addition to these, we developed a structure based on relevant information for both audiences

The Council Discrimination Your rights Assessment offices Key tools News
*The Chair
*Our mission
*Working Plan
*What is
*What is equality?
*Where can we find discrimination
more commonly?
*Key statistics
*Who is who
*What to
do if you
have been discriminated?
*The law
*Map of
points with
contact details
*The law
*Who is who

[*5. Dissemination*]

In this section we unfortunately did not have enough budget to design a comprehensive dissemination strategy with an agency. However, we agreed a few actions based on our assets:

1) All press releases would include a reference to the website

2) All members were encouraged to add a link to the new website in their sites.

3) All NGOs part of the Assessment & Advice Offices were to include a link in their sites and encouraged to include news in their newsletters.

[*6. Outputs*]

1) 1 new content uploaded per month

2) 1,000 monthly visits the first year.

3) Increase of cases dealt through the website.

[*7. Indicators*]

  • Number of visits
  • Number of pages seen
  • Average of pages seen per visitor
  • Average time spent on the site
  • Origin of visits
  • Percentage of new visitors
  • Number of cases that have come through the website

[*8. Evaluation*]

1) Frequency of evaluation: it was decided to evaluate the results every three months in order to assess if the strategy needed reinforcement

2) Tools: google analytics and case forms (question: how did you know of the existence of this service + cases received by e-mail)

Note: unfortunately, we only have data until May 2011 as the Ministry decided it was not appropriate to use google analytics as it gave out information considered reserved. During the summer the site had a content manager upgrade which stopped data collection, which means there is a lack of information between June and September.

The data available shows the following results:

Indicator 2010
Trimester 4
Trimester 1
Number of news uploaded 4 4
Number of news uploaded 8.545 12.944 (increase of 66%)
Total number of visits 2.040 2.914 (increase of 47%)
Average time spent on the site 3min y 35sec 2min y 52sec
Origin of visits 67,70% direct
22,90% reference sites
(, twitter &
9,31% search sites
41,64% direct
27, 77% reference sites
(, twitter &
31,59% search sites
Percentage of new visitors 67,75% 72,3%
Number of cases through website Not available yet Not available yet

[*9. Management*]

Currently, the Council only has one full-time staff member dedicated to the implementation of the action plan. It was therefore decided to include this activity within her daily work. Taking this into account, the number of hours spent on this is very limited: an average of 2 hours per week. This of course has an impact on the outputs and results, which are kept to the minimum.


Communications GPG

Home Care Inquiry campaign (United Kingdom)


Organised by the Equality and Human Rights Commission

Suggestions and advice for making a campaign more effective

  • Try not to ‘recycle’ information from one audience to another (e.g. do not lift word for word information from a press release to put into an invitation letter). It is of course fine to repeat basic facts, and indeed you probably would if you were talking about something in legal terms, but do tailor your information to your audience.
  • One example of good practice was used in the campaign in relation to inclusivity, related to the Commission’s consultation events on its strategic plan/equality scheme/grants.
  • To ensure that they were as inclusive as possible, the organisers arranged some of their consultations in smaller, regional venues. This helped them ensure they were accessible to communities and stakeholders who find it difficult, or who may be put off by attending events in large cities.
  • Items which usually get people’s attention are ‘real life examples’ – human interest, case studies, interviews, etc. Use the following link to see video clips and other media linked to the Commission’s Disability Harassment Inquiry and the launch of its report.
  • Good use of statistics can help get the audience’s attention (e.g. the Sex and Power publication, showing the position of women in society, and their under-representation in high powered jobs/positions).

Communications GPG

“Access for All – It’s the Law” campaign (United Kingdom – Northern Ireland)


Organised by the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland

1) Overall context

The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 (DDA) made it unlawful to discriminate against disabled people. The Act was introduced in stages, with provisions about access to services coming into effect in October 2004, in 2006 the reach of the Act was further extended to cover other categories of people not previously included. For many years the Act was not applied to the provision of transport services, and people could not rely on the DDA if they were refused access to public transport such as buses or trains or it they were provided with inadequate or inferior services because they were disabled.

This changed with the introduction of the Disability Discrimination (Transport Vehicles) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2009 which came into force on 25 January 2010. These Regulations cover trains, buses and coaches, taxis, rental vehicles and breakdown services. They made it unlawful to treat a disabled person less favourably than someone without a disability, for example by offering them a lower standard of service.

2) Brief description of the campaign

The Equality Commission’s Business Plan 2011-2012 states at objective 1.1 “To continue to build the commission’s profile and image by delivery of three promotional campaigns reflecting corporate priorities”.

A refresher campaign for ‘Access For All’ was developed in support of the launch of the Code of Practice for Disability Discrimination (Transport Vehicles) Regulations (Northern Ireland) in June 2011.

The small weight campaign, capitalised on the existing creative, first seen in January 2010 when the Regulations were introduced.

The campaign had a tighter focus on target audiences with the primary focus on people with disabilities. Consideration of the audience resulted in a further segmentation with older people and carers being identified.

One in five of the population are limited in their daily activities because of some form of disability, with 48% over 55 years of age and around half are in the social grade of DE. Around half of all disabled people are very active users of the internet but the other half are not active at all. Nearly two-thirds watch more than two hours of television per day and over half are readers of the daily press.

A secondary audience type was identified as service providers, professional and representative groups. These groups were not a focus of the advertising elements but rather had a range of activities designed to increase their capacity to comply with the regulations. These activities included meetings, training sessions and engagement events.

A multi-channel mix of television, radio, outdoor and online advertising was developed, supported by extensive media promotion and a series of roadshows in shopping centres and other public spaces.

3) General objectives of the campaign

  • To remind disabled and older people of their new and enhanced rights;
  • To motivate them to use these rights when needed;
  • Provide information to the general public about the new transport regulations and the responsibilities of transport providers.

4) Key messages

  • If you have a disability you cannot now be offered an inferior service by a transport provider;
  • If you are a transport provider you cannot now discriminate against passengers with a disability by offering them an inadequate or inferior service;
  • The Equality Commission for Northern Ireland can provide information and advice about these new
    changes to the law.

5) Target audiences (primary and secondary)

[*Primary audiences:*] people with disabilities; elderly people; carers.

[*Secondary audience:*] service providers.

The strategic approach was to develop insight into the different needs and motivations for the segmented audience strands this work was informed by engagement with disabled people, representative groups and commercial companies.

This resulted in the adoption of a range of communication techniques and channels to reach each audience.

6) Resources and budget

  • Television: £ 14,637.60
  • Radio: £ 4,781.10
  • Press: £ 1,824.92
  • Outdoor W8 Sheet, Bus internals: £ 4,503.00
  • Online, SEO, UTV Player: £ 179.11
  • Agency, Direct & Indirect: £ 4,755.60
  • Roadshows: £ 1,000
  • Press advertorial: £ 1860
  • Code Launch: £ 70

TOTAL: £ 33,611.33

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did the organisers connect with their audiences?

[*Television and Radio Coverage*]

The existing creative of a 20 second high definition television commercial using disabled people fronting the advert and delivering the key message to the audience against a transport themed graphically created background was used.

This advert broadcast from 20 June to 10 July 2011, deploying 250 TVRs across UTV (70%) Ch4 (27%) and Daybreak (3%) reflecting Northern Ireland’s natural share of viewing.

Transmission for daytime programming was weighted to increase exposure of the campaign messages to the elderly and disabled people who would be more likely to watch daytime television.

A 20 second radio advert using both male and female voice overs was broadcast on Downtown, Classic FM, U105 and Talksport. This mix of stations provides optimum opportunity to hear by target audiences across Northern Ireland.

[*Media advertising*]

The core audience of disabled and elderly people are heavy consumers of daily press with 1 in 3 adults aged 55+ relying on daily newspaper to keep them informed. Likewise 54% of adults with disabilities read a newspaper every day. Colour adverts featuring the “Access for All – Its the law” logo and accompanying editorial featured in the Belfast Telegraph, Irish News, News Letter, Daily Mirror and Sunday Life.

[*On-line Advertising*]

41% of disabled people regularly use the internet. To this end the campaign utilised the Search Engine Optimisation facility on Google. This works when key words are keyed into Google e.g. Transport Disabled People, Accessible Taxis Disabled People, Disability Rights Transport. These word strings bring internet users directly to the dedicated website.

[*Outdoor Advertising*]

15 large format 48 sheet outdoor posters were located across Greater Belfast on high volume traffic routes (including Belfast International Airport and Central Station.) 50 Translink Metro buses carried live campaigns ads on a range of being passenger routes. These bus internals were placed behind the driver beside the priority seating for disabled people.

[*Media promotion*]

As part of the Disability Transport Campaign the Commission publicised the case of Nicola Nesbitt against Value Cabs. This case was based on the claim
that Ms Nesbitt who is disabled was charged more than a non disabled person for using an accessible taxi. Coverage of this case appeared in 13 newspaper articles.

Roadshows.png To help reinforce the campaign message 15 road shows were held at shopping centres across Northern Ireland. See Appendix 1 for location of shopping centres.

Staff attended at the shopping centres where they provided information and advice to members of the public.


The Code of Practice on the Provision and use of Transport Vehicles was launched in Equality House on 21 June 2011. The event was attended by a large number of taxi and coach driver/owners as well as disabled people and disability rights organisations. Presentations were made by the Equality Commission, Translink, North-West Taxi Association and the Automobile Association. The Code itself was delivered to 561 transport providers.

A training session on the content of the Code was delivered on 28 June 2011 to an audience of owner/workers in coach hire, taxi and public transport. Training has also been delivered to 132 Translink managers and inspectors.

[*Website and Digital*]

A new “Access for All” section was designed for the website incorporating two distinct areas for visitors. These were aimed specifically at the two main groups affected by the Disability Transport Regulations: individuals with disabilities and transport service providers. Emphasis was placed on customer journey planning to make the menus and navigation as user friendly as possible.

Considerable effort was made to break down information into concise topics directly relevant to the target audience. This included appropriate content from the Code of Practice and Disability Transport Regulations, details about the DTR road shows and links to additional content and relevant publications available online. The website also used video and audio files to enhance the visitor experience.

An “Access for All” icon was hosted on the homepage of the ECNI website taking visitors directly to a dedicated “Access for All” microsite. This page is also accessible through the “Your rights”, “Employers” and “Campaigns”
section of the website.

8) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

[*Advertising outcomes*]

The IPSOS MORI monthly omnibus survey was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the campaign by asking questions of a sample of disabled people about their awareness of the campaign and change to the law.

The results of the survey show:

[**Spontaneous awareness:*] 28% of respondents were aware of changes to the law with regards to public transport for people with disabilities;

[**Recall of recent changes:*] 41% of people who were aware of recent changes thought that these changes related to “accessibility”. 22% of people who were aware of recent changes thought these changes were in relation to “not being offered inferior service or discrimination against”;

[**Awareness of specific change to the law:*] 44% of respondents when prompted were aware that the changes in the law meant that people with disabilities could not be offered an inferior service by bus, train, coach, taxi or other transport provider. Awareness was higher among older age groups (45-65+) than younger age groups.

[**Advertising awareness:*] 58% of respondents had seen the advertising (when prompted) this awareness was highest among female respondents 63%.

[*Media promotion outcomes*]

The Disability Transport Campaign resulted in 23 press articles and 7 radio broadcast pieces returning 100% Prime Positive tonality and presenting the Commission in extremely favourable light and ensuring the highest possible Media Performance Index of 100/100. The combined PR value of this publicity was £75,482.

The publicity generated by the Nicola Nesbitt settlement resulted in 13 press and 5 broadcast pieces. All exposure was Prime Positive in impact noting the support that Ms Nesbit received from the Commission in making her claim. The majority of articles also noted how Value Cabs had agreed to work alongside the Commission in reviewing its policies and procedures thus boosting the reputation of the Commission as being successful and business friendly.

[*Road show/PR events outcomes*]

Staff who attended at the road shows provided members of the public with advice and information on a range of equality issues, the most common enquires referred to disability. Engagement by the public with staff varied according to venue.

Shopping centres audiences were more likely to engage than those at train or bus stations.

Overall 225 individuals engaged with staff requesting information, describing an experience, seeking advice or commenting positively about the Commissions presence at the venue. The majority of these engagements with staff were about disability related issues.

[*Website promotion*]

Over the campaign period the “Access for All” section of the website received 232 visits and 686 pages. 92.5% of these were first time visitors to the site and most were referred from Google and UTV’s website. The Transport Service Provider’s section was visited 35 times with 465 page views and the Disabled People/Your Rights section received 43 visits with 407 page views.
This indicates that those visitors who clicked beyond the introduction pages were very interested in reading further information about the Code of Practice and Disability Transport Regulations, rights and duties, and were most likely therefore to be local transport service providers and people with disabilities – the key target audiences.

A special Disability Transport Regulations edition of the eZine was issued to mark the launch of the Code of Practice. This was sent to over one thousand stakeholders including MLAs, Northern Ireland MPs, MEPs, Peers, NI Political Parties, the local media, individuals and organisations interested or involved in the disability sector.

This edition, which featured information about the launch, the Code of Practice publication, training session and links to the new “Access for All” webpages achieved a readership rate of 30%, and a click-through-rate of 6.5%. This remained consistent with eZines issued in the previous quarters.

It was noted that certain subscribers appeared to act as gatekeepers to their organisations. For example, one subscriber forwarded it onto 90 colleagues in the Assembly’s Committees.

[*Telephone/website enquiries*]

During the five week period following the campaign the enquiry line received 3.4 enquiries from individuals where the individuals state where the source of their awareness of the Commission. 37 individuals indicated that their awareness of the Commission as the organisation which could provide help was due to campaign advertising. 21 people had seen the TV or heard the radio ad. 16 had seen a billboard or newspaper ad. In the five week period preceding the campaign 132 (11.5% of enquiries were disability related. In the five week period following the campaign 155 (18%) of enquiries received were disability related.

[*Engagement with transport providers – disability transport*]

Engagement with transport providers, users and representative groups has been on-going since the Regulations came into force in January 2010. For example, sessions on the implications of the legislation have been delivered to all Translink managers and inspectors; a partnership programme ran with Guide Dogs, IMTAC and the Consumer Council in November 2010; and two transport sessions were included in the disability rights programme which ran during May and June 2011. The Commission is also represented on IMTAC and the Community Transport Association.

A number of actions, in addition to the media campaign and roadshows, were taken to make transport providers aware of their obligations and the Code of Practice. The document itself was sent to 561 transport providers. The launch event was attended by a number of taxi and coach / bus drivers / owners, and included presentations from the North West Taxi Proprietors’ Association, the Automobile Association and on behalf of Translink. Photographs taken at the event were circulated to the presenters for inclusion in their newsletters and magazines, thereby increasing the reach of the event and its messages.

NI_access_for_all.png A training session on the content of the Code and how to use it to avoid discrimination ran on 28 June 2011. It was well received and was attended by owners / workers in: coach hire; taxis; public sector transport provision; and a driver training provider.

Around 15 advice enquiries from transport providers have been received through the enquiry line since the campaign was re-run. Over half have been from taxi firms / drivers who have been unsure of their obligations. As a result of work in this area, the Commission is sitting on the taxi stakeholder working group, set up by the Department of the Environment in preparation for forthcoming changes to taxi regulation in Northern Ireland.

9) Impact of the campaign

  • Following the release of the Commissions press release about the Nesbitt case and the subsequent publicity it received the Commission was contacted by the Department of the Environment. The Department had been contacted by Minister Attwood who have been asked by Anna Lo MLA what action the DOE had proposed to take in light of the settlement.
  • As part of the settlement in the Nesbitt case the respondent taxi company agreed to meet the Commission to review its practices and procedures and in particular its charging structure in relation to disabled passengers. The Commission has met with Value Cabs and these discussions are ongoing.
  • The Access for All Section of the Commission’s website was updated to coincide with the start of the campaign. The changes made to the website allowed disabled people and transport service providers to access the information that they required more easily. The development of this section of the website has been subject of an award nomination to the Chartered Institute of Marketing Awards. The website has now been shortlisted for an award.
  • In the 16 week period following the beginning of the campaign (20.6.11) 14 disability transport enquires were received by the legal services division out of a total 375 application/enquires received. In the 16 week period prior to the commencement of the campaign no disability transport enquires were received.
  • News of the Code of Practice launch was posted on the Commission’s Twitter account. This was subsequently “retweeted” by Disability Action significantly boosting the Commission’s number of Twitter followers. Since the launch of the Code and publicity for the Nesbitt/DTR legal case, the Commission’s number of followers has increased by over one hundred from the launch date. This recent increase included members of the media, the total now stands at 455.
Communications GPG

“Dare to say no to violence against women” campaign (Belgium)


Organised by the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men

1) Brief description of the campaign

To mark the International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women on 25 November 2010, the Institute for the Equality of Women and Men distributed environmentally-friendly free t-shirts to the staff members of federal civil services and minister’s advisers. The action attempted to allow a maximum number of civil servants to show their involvement in combating violence against women on 25 November 2010.

The [*main message*] of the campaign was “Dare to say no to violence against women”.

The [*underlying messages*] were as follows:

  • Acts of violence harm personal integrity of victims and are a violation of basic human rights;
  • Intimate partner violence is a social phenomenon affecting the population as a whole, across all socioeconomic categories;
  • Men can also be victims, and women can also be perpetrators. However, the studies show that the majority of the victims of serious or very serious cases of violence in the private sphere are women;
  • The physical, psychological and social consequences are dramatic.

To support our communication with facts and figures, the institute used the results of their 2010 study The experiences of women and men with psychological, physical and sexual violence (Dark Number study).

2) General objectives of the campaign

The main objective of the campaign was to encourage victims to report acts of violence, press charges or contact support/aid groups.

3) Specific objectives of the campaign

Encourage men to participate in the fight against violence.

4) Target audiences (primary and secondary)

[*General audience*]: the male and female population.

[*Primary target group*]: female victims of violence.

[*Secondary target group*]: men and women (witnesses and perpetrators), as well as male victims.

[*Tertiary target group:*] the authorities, aid-to-victims organisations, partners.

5) Stakeholders involved and the difficulties encountered and surpassed while managining the relationship with them

The main stakeholders included men, provincial coordinators, partners in the National Action Plan to combat intimate partner violence, the federal public services, associations, the government (12 federal ministries participated, as well as 11 minister’s offices), etc. The institute received a lot of positive reactions. Several governmental departments informed them they were prepared to take part again the following year and were also willing to participate in other similar actions by the institute.

6) Resources and budget

The global budget was 81.000€. However, the institute did not use up its entire stock of t-shirts. The remaining ones were used for the 2011 campaign when self-defence and krav maga clubs were also targeted.

7) Detailed description of the communication channels used and messages conveyed. How did theorganisers connect with their audiences? Possible pitfalls to be avoided.

A letter was sent to all the chairpersons of the federal public services and the minister’s offices, followed by an e-mail to those in charge of public relations in the federal public services and ministers’ offices. Later, texts were sent to the participants to help them inform their colleagues and stakeholders about the action via their intranets and websites.

A news item on the institute’s website was added two days beforehand, before the press conference by the minister for equality opportunities on the international day.

An internal message was sent to all the institute’s staff members to encourage them to participate in the event.

The institute prepared communication aids for the public services to inform their staff, consisting of an e-mail, an intranet news item and one for their websites.

A few days after the event a news item was published on the institute’s website to thank all participants.

8) Explanation of the mechanism put in place to evaluate and monitor the campaign

The institute used the the communication aids that were prepared to help the public service departments inform their staff, particularly those for the intranets.

Following an analysis of the media it appeared that 4 of them, among which 3 official ones, mentioned the campaign, 3 discussed the issue itself and the figures of our Dark Number study and 10 spoke about subjects related to violence against women and the international day, but without mentioning the institute.

This list is incomplete as the institute does not have the means to conduct a complete overview of the written and spoken press in Belgium.

The t-shirt campaign itself was mentioned only once. This could be explained by the fact that the institute was unable to provide the number of participating civil servants and neither could it propose journalists to visit a participating department.

The figures from the Dark Number study again succeeded in drawing the attention of the media despite the fact that the institute had already communicated them in the course of 2010. This shows the relevance of re-using research data in the context of a campaign, even if they have been communicated before.

9) Lessons learned and pitfalls to be avoided

The institute noticed that the media made mention of the i-* nternational day, so this issue seems to be very interesting for the press. However, in spite of its press statements the institute is rarely mentioned as a reference body. In addition, it noticed that figures by Vie Féminine and Eurostat are sometimes preferred to theirs. It is possible that journalists choose to mention associations instead of the institute because they often look for accounts by victims, which the organisation cannot offer them. Therefore, there is still a lot of work to raise the institute’s visibility, particularly by focusing attention on its competence in this field.

[*Weak points of the campaign:*]

  • The institute was unable to say how many civil servants wore the t-shirt on the day itself;
  • Some people (mainly from ministers’ offices) did not understood that the t-shirts were free;
  • The Ministry of Defence was interested, but had to remain in uniform.