Talk to Frank gives good, honest information shock horror.

Talk to Frank, the government’s anti drugs advertising campaign, has come in for a lot of criticism on UKCIA for it’s cannabis information, which is often compromised by the need to support the prohibition drug war policy of the government. Indeed, the TV and radio adverts warning young people of the supposed dangers of cannabis have often been simply wrong in what they say, especially the claim that stoners always end up “puking”, which simply doesn’t happen in all but the rarest of situations.

But as always, when something is done right; praise is due. So unlikely as it may seem this blog entry praises some advice given by talk to Frank. Pigs really might yet fly …

The Sunday Telegraph ran one of its shock-horror stories this weekend (19th April) based on the information given by Frank’s telephone helpline to callers pretending to be young teenagers seeking advice: “Revealed: Government helpline tells children ‘cannabis is safer than alcohol’” screamed the outraged headline.

Elsewhere on the Telegraph site, they print the full transcript of the advice Frank actually gave. The third of the  conversations was about Ecstasy, we’ll confine our comments to the first two which give cannabis advice.

First phone call:

The Sunday Telegraph (ST): My friend has started to smoke the occasional joint. Do you think I should tell his parents about it or my teacher?

The first thing the adviser does is to do a bit of digging:

Frank: How old is he?

ST: He’s 13. I’m worried it’s going to change his personality. I have only seen him do it a few times. Will he turn into a crack addict? He say’s it’s not affecting him at all. I’m worried it’s going to affect his personality.

The adviser has established that he’s only used cannabis a few times and the caller has concerns about him becoming a crack addict followed by concerns about it changing his personality. The adviser does some more digging:

Frank: How often have you seen him smoking?

ST: I have only seen him do it a couple of times. Will he turn into a crack addict?

Again, the ST raises the crack issue as being an important concern.

Frank: No that’s not the way it works. If you use it a couple of times it doesn’t have to cause any problems…

This is fair advice. No doubt the Telegraph would have wanted Frank to say cannabis is a gateway drug.

… People drink all the time. Alcohol is a much more powerful drug than cannabis, and people don’t turn into alcoholics and crack addicts or anything like that. It doesn’t mean he’s going to go down the road to destruction. That’s not the way it works.

Again, true.

ST: I’m worried it’s going to affect his school grades.

Frank: Ask him how much does he use. What do you think you will gain by telling his parents?

Here the adviser is steering the caller to an appropriate course of action, informing school or parents isn’t going to help, their friendship could be much more valuable in moderating his behaviour.

ST: Well I want him to stop it.

Frank: Its up to you, that’s personal to you. They won’t be able to stop him unless they lock him in a room. He’s starting to become his own person. You know if you want to do something, then you will find a way a round it, don’t you? They [parents] are not going to be with you all the time.

Again, good honest advice. The adviser then tries an interesting line of inquiry:

Frank: How do you feel when he is drinking?

ST: Well, we all drink occasionally.

Frank: But that doesn’t worry you at all?

ST: Not as much as cannabis.

The adviser has discovered that the caller drinks. Remember, this is supposed to be an underage caller who has told the adviser that he/she doesn’t consider alcohol to be a drug in the same way that cannabis is. The adviser then gives some advice about alcohol:

Frank: It’s a lot more potent than cannabis…

We could debate the use of the word “potent” here, but it gets the idea across that alcohol is a drug which can have far worse consequences than cannabis, which is true – certainly for most people. Then we get some advice about cannabis:

… It’s only when someone is smoking all day every day that problems with cannabis will arise. If people use it every now and again like they would drink, then it’s a less powerful drug then alcohol. That might help you put it into perspective. To make your mind up of what you want to do.

It would have been better perhaps to give the advice that any drug use by a 13 year old isn’t a good idea, which would include drinking of course. But saying that to a young kid you’ve just discovered is also a drinker probably isn’t going to get you far.  All in all it isn’t bad advice.

The Sunday Telegraph then tries a different tack:

ST: I had a talk at school recently and they said if you smoke occasionally you wont get addicted, is that right?

Frank: Yeah, that’s right. Find out what sort of frequency he is doing? But if he’s only smoking when he goes to parties, then that doesn’t mean it’s a gateway to being a crack addict.

Again the adviser has tried to get the caller to find out more about the lad’s cannabis use. It would have been a good idea to ask about the way the lad is smoking of course, and to have given advice about not using tobacco because of the addiction and health risks that come with that drug.

ST: We have started going to a few parties recently and sometimes we are smoking. But I feel it’s better he drinks rather than smokes.

Note the Telegraph has said “we are smoking”. The adviser would have “uncovered the truth” that in fact the caller is using cannabis as well. Perhaps this call about “a friend” is really a call about  the person making it?

Frank: Why do you feel that?

ST: I feel cannabis will affect him worse.

Frank: That’s not the truth. Its not advertised that way by the government, but that’s not the way it works…

Ouch! But again, very true, very refreshing honesty from Frank.

… You will be able to tell in the morning if you have been drinking – you might have a hangover. Well you are quite young so you might not have a hangover. Alcohol is a powerful drug in what it does on to your body and how many brains cells it kills and stuff…

Again, all true

… Cannabis is not to be taken lightly, but it’s a lot less powerful. If alcohol were illegal it would be a Class A drug. Cannabis should just be a Class C drug. In terms of its affects it’s a lot less powerful than drinking.

The is impressively honest advice

ST: Should I just let him get on with it? I mean will he get addicted?

Frank: He wont get addicted, no. Tell him you spoke to Frank and they told me it’s not as a dangerous as alcohol but they did tell me if it becomes every day that’s when you start having problems…

Good advice.

… But they said by using it as recreationally it is less dangerous than alcohol, because that’s the truth, in terms of the power of the drug. I mean when you are stoned you don’t lose control as much as you do when you are drunk. Cannabis doesn’t really get you that high, where you don’t know where you are and what you are doing or what you are saying. You know you are always in control, so from that point of view, it is a lot safer.

The adviser is trading on eggshells here, but in truth he is correct. Cannabis doesn’t have the same dissociative and intoxicating effects as alcohol, you are always aware of what’s happening when stoned, you’re not when drunk.

ST: I just get quite confused. I’m not sure what to think. Sometimes it seems to me that alcohol isn’t as bad as cannabis.

Frank: That’s because you are used to seeing everyone on alcohol. And you know what’s going to happen. And also because of the advertising campaigns that are saying it’s a really powerful drug. Alcohol is really addictive. The withdrawals of alcohol are worse than heroine for example; people can die when they become addicted to alcohol and stop suddenly. There are all sorts of aspects to alcohol we don’t know about…

Very true.

… Because we don’t know as much about cannabis and what we do know is put out there by the government and its all about the negative side of things, then people tend to feel its a lot more strong.

The Frank adviser is accepting the government lies, it’s honest if nothing else.

ST: When we had that talk at school, they said it was okay to smoke occasionally and you wont get addicted. Is that correct?

Frank: Yeah, yeah. Find out what his views are on it.

It would have been good to mention tobacco again there.

ST: He says it won’t affect him. He’s quite good at school and I am worried it will change his grades.

Frank: Well no more than going out drinking would. Why would it be different? If he starts using it more and more, but if he’s just smoking when he is at a party then that’s not a problem – at all.

True. Again, telling a young person who drinks not to drink isn’t going to engage that person.

ST: If I see him doing more, what should I say?

Frank: Speaking with his parents will be a bit strange. You might get in trouble with him. Speak to a teacher first.

Good advice. The telegraph then tries the law argument:

ST: Our school is telling us its illegal. So I thought about going to the police about it?

Frank: Why would you go to the police?

ST: Because it is illegal, isn’t it?

Frank: Yeah, yeah. But why? So they can catch him with it? Is that what you mean?

ST: I might get into trouble.

Frank: Underage drinking is illegal and you don’t see a problem with that. And underage sex is illegal as well, but it doesn’t mean it’s a really bad thing…

Good response. It’s throwing up issues the “young person” should be thinking about. The adviser continues:

… It just means that for whatever political reasons it’s illegal at some point. It is unlikely the police would do something about it anyway, in the same way they won’t go and find teenagers having sex. They are not bothered about that; they are bothered about the person using it all the time or supplying – that kind of thing. That’s what the police are there for

ST: I think it might speak to him about it now, so thanks.

Second phone call:

ST: Hi, I just wanted to get some advice about my friend. Sometimes we go out at weekends, and he’s started smoking the occasional joint. I have seen him do it a couple of times. He’s a good mate from school. Should I tell his parents about it?

So as before, the adviser digs for information

Frank: How old is he?

ST: He’s 13.

Frank: Have you tried talking to him first?

ST: Yeah. But I’m worried it might change his personality.

This one is more to the point, but of course a 13 year old boy is at the age when his personality is about to change anyway. The adviser digs some more

Frank: Have you had education about it at school? Are you at school with him?

ST: We had a talk at school and they said its okay to have the occasional joint because you don’t get addicted from it.

So now the adviser gives some advice

Frank: The main thing is because your body is so young you don’t know how much damage it could do. If he’s just keeping it to the occasional weekend, then I can’t see it doing him too much damage. I’m not sure what it would achieve by telling his parents.

Same advice as before but gently bringing up the age issue..

ST: He says it doesn’t affect him, I don’t know quite what it’s going to do

Frank: I would definitely keep an eye on it. Have you got any local groups you could speak to?

Be concerned, look for advice, keep your friendship. All good advice so far.

ST: I don’t know there might be. We drink at the weekends…

Now why did the newspaper throw that one in? It puts the adviser in the position of maybe dealing with a person who is really worried about their drink problem, or at least of feeling he has to give some alcohol advice.

Frank: Would you tell his parents that he drank? Alcohol is one of the most dangerous drugs there is. You need to be careful about everything you do. You need to look after each other when you are out.

Straight up advice indeed.

ST: I’m worried he might turn into a crack addict now he’s started on cannabis.

Frank: That’s unlikely. Crack is a long way from cannabis. You need to put things in perspective. Nicotine is physically addictive. Cannabis isn’t. You can stop smoking it any time you want…

Now that is a bit confusing. Tobacco is physically addictive and people soon get addicted to it and can’t simply stop. Cannabis can be difficult to stop for psychological reasons as well, the adviser is treading eggshells again and maybe cracked a couple that time but goes on

… Alcohol is the same. Cannabis – you get in the habit of doing it, because you enjoy doing it. If he’s just doing it at weekends, that should be fine. When it becomes a problem is when people start doing it all the time.

ST: That’s what our school talk was sort of about.

The adviser finds out more about the school talk

Frank: What did they say? If you get in the habit of doing it everyday, then it becomes addictive. It’s addictive in a psychological way. What’s the issue here? You’re under 16 so cannabis is as bad as cigarettes and drinking.

OK, the eggshells have stopped cracking and the adviser has made it clear that 13 is really too young to be doing any drugs. The Telegraph raises the mental health issue:

ST: I suppose I’m worried that you become mental?

Frank: The best way if you are worried, is to keep your relationship going with him. Then if does start smoking more… if you fall out by talking to his parents…. You’re worried about him. But be worried about everything; be worried about drinking. If you just keep it at weekends, I don’t think it’s likely to cause him any major problems.

Very good advice

ST: He’s saying that I should try it. I want to keep in the gang.

Frank: Just say you tried it before and you didn’t like it.

Just say no in a believable way

ST: If the cops saw us with a fag, they’re not going to do us but if we were caught with cannabis….

Frank: They would probably take you to the station. And tell your parents. If its first offence, you would get a warning and stuff. Just don’t feel pressured to do anything.

On the whole both of those  examples weren’t bad advice. It has to be remembered they were one-off calls and each would have only lasted a few minutes, the aim was to engage the caller, to make them think about the issues, the advisers did that.

The advisers did his/her job of finding out a bit about the callers, both were regular drinkers and good advice was given (although it hadn’t been asked for) about the dangers of drinking.

God advice was given about not betraying friendships and looking after each other.

What the adviser didn’t say was “just say no”, which is what the Telegraph is so upset about. This is the real world though, the adviser has a couple of minutes to engage with the callers and to hopefully leave a message  which will make the caller think. What we have here is experienced advisers dealing with a real world situation, worse of having to do so against a backdrop of a policy built on lies and misinformation.

Interestingly what the Sunday Telegraph seems most upset about is the idea that Frank is telling people that alcohol is more dangerous that cannabis, no doubt the Sunday Telegraph would insist alcohol isn’t a drug! This muddled thinking is at the root of a good part of the problems we have with drugs and it’s refreshing to see the advisers at Frank are honest about it.

The government’s reaction was predictable:

A Government spokesman said: “It is completely unacceptable for a Frank adviser to be giving out wrong, misleading and inaccurate information. We are urgently looking into the matter and will identify the person or persons involved and take action.

“Frank is an important resource for young people who need help and advice about drugs. It is vital that Frank advisers give out correct and straight forward advice – we have therefore commissioned a review of the training advisers receive and will act upon it.”

So will Frank’s advisers will be told to toe the line and give out the officially approved (mis)information? If the government insists they give out a propaganda message it’s to be hoped the advisers and the agencies who train them would quit.

So on this occasion, praise where praise is due and well done Talk to Frank for being honest.

About UKCIA

UKCIA is a cannabis law reform site dedicated to ending the prohibition of cannabis. As an illegal drug, cannabis is not a controlled substance - it varies greatly in strength and purity, it's sold by unaccountable people from unknown venues with no over sight by the authorities. There is no recourse to the law for users and the most vulnerable are therefore placed at the greatest risk. There can be no measures such as age limits on sales and no way to properly monitor or study the trade, let alone introduce proper regulation. Cannabis must be legalised, as an illegal substance it is very dangerous to the users and society at large.

6 thoughts on “Talk to Frank gives good, honest information shock horror.

  1. In an attempt to keep this short I’ll fight my natural instinct to rant on about media bias.

    I’ve just read the article though noticed:

    “[…]skunk, the newer type of cannabis[…]”

    “newer type”

    Argh! Why would one read the paper when there are many brick walls one could freely bash one’s head into to for the same effect?

    Nice to see the Frank advisor aren’t pedalling the propaganda machine though. Also nice of UKCIA to give them a pat on the back. I just hope this media attention get anyone fired or, worse, kill off the last of the straight-talking service that TTF was /meant/ to be.

  2. Damn you UKCIA for getting my hopes up in this article!

    I was so very pleasantly surprised to read all the advice given by the Talk to Frank advisors. It gave advice that was borne of fact and not political agenda.

    Then I got to the part in the article about the advisors getting sacked and a review of training etc etc and a little part of me died, well not quite, but it is a little depressing.

    One thing that should be noted however is if the TTF advisors were screened by the newspaper, who’s to say that the journalist didnt endure numerous phonecalls to advisors regurgitating government sponsored cannabis truths. Something to think about, after all, we know the kind of dedication this country’s journalists put into sensationalism, who’s to say this wasnt one of those instances?

  3. this is an outrage!!!
    people do their job and get sacked for it.
    oh wait, Frank’s not here to tell the truth! it’s here to sell the biased bullshit that the US sold the the whole world, a completely distorted vision of cannabis.
    after all, the lack of information and education is the way forward. how else can the governments control “their” people?

  4. I must say it is quite warming to see that Talk to Frank isn’t quite the super propaganda machine that I’d begun to believe it was and the government insists that it isn’t. As to where the governments reply leaves their claim that Talk to Frank is not there to further the scare tactics they’re so famous for, I don’t know? I just hope that those in charge have got the sense to see that a witch hunt against these advisers will do nothing to help the real 13 year old kids who are phoning Frank. All though that said, I’m willing to bet that the practical up shot of the telegraphs underhanded attack on this advice line is that all Frank advisers will now start trying to drill it in to their callers that one joint will most definitely be leading to injecting crack in to your eyeballs within weeks, the best thing their callers can do is phone the swat teams in immediately and hope their “friends” don’t pull their hands out of their pockets too quickly!
    In closing I just wanted to point out something you mentioned.

    “The adviser would have “uncovered the truth” that in fact the caller is using cannabis as well. Perhaps this call about “a friend” is really a call about the person making it?”

    If this adviser was really worth his/her salt they’d of picked up that this caller was probably the “friend” in question. However pulling the caller up on that would do nothing to help any advice given. As I’m sure most advisers are aware the best thing to do in these situations is to run with the idea that they’re talking about someone else.

  5. Hi Dragon

    You wrote

    >>
    If this adviser was really worth his/her salt they’d of picked up that this caller was probably the “friend” in question. However pulling the caller up on that would do nothing to help any advice given. As I’m sure most advisers are aware the best thing to do in these situations is to run with the idea that they’re talking about someone else.
    >>

    Oh yes I agree, which is indeed what the adviser seems to have done. But in his mind he would have picked up on the slip, which would have helped form an opinion of the person he was talking to, hence the overall advice he gave.

    Derek

  6. If this had been a genuine call I would have expected most teenagers to say they were confused by these responses. It does seem like very good advice but it would only serve to confuse the caller if it is in contradiction with the media hype that had led them to ‘Talk to Frank’ in the first place. So it is understandable that the government reaction was so strong and it looks like the non-sense comes from the top of the organisation. Just as well for them that virtually no one that is effected by these issues phones this advice line. It is ironic that ‘Talk to Frank’ only survives because people ignore it !

Comments are closed.