Abstract
In 1991, the Massachusetts legislature considered a bill that would have allowed a drunk driving defendant's refusal to take a breathalyzer test to be admitted as evidence in a criminal trial. After the measure passed in both houses, a state senator used a parliamentary maneuver to prevent it from being prepared for the governor's signature. Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) employed media advocacy techniques to alert the public, but the senator was unyielding and the legislative calendar ran out with the bill unsigned. Because of MADD's efforts, however, the senate president put the bill on a "fast track" the following year. The news media's focused attention on MADD's protests exposed deep schisms among its volunteer leadership regarding the nature and purpose of the organization and the appropriateness of using confrontational media strategies to advance its agenda. Paralyzed by the lack of consensus, MADD Massachusetts was rendered a far less effective advocate for policy change.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.