<< Back

CDC Consultation on MSM and Internet Use

On March 24, 2010, the CDC held a consultation in Atlanta with leaders in HIV prevention for MSM using technology.  Twenty experts were invited from CBOs, private sector, nonprofits, universities and governments to participate.  The complete list of individuals who participated follows at the end.

The specific focuses of the meeting included:  

1) an overview of the issues in this area;

2) discussing how the use of specific channels, technologies, or websites varies by important demographic and behavioral characteristics;

3) determining the strengths and weaknesses of channels, technologies, and websites for different types of HIV prevention messages, relative to each other and more traditional channels; and

4) recommendations about Internet and new media-based HIV prevention messaging strategies targeting various segments of MSM communities.

Briefly, some key themes emerged out of the meeting, including (summary list is not compiled by RTI or CDC):

1. Structural problems with CDC funding - Focus on DEBI interventions prevents new and innovative programming at the CBO level.  New programs are hard to continue due to funding cycles and sustainablity.
2. Relationships - an increasing number of HIV infections are occurring in some form of relationship.  More focus on building healthy relationships could be a vital strategy moving forward.
3. Funding for Tools - Its not clear whether or not CBOs can purchase the tools (computers, video cameras, etc) they need to conduct outreach using the internet.
4. Filtering Systems - States, counties and libraries are filtering access to sexual health information and the websites through which outreach workers can conduct public health informations.  This is a serious concern to the field.
5. Facebook - MSM are moving to this social network as the primary tool for social interaction.  Hookup websites are definitely the prime place for casual sex.  However, Facebook presents a new and much more exciting venue to produce interventions.
6. Channels - Can we really conduct interventions in 140 characters via Twitter or Text Message? What channels are the right ones for different target populations?  We need a grid of services vis a vis target populations
7. Messaging - What is the CDC's role in providing guidance for messaging? Does it need to include other aspects of MSM behaviors on mental health, physical health, social support etc? Should we leave messaging to the local CBOs with guidance from the CDC. Which group should drive?
8. Video versus Content - Video production is cheap and extremely powerful. Most agreed that video is a much stronger method to convey educational information over content.
9. Mobile phones and Geo-location - Smart phones are only 35% to 40% of the market. However, this is expected to double in the next five years.  We need to be present on applications like Grindr, FourSquare, etc
10. Targeted Advertising - Google and Facebook both offer amazing targeting platforms to reach hard to find populations.  And they are cheap, use them!

Participants on the panel included (does not include 30 to 40 observers):

• David Novak, Online Buddies
• Dan Melton, npT Labs
• Stephan Adelson, Adelson Consulting
• Patrick Herbert, AIDS Project Los Angeles
• Simon Rosser, Univ of Minnesota
• Dan Wohlfeiler, CDC
• Mary McFarlane, CDC
• Greg Rebchook, UCSF
• Cathy Reback, Friends Institute/UCLA
• Brian Mustanski, University of Chicago
• Jim Pickett, AIDS Chicago
• Francisco Roque, Gay Mens Health Crisis
• Lee Carson, Public Health Management Corporation
• Paul Mooney, FLUID Interactive
• Miguel Gomez, AIDS.gov
• Bhupendra Sheoran, ISIS