Social Media Use Among Most-at-Risk Populations in Jamaica

"Social media sites and mobile phone-based platforms have the potential for enabling communication programs to support current interventions and reach marginalized populations, such as sex workers and MSM in Jamaica at scale."

This study explored the use of technology for information-seeking, advocacy, mobilisation, and communication among sex workers (SWS) and men who have sex with men (MSM) in Jamaica, specifically via social media sites. An additional purpose of this assessment was to inform the development of communication materials/media aimed at reaching these two distinct audiences as part of broader HIV-prevention interventions. Conducted by FHI 360’s Communication for Change (C-Change) project, which is funded by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the U.S. President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), the study found that segmentation of sub-populations is needed, as each has different levels of access to, and preferences for, communication channels, social media sites, and the type of health information they find useful.

Conducted in 2011, this study examined the use of cell phones and the internet, including social media, for communication and preferences for receiving health information amongst most-at-risk populations (MARPs). A total of 15 data collectors were recruited from all study locations to conduct the survey over a 3-week period. Data collectors were recruited from within the SW and MSM population.

It was found that cell phone use and text messaging are high in Jamaica amongst MSM and male sex workers (MSW). Few female sex workers (FSW), however, reported doing so; FSW were also less likely to have internet access, including access to social media sites. Health-seeking information habits online varied among the three populations. Most MSM infrequently or never looked online (72.3%, n=295) for health information. While MSW and FSW reported looking at health information online more frequently, only a few reported looking more than two or three times a week. Among all populations, there was high level of interest in receiving group-specific health and well-being information. All populations preferred to receive this communication via private channels: email, in person, text, and print. Social media can be an effective way to extend or reinforce interpersonal social and behaviour change communication (SBCC) activities and to reach harder to reach audiences.

Findings from this study indicated a mix in group preferences related to the use of these media to communicate health/well-being issues. Interpersonal communication was named by almost all FSW and most MSW and MSM as their preferred way to engage around these topics. This report provides several recommendations that are discussed in more detail in the report:

• Ensure that interventions for most-at-risk populations (MARPs) take into account their intended audience's level of technology access and preferences for using these technologies.
• Take into consideration secondary audiences (i.e., sex partners, friends, family) for dissemination of messages (to or from) and promotion of actions. Involve individuals trusted by MARP audiences to communicate MARP-relevant health information and tap into individuals with larger social networks closer to MARPs to further engage and reach these communities regarding sexual health.
• Integrate social media into current programming with MARPs via opt-in programme options. Consider the appropriateness of using social media as a communication channel when developing communication and new programme strategies.
• Further explore the intended audience's motivation for accessing social media beyond frequency and use. Understanding why intended audiences access what they do will ensure tailored and appropriate interventions.
• Directly involve segmented MARPs in social media intervention development to assure that materials/interventions are appealing and deemed valuable to share, and that they utilise the most popular social media sites per type of MARP.
• Recognise the limitations of selecting a social media channel. Consider using multiple approaches, as well as social and mobile phone-based media, to reach the intended audience through multiple channels and more than once.
• Ensure that communication approaches using social and mobile phone-based media are multi-directional and do not rely too heavily on one-way communication.
• Do not use social media/mobile technology as a sole channel for communicating health information to MARPs. Employ a variety of mutually reinforcing communication channels for interventions including interpersonal communication.
• Ensure the privacy and confidentiality of your audience and take precautions to ensure that their personal information is not compromised.