A summer 2003 Chronicle article explores the concept of using “branding” strategies to elevate awareness and understanding of CFIDS. The article invites comment and opinion and we have received a fair number of letters and E-mail messages in response. Many readers support a more marketing-driven approach while others suggested that “spin” is the last tactic the community should use.

Questions raised in the article about the name “chronic fatigue syndrome” may have been mistaken for a shift in the Association’s policy on the name change. In 1998 The CFIDS Association of America's Board of Directors adopted the following policy statement on the name change: “The Association’s Board is solidly committed to facilitating a change from the name ‘chronic fatigue syndrome' to a name that more accurately describes the illness and leads to greater acceptance of the illness." This policy continues to guide Association activities related to the name change.

Although the name of a product or cause is an essential element of any branding or education campaign, in the case of renaming CFS, the decision about what to call it must be considered in a broader context. The two processes – building consensus on a name change and developing a high profile awareness campaign -- can and should occur simultaneously, as long as there is continuous sharing of information to maximize the success of both efforts in enhancing the credibility of CFS.

In fact, when the name is changed, a cohesive multi-media communications and marketing campaign will be paramount to the public’s acceptance and adoption of the new term.

For more information about the use of marketing strategies to influence social and public policy read about a program called Progress to Power, written by Rich Neimand of BatesNeimand, a social marketing and political communications firm, and an article about “loveLife,” an HIV/AIDS campaign, written by Ron Irwin of University of Cape Town School of Management Studies in South Africa.