Sodium Reduction Communications Toolkit

Once your overall communications objectives are in place, carefully consider your target audience(s) and their needs from the start. Researching the specific priorities of different stakeholders to tailor the tone and elements of your messages to each target audience—by group and individual—can be helpful.

Ask yourself:

• Who do you need to reach?
• What do they know/ not know?
• What do they care about?
• What specific information is needed to persuade them?
• When might they be most receptive?

For more information on audience mapping, see Step 2: Identifying Your Primary Audience of GHAI’s Communication & Media Advocacy Action Guide.

Technical accuracy matters, but comprehension matters just as much. Commonly understood terms out-perform precise scientific language in both policymaker and public-facing materials, provided they are firmly grounded in evidence and do not oversimplify the underlying science.

• Say “salt” instead of “sodium” wherever possible
• Use “teaspoons” instead of “grams” for consumption data
• Create materials that are ideally one page
• Use visuals to communicate data rather than tables or charts
• Aim for 3 data points maximum. Though there are likely dozens of statistics related to salt reduction that you could use, more than three can be overwhelming instead of convincing.

For more guidance on audience-specific messaging, see this Messaging Matrix (LINK TBD)

Focus on achievable policy actions rather than only describing the problem:

• When communicating with decisionmakers, offer several evidence-based options instead of prescriptions to reduce defensiveness if all best-practice policies can’t be pursued at once and to increase receptivity for prioritizing sodium reduction efforts wherever possible.
• Frame messages as supportive and collaborative rather than antagonistic.
• Opt for solutions-forward rather than fear-based

For more guidance on messaging, see this Messaging Do’s and Don’ts (LINK TBD)

For decisionmakers, frame messages around what they care about most backed by the best available data. Depending on the country’s context, this might be the financial benefits of the policy or how it links to other established health goals. Frame public messaging around consumer or family protection or pointing to the consequences of not passing the policy.

For more guidance on audience-specific messaging, see this Messaging Matrix (LINK TBD)

Evidence can demonstrate the:

• Severity of the problem in your country
• The relevance of the issue in your context and why it matters to your audience
• The effectiveness of the policy as a solution (e.g. Affordability/cost savings of local/national policy implementation)

An example of a key message not connected to evidence might be, “Salt reduction is important for one’s health.” Whereas, “Eating more than WHO’s recommended 2g of salt per day increases blood pressure, which increases one’s risk for heart attack, stroke, and early death” uses one data point plus evidence to highlight why and how salt reduction is important to one’s health.

Often global and even regional data is not enough to persuade policymakers. Consider what specific kinds of data will resonate best with your audience. This might include national sodium intake, hypertension burden, stroke burden, economic costs, local dietary sources or national policy commitments.

If local evidence is unavailable, use regional or global evidence while acknowledging data limitations and emphasizing the relevance to your country’s context.

Develop messages that address common industry arguments (anti-poor, anti-business, no local evidence) before campaigns launch, not after. Share widely with coalitions and include when reaching out to policymakers and journalists.

For more guidance on audience-specific messaging, see:

• Marketing Exposed: A Global Public Health Threat for Food Policy

• Behind the Labels: Big Food’s War on Healthy Food Policies