university administrations or statewide college task forces, as found in the states of Missouri and California. Still others may be the result of grassroots organizations from a number of localities realizing that they have common interests at the state level, and banding together for coordinated and more effective action.

Successful community coalitions include the use of multiple program strategies, such as education programs, community organization, environmental policy changes, strategic use of the news media, and heightened enforcement of existing policies (Hingson and Howland, 2002). Strategic use of the mass media by communities is an important component of community mobilization and can support other interventions. It can be an effective vehicle for publicizing new or existing policies and gaining public support for alcohol control policies and increased enforcement efforts (Casswell and Gilmore, 1989; Stewart and Casswell, 1993). Skillful use of media resources can support community organization and public education about successful strategies, as well as influence those who have the power to make changes in enforcement practices or in policies. Community groups that have developed the skills to use the news media strategically to support their objectives for changes in the environments contributing to public health problems can influence public opinion and public policy (Wallack et al., 1996; Wallack, 2000; Seevak, 1997).

Two examples of coalition-building in communities comprised primarily of racial and ethnic minority groups provide instructive lessons. Oakland, California, achieved successful alcohol policy outcomes through the work of a single coalition consisting primarily of professionals and government officials. The central focus of the coalition was to develop legislation that would tax all alcohol outlets in the city to provide funds for improving neighborhood safety and beautification. The major strategy relied much more on skillful use of the media than on grassroots organizing. The “Deemed Approved Ordinance,” enacted by the city in 1993, charged alcohol outlets an annual fee of $600 for monitoring establishments. At the same time, the city also enacted a 1-year moratorium on new licenses and required a 1,000-foot separation between alcohol outlets citywide except for the downtown area. A year later, in 1994, Oakland received a $100,000