Bliley TI
Cigarette Advertising and Promotion -- The Free-Speech Perspective
Abstract
Includes report headings: "Executive summary; Introduction; Chapter I: Why do young people begin smoking?; Chapter II: How advertising works - Competition in a 'mature' market; Chapter III: International experience with cigarette advertising bans; Chapter IV: Cigarette advertising and 'targeting'; Chapter V: Promotional activity by cigarette manufacturers; [and] Conclusion.
Fields
- Company
- Tobacco Institute
- Named Organization
- Advertising Age
- American Council on Science and Health
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Childrens Research Unit of London
- Congress
- CRU
- CSPI
- Ernest & Juio Gallo
- Fabbrien D'Ami Pietro Beretta
- Federal Trade Commission
- Federal Trade Commission (Enforcement agency for laws against deceptive advertising)
Enforces laws against false and deceptive advertising, including ads for tobacco products. Ensures proper display of health warnings in ads and on tobacco products;collects and reports to Congress information concerning cigarette and smokeless tobacco advertising, sales expenditures, and the tar, nicotine, and carbon monoxide content of cigarettes.- General Motors
- Gillette
- Institute for Social Research
- Michigan Distributors and Vendors Association
- Minister of National Health and Welfare
- NAACP
- National Association for the Advancement of Colored People
- National Automatic Merchandising Association
- National Bureau of Economic Research
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- National Institutes of Health
- National Smoking and Health Association
- New Jersey Medical School
- NIH
- Ohio State University
- Ontario Task Force on Smoking
- President's Council of Economic Advisors
- Ragu
- Surgeon General
- Swedish Export Council
- The Wharton School
- Tobacco Products Unit
- Toxic Substances Board of New Zealand
- United States Supreme Court
- University of Michigan
- University of Pennsylvania
- University of Toronto
- Wayne State University
- World Health Organization (Concerned with global public health)
International organization concered with public health worldwide- World Health Organization
- American Council on Science and Health
- Named Person
- Ashley, M.J. Dr.
- Begin, M.
- Blackwell, R.D. Dr.
- Gallo, E.
- Gallo, J
- Hamilton, J.L. Dr.
- Hooks, B.L., Dr.
- Lipsett, M. Dr.
- M.Lewit, E.M. Dr.
- Moschis
- Pertschuk, M.
- Schudson,
- Ward, S. Dr.
- Warnberg, K.
- Whelan, E.
- Young
- Begin, M.
- Keyword
- CRU
- Juvenile Smoking Initiation & Advertising
- Taste Cultures
- Tobacco or Health: An End To Tobacco Advertising or Promotion
- TSB Report
- Juvenile Smoking Initiation & Advertising
- Region
- Denmark
- Finland
- Hong Kong
- Iceland
- Italy
- Japan
- Kenya
- Korea, Democratic People's Republic of
- Korea, Republic of
- Kuwait
- Netherlands
- New Zealand
- Norway
- Philippines
- Portugal
- Spain
- Sweden
- Switzerland
- Taiwan, Province of China
- Australia
- Austria
- Canada
- China
- Finland
- Type
- Report
- Youth
- Subject
- Advertising regulations
- Cigarettes
- Consumption rates
- demographics
- epidemiology
- Federal level
- Government agencies
- industry sponsored research
- International level
- marketing
- Men
- Regulations
- Research studies
- sales
- Sampling
- Vending machines
- Women
- Adults
- Cigarettes
Document Images
duced tobacco consumption and fewer new
smoke~s."~/
"" At th~ same conference, Professor James L. Hamil-
ion of Wayne State University stated that advertising bans
"have not been ~n effective policy for reducing ~igarette
smoking.''~/ Dr. Hamilton explained that cigarette adver-
tising is "a competitive weapon" and "has not been used as a
means for expanding [the] marketo"!/
As recently as 1989, then-Surgeon General Koop
acknowledged that cigarette advertising and promotion have
not been shown to increase the level of tobacco consumption.
He stated:
"There is no scientifically rigorous
study available to the public that pro-
vides ~ definitive answer to the basic
questiDn whether advertising and promo-
tion increase the level of tobacco con-
sumption."~/
~/ K. W~rnberg, "Ban on Advertising - What Then?", Pro-
ceedings on the ~rd World Conference on Smoking and Health,
vol. II, p. 854 [New York, 1975) ["3rd World Conference"].
6/ Hamilton, "'~he Effects of Cigarette Advertising Bans on
~igarette Consum~)tion," id. at 829.
!/ Id. at 830-31.
~/ U.S. De~art, lent of Health and Human Services, Reducing
the Health Consequences of Smoking: A Report of the Surgeon
General 512 (1989) (hereinafter cited as Surgeon General's
Report )
TIMN 0033241
Before launching their, attack on cigarette adver-
tising, antismo~ing advocates acknowledged that the only
demonstrated in~luences on smoking by young people are the
influences of f~mily and peers, and these influences --
unlike the asses:ted influence of cigarette advertising
--
have been shown to be both powerful and direct. In 1969,
for example, da~a gathered for the American Cancer Society
demonstrated th=.t "[p]ersons 'in the enviro~ent are clearly
very important ~n shaping smoking behavior: Where parents
or other fre~e~tly seen adults smoke, youngsters are more
likely to take up the habit. * * * Most influential of all
seem to be friends .9/
In 1983, Dr. Mortimer Lipsett, the Director of the
NIH's National Institute of child Health and Human
Development, testified to Congress that "[t]he most forceful
determinants of smoking [by young people] are parents,
peers, and older siblings.''I0/
Dr. Lii~sett also noted:
9/ Quoted in Advertising of Tobacco Products: Hearings
before the Subco,~m. on Health and the Environment of the
H.ouse Comm. on Energy and Commerce, 99th Cong., ist Sess.
683 (1986).
!0/ Smoking Prevention Act: Hearings on H.R. 1824 before
the Subcomm. on :[ealth and the Environment of the House
Comm. on Energy ~u~d Commerce, 98th Cong., ist Sess. 53
(1983) (statemen~ of Mortimer B. Lipsett, M.D.).
TIMN 0033242
" '~If one parent smokes, the child is
twice as likely to smoke as one reared in a
nonsm~king household. If both parents or
~ one p~.rent and an older sibling smoke, the
~ chances become four to one. If the child's
~ ~ best ~riend smokes, there is a 90 percent
~'~ probability that the child will smoke
These findings are not limited to this country,
but reflect worldwide opinion. For example, the Swedish
national Smoking and Health Association concluded in 1983
that "the smokiDg habits of young people are dependent on
stressed that "[t]he people who most influence a child to
start smoking are his or her friends and family.''13/
This consensus is supported by a four-country
survey conducted in 1983-1984 by the World Health Organiza-
tion ("WHO"), the results of which were published in 1986:
"When young people start smoking, the most
important predictor is the smoking
behaviour and smoking-related activities of
'significant others'."14/
ii/ Ibid. (emphasis added).
12/ Smoking Control in Sweden 9 (1983).
13/ B~gin, "Address to the Fifth World Conference on
Smoking and Health," Proceedings on the 5th World Conference
on Smoking & Health, vol. I, p. 26 (Winnipeg, 1983) ["Sth
World Conference"].
14/ Aar~, Wold, Kannas& Rimpel~, "Health Behaviour in
(footnote cont'd)
TI [N 8 33243
The WHO survey ~ound that "[t]he strongest statistical rela-
tionships are f¢.und with the smoking habits of the best
friend.''15/ Thc survey also found that smoking among
~schoolchildren is "strongly related to the number of smokers
in the family."!~/ The researchers also found "no sys-
~tematic differences" between the smoking behavior of young
~eople in countries where tobacco advertising is completely
~anned and in countries where it is not.17/
Many other studies have reached similar
Zoonclusions. For example, studies conducted in 1975 and
~980 in Norway s~owed that where both parents smoked, and
~ ~hey permitted t~eir children to smoke, about 67 percent 'of
he girls aged 15 were daily smokers. Where neither parent
smoked, and the zhiidren were not permitted to smoke, the
figures fell to 9 percent for boys and Ii percent for
girls.I-8/ Dr. M.J. Ashley of the University of Toronto
(footnote cont'd~
Schoolchildren: :~ WHO Cross-National Survey," Health Promo-
tion, vol. 1, no. i, pp. 17, 21 (May 1986).
17/ Id. at. 32 (~mphasis added).
18/ See Hauknes, L~chsen, Aar~, "Planning, Development and
Evaluation of a :~pecial Smoking and Health Program for
(footnote cont'd)
TIMN 0033244
report4d in 1983 that Canadian boys and girls whose fathers
or mothers smoke are significantly more likely to smoke than
Canadian boys and girls whose fathers andmothers do not.19/
~WHO s reglonal detector for Europe recently reiterated that
,, • '
smoking among children and adolescents is heavily linked to
~the smoking beha-iour of parents.''20/
Expert~ who have studied the cigarette advertising
~issue for the ad,.,ertising and tobaooo industries also have
~reported that a ~oung person s decision to start smoking is
~%~nfluenoed'prima~'ily by his parents, peers and siblings.
~ ~articularly ins:.ructive is the testimony in 1986 before the
~'~ouse Subcommittc.e on Health and the Environment by Dr.
Roger D. Blackwe].l, Professor of Marketing at Ohio State
University, and Er. Scott Ward, Professor of Marketing at
The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania.21/ Dr.
Blackwell explained that
( footnote cont ' d)
Pupils Aged 12-13 Years," 5th World Conference, vol. i,
p. 722 (1983).
19/ M.J. Ashley, "Women and Smoking," 5th World ConferenCe,
• 20/ J.E. Asvall, M.D., "A Smoke-Free Europe - A Challenge
~-6r All for Health," First European Conference on Tobacco
Polic~, Madrid (Nov. 7-11, 1988).
21/ Advertising of Tobacco Products: Hearings before the
(footnote cont'd)
TIMN 0033245
"From his parents a child acquires
basic ~.ttitudes toward smoking. The more
the paLents.smoke, the more likely the
child ~,ill smoke; the more the parents
discourage smoking the less likely the
child ,.,ill smoke.
"k'riends also play a significant role
in the youngster's decision to try smoking
and betome a smoker. And so does the image
of 'the smoker' that most children develop.
Children report a distinct image of the
stereotypical smoker, and it is not the
flattering image-that anti-tobacco advo-
cates attribute to cigarette advertising.
"The stereotypical smoker is viewed by
children as less educationally successful,
less healthy, and 'tougher' than the
stereotypical nonsmoker -- and nonsmokers
generally view other nonsmokers as more
desirable to have as friends than smokers.
"None of the research suggests that
advertising influences children to view
smoking in a positive light -- we are talk-
ing about not intent but actual response
among the children. To the contrary, the
research that is available revealed in
young p8ople a skepticism and distaste for
cigarette advertising."22/
These cDnclusions also coincide with those
of a
16-country study 3y the Children's Research Unit (CRU) of
(footnote cont' d)
Subcomm. on Healt,~ and the Environment of the House Comm. on
Energ~ and Commerce, 99th Cong., 2d Seas. (1986).. Dr.
Blackwell is co-author of a leading textbook on consumer
behavior in the U,~ited States, and Dr. Ward is the author of
the most widely u:~ed marketing management casebook.
22/ Id at 708. See also prepared statement of Dr.
Blackwell, id. at 710-26 (discussing research).
TIMN 0033246
London, Juvenile Smoking Initiation & Advertising (March
1989}.2--3/ In all countries surveyed, the chances of a child
smoking were low in a household where there were no other
smokers.24/ Given the role that parents and other role
models play in s~oking by young people, there is no reason
to believe that banning cigarette advertising would lead to
reduced smoking .~mong young people.
PRIVILEGED AND CON~IDENT/A£
23/ CRU 16-Coun;:r~ Stud~ at 8, 11-13. The CRU
S~xteen-country :~tudy involved fifteen independent
investigations (Argentina, Australia, Canada, Hong Kong,
Italy, Japan, Ke,~ya, Kuwait, New Zealand, Norway,
Philippines, Spa~n, Sweden, Switzerland and Turkey)
involving interviews with over 1000 children 7-to-15/16
years of age in f.ach country: U.K. data were gathered from
gover~ent sources for comparison purposes. The CRU study
was funded by thc tobacco industry and was published by the
International Ad~ertising Association.
2~/ CRU 16-Coun£r~ Study at ii. Earlier studies by the CRU
have consistentl> found that parents play a critical role.
In Canada, for e>ample, the CRU reported that a child whose
parents smoke was nearly twice as likely to try cigarettes
as a child whose parents do not smoke (43 percent to 24
percent); a chila whose siblings smoke was more than twice
as likely to try cigarettes as a child whose siblings do not
smoke (72 percent to 30 percent); and a child whose closest
friends smoke was more than three times as likely to try
cigarettes as a child whose closest f~iends do not smoke (80
percent to 24 percent). Children's Research Unit, ~
Ex~nation of the Factors Influencing Juvenile Smoking
Initiation in Canada (May 1987).
TIMN 0033247
Vo.. _.
"There is little evidence that advertising
result~ in additional smoking. As with
many p~oducts, [cigarette] advertising
mainly shifts cons~ers among brands."
President' s Council ~/ of Economic' Advisors
A. The Distinction Between "New"
a,td "Mature" Product Markets
Certainly all companies, cigarette companies
included, use advertising to promote the sale of their
products. Proposals to ban cigarette advertising, however,
~eflect a basic .:isunderstanding of how advertising works.
Much advertising, including cigarette advertising, is neither
intended to, nor does it have the effect of increasing the
number of people who use a particular product. Instead,
advertising is used to serve a variety of disparate objec-
tives depending on whether the product being advertised is
i_/ Economic Report of the President 186 (1987),.
TIMN 0033248
o~'~. Zt'ed z-
..................... : .................................... :;~'~. .... ~'Y t~ "~J C
" '
Co o Co..
,.
category is in compeL±Lion with other product categories.-2/
In. the case of a "new" product like compact disc
players, cellular telephones, or walkman stereos, advertising
attempts to inform people about product attributes and
benefits. Because the product category is new, advertising
functions as a central means by which consumers learn that
the product categ3ry exists and how it might be useful to
them. At this stage, advertising promotes demand for the
product category Ln the course of promoting demand for
particular brands -- although all advertisers ultimately are
interested in pro.noting their brands against competing
brands ..
As awareness of the product category spreads,
advertising matte~:s less and less in stimulating aggregate
demand. In fact, demand flattens because there are fewer
2/ For discussi,~.n of the concept of "product life cycle,"
and the role of p,omotion for mature product categories, see
C. Wasson, Dynamic Competitive Strategy and Product Life
Cycles (1978); R. Polli & V. Cook, "Validity of the Product
Life Cycle," Jour~al of Business (Oct. 1969); R. Buzzell,
:'Competitive Behavior and Product Life Cycles," in New Ideas
for Successful Maz'keting (J. Wright & j. Goldstucker eds.
1966); R. Hammermcsh & S. Silk, "How to Compete in Stagnant
Industries," Harw~rd Business Review (Sept.-Oct.. 1979); J.
Swan & D. Rink, "k'itting Marketing Strategy to Varying
Product Life Cycles," Business Horizons (Jan.-Feb. 1982);
and Y. Wind, Product Polic~: Concepts, Methods and Strategy
(1982).
T]MN 0033249
"new" or "mature," and depending on whether the product
category is in competition with other product categories.~/
In th~ case of a "new" product like compact disc
players, cellular teiephones, or walkman stereos, advertising
attempts to inf~rm people about product attributes and
benefits. Beca,~se the product category is new, advertising
functions as a ...entral means by which cons~ers learn that
the product catfgory exists and
product categor~ in the course o~
interested in promoting their brand~. :..
.,....:;:,. ,. ~..., • ~
, :..
brands.
As awareness of the product category spreads,
advertising matters less and less in stimulating aggregate
demand. In fact, demand flattens because there are fewer
~/ For discussion of the concept of "product life cycle,"
and the role of 3romotion for mature product categories, see
C. Wasson, Dynamic Competitive Strategy and Product Life
Cycles (1978); R. Polli & V. Cook, "Validity of the Product
Life Cycle," Jouznal of Business (Oct. 1969); R. Buzzell,
~'Competitive Beh~vior and Product Life Cycles," in New Ideas
for Successful M.~rketing (J. Wright & J. Goldstucker eds.
1966); R. Hammer~esh & S. Silk, "How to Compete in Stagnant
Industries," Harvard Business Review (Sept.-Oct. 1979); J.
Swan & D. Rink, "Fitting Marketing Strategy to Varying
Product Life Cyc.es," Business Horizons (Jan.-Feb. 1982);
and Y. Wind, Product Policy: Concepts, Methods and Strategy
(1982).
TIMNO033250
