Tobacco Documents Online

NEU YORK TIMBS New York, Nev York dune 26, 1964 Code for Cigarettes Cigarette makers and their allies in Congress profess shock at the Fedenallrade Commiseion's decision reqniriag all cigaeette packages and ad- vertiaing to call prominent attention to the dan- gera in smoking. Given the weight of evidence, the only real shock In the F.T.C. orderis that It was not more drastic. The industry, of course, wants self-regulation. Xt would prefer to police iteelf through its pro- posed voluntary advertising code. The trouble is that the code merely reatricts the alluring claime made by the cigru+etts makere; it Is not Intended to emphasize the herards in smoking. Congressional partisans of the tobacco lobby are joining in the attack on the F.T.C., threaten- ing action to revoke the regulation If the indus- try falls to defeat it in the courts. The maJority of Congressmen are on the sidelines, regarding the whole affair as a minor and parochial alterca- tion. Yet the report to the Surgeon General, plus the American Medical Association'e belated find-. ing that smoking "is a serious health haaard," leaves no doubt that the issue of advertisiae is of vital public concern. The RT.C.'o requirement places no restriction on individual choice. It will not discourage smok- ing by an increaee in the cost, which could be done by a higher excise tax or by eliminating tobacco subsidies; it will not make cigeuttes less accessible. Consumers will have the same free- dom to smoke as they do now, but at last they will no longer be under any illuaione about the benefits that cigarettaa allegedly provide. It Is unimportant whether the regulation comes under the F.T.C. or the Food and Drug Adminta• tratlon. The essential thing Is to make consumers fully aware of the danger. With Congress apa- thetlo If not ar.tively hostile, the Administration must give Its full backing to this mbatmal pro- poeal and help to speed action In the courts. The health of the public, particularly the young, is at stake. The Goverament must play Its necea- aary part In protecting' It. POST-TIMES-EEAALD Washington, D.C. J1+ne 27, 1964 Page 53 Ht®0033054 To Tell tlee Truth The outrage of the cigarette industry over the new Federal Trade Cummisslun regulations is surely a bit overdone. Obviously, the Industry is unhappy with the FTC's ruling that beginning next year a prominent warning must be placed on all cigarette packs, and that by July, 1965, a similar warning must be Included in all cigarette advertising. It may be that the requirements are unwise; but it Is hard to see how they can be termed an unlawful act of regulation. For years. the FTC has dealt with the sensitive problem of truth in advertising. and for years It has been especially concerned with deceptive practices in cigarette advertising An imposing series of court decisions has upheld the Commis- sion's right to protect the consumer from decep. tive claims that smoking was somehow beneficial to health and even welght-slimming. Last January, a blue-ribbon committee appointed by the Surgeon General reported its conclusion that there was a causal connection between cig- arette smoking and lung cancer. This determina- tion was not lightly or arbitrarily made; it was based on exhaustive sludy of all available evi- dence. And this judgment presented an obvious probledi to the FTC, since failure to disclose ma- terial facts about a product constitutes one of the practices that the Commissiun is instructed by law to prohibit. The fact that Congress also is considering legislation hardly pre-empts the field. The more difficult question is whether the new requirements are wise. Admittedly, the labeling provision raises some philosophic problems, though it is torturing logic to suggest that automobile adverttsing might. also contain th,-% warning that car accidents can cause death. The important dietiuction is that traffic accidents result fyom ab~• normal circumatances, whereas lung cancer can result from what the cigarette Industry would re. gard as a perfectly normal daily quota or cigarettes. Rather, the philosophic problem lies in the anomalies that beset the whole question of tobacco. As the Indostry itself points out, millions of per- sons are dependent on sale of tobacco, and cig• arette sales pour some $3.2 billion annually into Federal, state and local taxes. Moreover, the Gov- ernment is deeply involved in encouraging. through the farm program, the very crop which when processed Is branded as a menace to health by another arm of the Federal Government. But these are paradoxes with which the FTC cannot be expected to grapple. What was before the Commission was the nprro«er question of whether the American consumer is entitled to know the hazard he risks In cigarette smoking. After due deliberation, the ETC is asking the cig- arette Industry to tell the truth. Since we have been for no long bombarded with ad.ertising designed to make us adopt the habit, it hardly seems outrageously unfair to require a little more candor in the future to stone for what cannot be undone in the nasl.