Industry-Provided Depositions
the United States Senate Report of Proceedings Hearing Held Before Committee on Commerce S. 559 and S. 547 Bills to Regulate Labeling of Cigarettes, and for Other Purposes 650330
User-Contributed Notes
Fields
- Named Person
- Ackerman
- Auerbach
- Bass
- Bell, H.H./Natl Assn, O.F. Broadcasters
- Brown
- Buddy, E.
- Collins, L./Natl Assn, O.F. Broadcasters
- Cramer, M.J./Lorillard
- Dixon, R.
- Foote
- Franklin, B.
- Gleason, J.
- Goldwater
- Gray, B./R.J. Reynolds
- Gunther, J.
- Hill, G.W./American Tobacco, C.O., American Brands
- Hoffman, J.
- Horn, D./Us Public Health Service
- Hueper, W.C./Us Environmental Center, O.F. The Cancer
- Johnson
- Kolodny, J.E./National Assoc, O.F. Tobacco Distributors
- Landis
- Lasker, A.
- Levin
- Magnuson, W.G./Us Comm, O.N. Commerce
- Meyner, R.B./Cigarette Advertising Code
- Miner
- Moore, G.E./Roswell Park Memorial Inst Buffalo
- Morton
- Nobel
- Rogers
- Ross, C.
- Royster, F.S.
- Salber/Harvard Univ
- Saxon
- Skelton, R.
- Sullivan, E.
- Terry, L.
- Warren, L.
- Washington, G.
- X/Us Comm, O.N. Commerce
- X/Psychology, O.F. Selling
- X/Psychology, O.F. Management
- X/Cigarette Advertising Code
- X/Natl Research Council
- X/Harvard Univ
- X/Univ, N.C.
- X/American Psychological Assn
- X/Us Navy
- X/Us Naval Reserve
- X/Fordham
- X/Ny Univ
- X/Columbia Univ
- X/Personnel Development
- X/Us Congress
- X/Dupont
- X/Beatles
- X/Us Government
- X/Brewers Inst, O.F. America
- X/Fcc
- X/R.J. Reynolds
- X/Lorillard
- X/Philip Morris
- X/American Tobacco, C.O., American Brands
- X/Advertising Age
- X/Us Dept, O.F. Health, Education & Welfare
- X/National Academy, O.F. Sciences
- X/Council For Tobacco Research
- X/Us Public Health Service
- X/Parent Teachers Assn
- X/Us Bureau, O.F. Standards
- X/Us Treasury Dept
- X/Natl Assn, O.F. Broadcasters
- X/Television Code Review Board
- X/Radio Code Board
- X/Report, O.N. Smoking + Health
- X/National Assoc, O.F. Tobacco Distributors
- X/Univ, I.L.
- X/Univ, T.X.
- X/Purdue
- X/Oh State Univ
- X/American Economic Assn
- X/Operations Society, O.F. American
- X/Mcgraw Hill
- X/Ford Motor
- X/Safety Council, O.F. America
- X/Frontiers, O.F. Marketing
- X/Thought + Science
- X/Inst, O.F. Management Sciences
- X/Ny State Health Dept
- X/Ny State Univ Buffalo
- X/Roswell Park Memorial Inst
- X/Journal, O.F. The Nci
- X/Natl Bureau, O.F. Standards
- X/Emory Univ
- X/Cancer
- X/Us General Inst For Funds
- X/American Cancer Society
- X/American Cancer Inst
- X/Comm For Research, O.N. Tobacco + Health
- X/Journal, O.F. Cancer
- X/Washington Star
- X/World Health Organization
- X/Surgery Gynocology + Obstetrics
- X/United Nations
- X/Yale Univ
- X/Albany Univ
- X/Us House
- X/Food And Drug Administration
- X/Ny City Dept, O.F. Health
- X/Ny City Board, O.F. Health
- X/American Heart Assn
- X/Ca Medical Assn
- X/Ca State Medical Society
- X/Natl Education Assn
- X/American Assn For Health Physical Edu
- Type
- DEPO, DEPOSITION TRIAL TRANSCRIPT
- FOOT, FOOTNOTES
- LIST, LIST
- LEGAL
- LIST
- Characteristic
- PARE, PARENT
- Named Organization
- X/National Institutes of Health
- X/Queens College Ny
- X/Federal Trade Commission
- X/American Medical Association
- X/Surgeon General S Advisory Committee
- X/American Marketing Association
- X/National Cancer Institute
- X/American College of Chest Physicians
- Litigation
- 10004034
- Author
- Bass, F.M./Purdue Univ Lafayette
- Bell, H.H./Natl Assn, O.F. Broadcasters
- Beyrer, M.K./American Assn For Health Physical Edu
- Crissey, Wje/Mi State Univ East Lansing
- James, G./Ny City Health Dept
- Jordan, B.E./Us Senate
- Lane, Z./National Assoc, O.F. Tobacco Distributors
- Meyner, R.B./Cigarette Advertising Code
- Moore, G.E./Roswell Park Memorial Inst Buffalo
- Wasilewski, V.T./Natl Assn, O.F. Broadcasters
- X/Us Comm, O.N. Commerce
- Date Loaded
- 26 Mar 1999
- Request
- 30
- Attachment
- 619035
- Brand
- Camel
- Springtime
- Winston
Document Images
O
:D
g~3
::IOV~I]AOD :~Q IM-NOI.I.V N
~000~ "D "(] 'u°J, Bu!qs~IA
"3 "N '4oe.J4S puo:es g['p
s.~a~oda U l m. a~.ffo
NV Alqq 0_$-~ DINO IAI
D (3 ' uo~6u! ClSDM
- :.-, ..
g96I qo.r~[ 0¢
g~tb-'OdU.ll~ U3"H¢O HO& (I~V
'g-~J~VOI3 ~IO 01{lq.~WI ~.~.WLqO~ra O~ ~TII~
L~g "g pu~ 6gg "g
aaaommoD uo oa]l!mmo3
!.
9
3WN3OA
aaojoq pioq ~u.ueaH
s~u!pooaosd jo laodo~
-°
L
:c .
L':
.ii;' ~,
.~[ ..
,-(
~.:
x"-
GM/c
1020
(
eL.Y
/-
C
/
CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF:
PAGE
Dr. William J. E. Crissey,
Professor of Marketing, and
Associate Dean of Graduate School
of Public Administration,
Michigan State University,
East Lansing, Michigan.
1022
Governor Robert B. Meyner,
Administrator,
Cigarette Advertising Code,
51 Madison Avenue,
New York, New York 10010.
1045
Howard H. Bell,
Code Authority Director,
National Association of Broadcasters.
1114
Vincent T. Wasilewski, President,
National Association of Broadcasters,
1771N Street, Northwest,
Washington, D. C., 20036.
1121
Hon. B. Everett Jordan,
United States Senator,
State of North Carolina.
1139
Ziggy Lane,
Field Coordinator,
National Association of Tobacco Distributors,
360 Lexington Avenue,
New York, New York;
on behalf of
Joseph E. Kolodny,
Managing Director.
1144
Professor Frank M. Bass,
Krannert School of Industrial Administration,
Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana.
1156
Dr. George James,
1292
Commissioner of Health, New York City.
Dr. Mary K. Beyrer, 1339
American Association fr Health, Physical Education, '~
and Recreation, Washington, D.C. ~"~:~.~:
6S000S911
MONICK/c
1021
S. 559 and S. 547
BILLS TO REGULATE LABELING OF CIGARETTES, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES
Tuesday, 30 March 1965
United States Senate,
Committee on Commerce,
Washington, D. C.
(
The Committee met at i0:18 a.m., in Room 5110, New
Senate Office Bullding, the Honorable Warren G. Magnuson,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
+ + +
The Chairman. The Committee will come to order.
Our first witness will be Dr. William J. E. Crissey,
Professor of Marketing, and Associate Dean of Graduate
School of Public Administration, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, Michigan.
We will be glad to hear from you, Dr. Crissey.
(
#2
tel
1022
STATEMENT OF DR. WILLIAM J. E. CRISSEY, PR(~ESSOR (IF
MARKETING~ AND ASSOCIATE DEAN (~ GRADUATE SCHOOL (~
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION~ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVI~SITY, FAST
LANSING, MICHIGAN°
Dr. Crissey. Mr. Chairman, my name is William J. E.
Crissy. I am a professor of marketing and ~ssociate Dean of
the Graduate School of Business ~dministration, Michigan
State University. I joined the faculty at ~Ltchigan State in
1960.
Like most of my professional contemporaries, I did not
receive my own university training in the field of marketing.
When I attended college and graduate school, marketing was
not recognized as a distinct academic discipline as it is
today. My master's degree, which I received from Harvard in
1937, is in the fleld of education; my doctorate, from the
University of North Carolina in 1942, is in psychology.
Psychology has always been of great interest to me, even
apart from its appllcation to business and marketing. I am
a llcensed psychologlst and a Fellow of the ~merican Psycho-
loglcal Association.
During World War II, I served in the Navy as a line officer
on both submarines and destroyers. I am currently a comm~nder
in the United States Naval Reserve.
In the years since World ~ar II, I have divided my time
between teaching, writing and consulting in the flelds of
6S000N913
C
(
rd2
1023
psychology and marketing. I was an associate professor of
psychology at Queens College, in New York, from 1947 to 1956.
During this period I also lectured at Fordham, New York
University and Columbia°
I have written extenslvely in the fleld of marketing and
have publlshed more than 50 artlcles° I am the co-author of
two series of sales and management booklets -- one entltled
*'The Psychology of Se11Ing*'; the other, "The Psychology of
Management. ,I
From 1954 to 1960 1 served as the head of my own consulting
firm in New York, known as Personnel Development, Inc°
As someone who has devoted much of his professlonal llfe
to the study of marketing, I am deeply interested in the sub-
Ject matter of the hearings which this Committee is now holdlng
in connection with proposed tobacco leglslatlon. Among the
q uestlons before this Committee is whether cigarettes sold in
interstate commerce should be required to bear some kind of
/
warning with respect to the posslble risk to health in smoking°
As I view it, this question resolves Itself into three
sub-questlons: First, as a matter of medlcal science, is there
a significant health risk in smoking? Second, if there is such
a risk, does the public interest require that manufacturers
be required to state this fact in connection with the sale of
cigarettes? Third, if the publlc interest does so require,
what should be the nature of the required notice and where
6S000S914
C
(
re3
1024
GS0008915
should it appear?
Medlclne is not my field, and I am therefore not competent
to testify with respect to the first question.
Nor can I offer much that would aid this Connlttee in
deallng with the second question it amy have to face : whether,
I¢ it should be concluded that smoking amy involve a risk to
health, the degree of that risk and what is known about it
warrant requiring cigarette manufacturers to warn of the risk.
This is a policy question for Congress.
I would note, however, that there are a great many products
and services on the market which Involve some rlsk to users
but which are not required to bear any kind of warning state-
ment at a11. The explanatlon, I assume, is that consumers
are belleved to have, from general knowledge, adequate informa-
tion to protect themselves from unanticipated injury.
Evidence exists from which Congress might conclude that
this is the case with respect to cigarettes. There are
frequent and repeated references in the public press to the
various health charges that have been made against cigarettes°
Whether some kind of warning notice should be required, however~
is again a question on which professors of marketing have no
special competence to advise this Committee.
The third question -- in what manner cigarette manufacturers
should be required to warn of health risks in smoking, assum-
ing Congress determines that manufacturers should be so
(
(
re4
109.5
required -- falls into a somewhat different category. _ It is
a question which has important marketing implications, and on
which I should imagine most persons who have devoted their
lives to the study c~ marketing might be expected to have
rather definite opinions. I certainly do, and I am grateful
for this opportunity to present them.
Firstp let me address myself to the question of where any
warnings that might be required should appear.
In my opinions there is only one place for such warnings,
and that is on cigarette packages; that is, on the label.
Labeling is where consumers expect to find warnings, if at all.
The expectation comes from conditioning, the conditioning from
tradition, the tradition from common sense -- the common sense
of providing information where it will be most useful.
The Federal Trade Commission has issued a '*Trade Regula-
tion Rule" which would impose a requirement that warning
statements appear not only in cigarette labeling but in
cigarette advertising as well. At least one bill imposing this
requirement -- So 547 -- is pending before this Committee.
In my judgment, it is inappropriate to ask that cigarette
manufacturers include in cigarette advertising a statement
with respect to the possible health risks in smoking.
First of all~ if warnings should be required in labeling,
there would be no need for them in advertising° I am assuming
that the purpose of warnings, whether in labeling or advertising,
BSO00SSI ;
C
C
re5
1026
would be to remind cigarette smokers, or potential smokers,
of possible health risks in smoking. "
A warning on cigarette packages would certainly perform
this cautioning and reminder function adequately. A pack-a-day
smoker, such as myselfs would be confronted with the caution
notice twenty times a day. It is difficult to believe that
anything further would be necessary to communicate to smokers
the message that smoking may be harmful to healths Lf indeed
that message is one which Congress concludes ought to be
co~municated °
Of course, if mandatory warnings are looked upon not really
as a way of informing smokers of possible health risks in
smoking, but as a way of rendering cigarette advertisements
so unappealing as to drive them out of existences then we are
talking about a different problem. But while some might
welcome mandatory warnings in advertising as an indirect way
to abolish all cigarette advertising, I cannot believe that
the majority of persons would sympathize with such an under-
taking, either as a means or an end.
To my knowledge, there is no responsible body of opinion
in favor of prohibiting the manufacture or sale of cigarettes.
Moreover, I think most persons would agree that the right to
do business should carry with it the right to employ in the
conduct of that business normals every-day business techniques,
including advertising. Certainly no advertising embargo should
GS000 917
re6
1027
be imposed in an indirect, covert manner and without full
awareness of what is really being attempted.
Assuming then that the purpose of mandatory health warnings
would be to warn and to remind consumers, not to punish
cigarette manufacturers, the lack of need strikes me as a
controlling argument against requiring their inclusion in
advertising, particularly if a warning should be required to
appear on the label. Beyond that, however, I cannot help but
view mandatary warnings in advertising as basically incongruous
and at odds with the traditional and accepted role of advertis-
ing in our economy° This role is to remind consumers of the
advertised product's virtues and benefits, whether tangible
or intangible. In the case of cigarettes, of course, the
benefits are intangible: taste and psychological satisfaction°
The fact that advertisingts long-accepted role has been
to remind consumers of the advertised product's attributes,
not its possible drawbacks, does not mean that advert~sing is
~t subject to important legal and moral standards° It is.
Advertising is expected to be honest; it is expected to be in
good taste.
Advertising is not, however, expected to be impartial.
Uhat the consumer expects from advertising is vitally
important in distinguishing it from labeling. I believe that
an understanding of consumer expectation leads inescapably
to the conclusion that it would be inappropriate to require
)
re7
cigarette advertising to contain health warnings.
1028
For one
thing, because consumers do not expect to find warnings in
advertising, they do not interpret the absence of a warning as
an assurance of safety. Certainly there could be no doubt
on this score if cigarette packages contained warnings.
In this connection, I understand that proponents of m, uda-
tory cigarette health warnings have sought to justify them on
the grounds that they would symbolize govermnental concern
with the problem of smoking and health and would stand as
evidence of an authoritative governmental determination that
smoking may be a health hazard. I do not entirely dismiss
this argument, but it seems to me that a mandatory warning in
labeling would be just as significant a symbol of governmental
concern and just as unambiguous evidence of an official
determination that cigarettes may be dangerous to health as
mandatory warnings in advertising.
Moreoverp it would be a symbol that was consistent with
consumer expectation-- the expectation of finding warnings,
if anywhere, on the label, not in advertising.
This leads me to a slightly different but unrelated point.
One who would attempt administratively or legislatively to
reshape the role of cigarette advertising in relation to the
marketing of this product should ask himself what the impact
of such a reshaping could be on the marketing of other products.
In my judgment, mandatory warnings in cigarette advertising
6S0008 19
