Anne Landman's Collection
Headline-writing exercise at Philip Morris
Abstract
Participants at a Philip Morris (PM) meeting were asked to brainstorm about what a headline should read for a PM-paid, full-page editorial in a major European newspaper. This document contains ideas from that brainstorming session. Some ideas:
Life Causes Death! (Explain how lifestyles differ, the importance of lifestyle freedom and diversity, and the relation between lifestyle and risk...
The Greatest Myth of the Century: Passive smoking is a pajor (public health) problem. (Explain why passive smoking is not a major problem. Describe how and why activists have turned itinto a giant Pink Elephant. Explain in detail how all the attention and resources dedicated to ETS/smoking distracts from more pressing political 'real life' problems...
Smokers outside: Are smokers drug addicts?...Explain clearly the differences between smokers an drug addicts as to ridicule the comparison...Focus on the increasingly common phenomenon of having to smoke outside...
Is American Intolerance/Puritanism coming to Europe?
Do non-smokers have the right to "smoke-free air"? (One of the claims often made is that N-S have the right to "smoke-free" or "clean" air...Develop arguments that show flawed logic, i.e., if we accept the anti's premise, then all cars should be banned also...
If stop smoking, the Stress Will Kill You! (Develop and support the argument that anti-smoking scare tactics lead to increased stress because of smoker harassment/discrimination which turns out to be a worse problem. Society needs its pressure release valves and if we shut off smoking as a pressure release, stress will build and be released in a more destructive manner than smoking. Use specific examples like the smoker who punched a flight attendant.)
Later in the document, employees worked to find a new name for "ETS," (environmental tobacco smoke) that would be "more representative of the issue." Some proposals:
Neighboring Tobacco Smoke Other People's Smoke Tobacco Smoke Remnants Trace Tobacco Smoke
The document also states "we must position [the antis] as extreme and unreasonable," and proposes ways PM could do this:
--Anti-smoking has become a profit business in its own industry. --Expose anti links to pharmaceutical/WHO, Mormons, bureaucrats, public health officials, other... --CDevelop arguments through research on antis and Intolerance, Zeal and Puritanism...
Fields
- Quotes
After all the participants briefly described what they wished to get out of the meeting, we carried out the following excercise. The scenario was that we had to write the headline for a paid, full-page editorial in a major European publication. Below are the ideas that were floated as part of the creative brainstorm:
SCENARIO: 1 PAGE AD [EDITORIAL) 1. Smoking is not a sin! (Explain how smoking has become a question of morality and why this is a dangerous trend by placing in a larger context and using other examples of "sinful behavior")
2. Life Causes Death! (Explain how lifestyles differ, the importance of lifestyle freedom and diversity, and the relation between lifestyle and risk. Explain how "real-life" risks differ from Relative Risks and why that is important. Place ETS (and smoking?) in its "proper risk context".
3. Is Smoking a Social Behaviour? (Explain how people smoke and why smoking is a positive social behaviour and phenomenon. Emphasize the pleasure and "creative/concentration" aspects. Focus famous smokers. Create argument that specifically counters anti claims that smoking has no benefits, only risk. Place smoking into a societal context, not health context).
4. The Greatest Myth of the Century: Passive Smoking is a major (public health) problem. (Explain why passive smoking is not a major problem. Describe how and why activist groups have turned it into a gisnt Pink Elephant. Explain in detail how all the attention and resources dedicated to ETS/smcoing distracts from more pressing political and "real-life" problems).
5. The Greatest Propaganda Campaign of the Century... THE ANTI-SMOKERS!!! Explain how the antis use "PR Science" to fan the flames of their own fire and how they benefit financially and professionally. Explain, with specific examples, why even scientists and doctors who agree with us are shunned by their colleagues if they say so openly.
- Company
- Philip Morris (PMCS Brussels)
- Author
- Winokur, Matthew N. (PM Europe, Manager, Worldwide Regulatory Affairs)
- Recipient
- Presumed corporate recipient, Philip Morris
European acronym for an association of hotels, restaurants and cafes or caterers in the European Economic Community. Also seen spelled as "Ho.Re.Ca" or referred to as the Horecasector. Businesses or individuals pay membership dues to belong to Horeca.
See Philip Morris Inc.
International organization concered with public health worldwide
Document Images
25/08 '93 16:39 '&32 2 2878089
/I 1
P.M.C.5 BRUSSELS - MATT WINO%LtR
/ ~
r ~~ ~ t/
After all the participants briefly described what they wished
to get out of the meeting, we carried out the following
excercise.
The scenario was that we had to write the headline for a PM-
paid, full-page editorial in a major European publication.
Below are the ideas that were floated as part of the creative
brainstorm:
$CEN,h..RIO 1 PAGE AD (EDITORIAL)
1. Smoking is not a sin! (Explain how smoking has become a
question of morality and why this is a dangerous trend by
placing in a larger context and using other examples of
"sinful behavior")
2. Life Causes Death! (Explain how lifestyles differ, the
importance of lifestyle freedom and diversity, and the
relation between lifestyle and risk. Explain how "real-life"
risks differ from Relati.ve Risks and why that is important.
Place ETS (and smoking? ) in its "proper risk context".
3. Is Smoking a Social Behaviour? (Explain how people smoke
and why smoking is a positive social behaviour and phenomenon.
Emphasize the pleasure and "creative/concentration" aspects.
Focus famous smokers. Create argument that specifically
counters anti claims that smoking has no benefits, only risk.
Place smoking into a societal context, not health context).
4. The Greatest Myth of the Century: Passive Smoking is a
major (public health) problem. (Explain why passive smoking
is not a major problem. Describe how and why activist groups
have turned it into a giant Pink Elephant. Explain in detail
how all the attention and resources dedicated to ETS/smoking
distracts from more pressing politicaJl and "real-life"
problems).
5. The Greatest Propaganda Campaign of the Century... THE
ANTI-SMOKERS!!! (Explain how the antis use "PR Science" to
fan the flames of their own fire and how they benefit
financially and professionally. Explain, with specific
examples, why even scientists and doctors who agree with us
are shunned by their colleagues if they say so openly. Take
arguments from Science Under Sie ).
0002/017
O1\14562235.AJA
25/06 '93 16:40 $32 2 2$7so69 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS -+--+
MATT WINOKUR Q]00ai017
6. Let's workk it out Together! (This message is based on the
long-running Dutch industry advertising campaign. The body of
the ad/argumentation will support the claims that any conflict
between smokers and non-smokers be worked out amongst
themselves. Obvious arguments to make here are all those
relating to the disadvantages/dangers of laws restricting
legitimate lifestyle choices. See Dutch campaign materials).
7. Tolerance of Non-Smokers versus Intolerance of Antis.
(Explain the intolerance of the anti-smoking movement by
focusing on specific examples like the WHO's "Bill of Rights"
and other anti-literature/rhetoric/actions. Compare the
antis' intolerance to other forms of intolerance and link°it
to larger societal issues. The goal is to position antis as
well-meaning, but nevertheless, fostering intolerance.
Explain what tolerance by non-smokers means and how it diff ers
from the goals/philosophy of antis.
8. Tolerance of Lifestyle/Hu.man Habits: A Thing of the Past?
(Explain how the new "health/environment religion" movement is
fostering intolerance towards those with differing, or not
politically correct, lifestyles and opinions. Illustrate the
trend with specific examples (probably mostly US). Make
convincing slippery slope argument supporting contention that
this trend puts at risk diversity, freedom and democratic
ideals.
9. Courtesy!!! where has it gone? (Explore the subject of
courtesy and how it has changed over time and how it's concept
differs from nation to nation. Explain how courtesy vis-a-vis
smoking has evolved and where it stands now. What does it
mean to be courteous and how does courtesy lubricate the
wheels of society. Note: Many Europeans would consider
asking a house guest to smoke outside as not courteous.
Explain why and how courtesy is a solution to smoker issues by
placing it in the larger context of courtesy, using specific
examples).
10. Does Means Justify the End for the Anti-smokers?
(Describe the anti-movement as having a noble cause, but so
overtaken with their mission that the truth becomes a side
issue. Identify and catalogue specific examples of antis
contradicting themselves or ignoring the truth. Expose.all
the fallacious antz arguments that are so emotional and
effective, but largely irrelevant or untrue).
11. Pharmaceuticals Target Smokers by Being Anti-smokers!
(Explain in depth the strategies and tactics of the
pharmaceutical. Try to support the argument that what they
are doing breeds intolerance and sets a precedent with
significant ethical/social/legal/political consequences).
01\14562235.AJA
25/06 '93 16:40 'ff52 2 2878069 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS - MATT RINOKUR U001/017
12. The Hidden Minority. Which of These People is Most
Commonly Discriminated Against? (Support the argument that
smokers are commonly discriminated against in many countries.
Use specific examples to illustrate how and why smoker
discrimination is growing. Place smoker discrimination in a
larger context by focusing on extreme examples and other new
types of lifestyle discrimination. Develop with specificity
the slippery slope arguments, focusing on the societal dangers
of the future. See A Handsmaid's Tale )
Visual: A smoker, a drug addict, a minority race, a
homosexual and a woman.
v
13. In Favour of Banning smoking in Restaurants? Not if you
Want Your Dessert!!! (Develop acceptable "parallel a)rguments"
defying anti-smoking logic and reasoning. Test their
arguments for bans and special right by applying the same
logic to other products to ridicule their objective and
arguments. These must be solid and sound arguments for them
to be credible. Use examples where such reasoning has led to
the ban of other products for which a demand e.xisted).
14. Smokers outside: Are Smokers Drugs Addicts? (Develop the
argument that smokers are treated like drug addicts and that
is a dangerous precedent for public and social policy.
Explain clearly the differences between smokers and drug
addicts as to ridicule the comparison. Focus on examples and
quotes of such claims and explore the motivation behind the
claims. Focus also on the increasingly common phenomenon of
having to smoke outside).
15. What do the Finnish Ice Hockey Team and Anti-smokers Have
in Common? (If you start losing the game, change the rules.
The text would compare famous sports teams which "changed the
rules" because they were losing the game. Make the analogy
between sports and the tactics of the anti-smokers and "expose
the scandal" by relating it to national sports.)
16. Are we NOT FREE? Non-bi-polar World Where Opinions and
Opposing Views Cannot be Debated Lead to New Tbreats to
Freedom. (As the walls between East and West come crashing
down, new, subtle 4nd dangerous threats to our freedom are
r surfacing. On many key social, economic, political and
scientific issues, free debate of ideas is being squashed by
"just causes" and Political Correctness. This new threat to
our freedom comes form inside and is much more pervasive and
difficult to "control" than an armed Soviet nation. Expand
these arguments by focusing on smoking and other example that
demonstrate that "being right" does not make one heard. See
The French Paradox and Science Under Siege.) _
01\14562235.AJA
25/06 '93 16:41 '$32 2 2878069 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS yy- MATT WIN0KL12 Z005/017
17. yisual: Berlin Wall w/smoker
Copy: Free no more?
18. Visual: Violent TV scene/images/nuclear.
Gramps smoking w/pipe.
Copy: Where's the threat according to EPA?
(This ad was seen as having little text with strong emotional
impact. The scene is that of a grandfather figure smoking his
pipe in his living room. On the television we see violent
crime in progress, the man lives in squalid conditions and`
outside his window we see a nuclear reactor and pollution.
The idea is to place environmental issues in their
perspective).
19. What Happens When Government Can't Tackle the Real
Problems? Visual: Newspaper story on p.10 about education
decline and crime increase. Front Page story, however, is
about smoking ban/ETS. (Develop argumentation of specific
examples where politicians have devoted time and resources to
ban smoking while ignoring important problems).
20. yisual: Smokers get left off Noah's Ark. (Develop
discrimination arguments as above).
21. Research claims: 70% of Dutch also have facts on their
side. (The idea here is that we should more heavily publici2e
survey results that support our arguments/positions).
22. SMOKERS NOT PRODUCTIVE? (Visual: Nobel prize winner or
very qualified scientist with list accomplishments. And he is
a smoker. Develop text to show how ludicrous it would be to
use smoker status as a criteria for choosing good people).
Copy: In the US, this man could not even be a fireman.
23. is it Politically Correct to smoke2 (Develop arguments on
Political Correctness as a phemonon and how it relates to
smoking. Focus on,examples of PC and show why it is dangerous
, trend.)
01\14502235.AJA
25/06 '93 16:41 $32 2 2878069 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS - MATT WINOKUR RI006/017
.
24. Is American Intolerance/Puritanism Coming to Europe?
(Develop argument that there is a dangerous puritan,
fundamentalist movement in the US and position anti-smoking as
one part of this movement. Explore the puritans' history of
deprivation and its contradictions with the Latin concept
"Joie de Vie". Explain how the principles of the movement are
exported to Europe through media and organized groups.
Position the whole thing as undesirable for Europe and as-one
of the reasons for the US decline in stature and
respectability. A hard-hitting example is the adoption issue
where smoking parents are discriminated against in child
custody decisions).
25. Intolerance or Stupidity? (Explore different intoleran*_
actions like the Singapore ban on gum to marginalize people
supporting such extreme proposals. Make fun at world of
examples of intolerance. California and W.H.o. can also be
good sources of examples).
26. Health Discrimination and Social Exclusion. (Develop in
detail the argument that smoking bans lead to discrimination
and eventually, social exclusion of smokers. Place smoker
discrimination in larger context of health discrimination.
Argue that as employers seek to lower health costs, they will
first exclude smokers, but then comes the genetic screening.
As tests to identify marker genes that indicate high risk of
future illness, some employers will be tempted to genetically
screen applicants. This is clearly a dangerous road to be on
and it starts with banning smoking).
27. Political Science? (Develop arguments about Junk Science.
See Mike Miles speech on issue.)
28. You Have a Problem with Smoking at Work? So Did We!!!
(The copy of this ad would explain how PM itself had a hell of
a time trying to figure out what to do about smoking at work
because of the many different circumstances of all our offices
and sites. Nevertheless, we would point to ourselves as
example of how smoking can be dealt with at work).
29. Personalized stories/solutions. (We talked about the
importance of personalizing stories smokers who have a
positive story to ~ell to support our arguments).
30. Do Non-smokers have the right to "smoke-free air? (One of
the claims often made is that N-S have the right to "smoke-
f reeTM or "clean" air. Is this correct from a
philosophical/moral/legal point of view. Develop arguments
that show flawed logic, i.e. if we accept the antis' premise,
then all cars should be banned also, indeed this is happening
already in Amsterdam and other European cities).
01\14562235.AJA
25i06 '93 18:d2 $32 2 2878069 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS - MATT WINOKLI2 2007!017
31. The Victim Era:!: (Develop argument about the "victim '
phenomenon which is common in the US. Use specific examples
to show that many people consider themselves victimized and
are unwilling to accept responsibility for their behaviour.
Subjects to be explored include product liability and other
extreme cases of litigation. The objective is to stigmitize
the concept of the victimized society and to position anti-
smokers as one of the groups most likely to exploit and breed
a "victim" mentality.
32. If Stop Smoking, the Stress Will Rill You: (Develop and
support the argument that anti-smoking scare tactics lead to
increased stress because of smoker harrassmentjdiscrimination
which turns out to be a worse problem. Society needs its
pressure release valves and if we shut off smoking a a
pressure release, stress will build and be released in a more
destructive manner than smoking. Use specific examples like
the smoker who punched a flight attendant).
iV
cn
0
~
W
~
N
v
~
W
01\14562235.AJA
25/06 '93 16:42 '$32 2 2878069 P.Y.C.S BRUSSELS - MATT WINOrtUR
E'1!S, A Mi.snomer: Some new names
Z008/017
It was decided that for many reasons, ETS was no longer an
appropriate name for the issue- When one considers the
overall business threat of declining social acceptability, ETS
is too narrow a definition of the problem we are trying to
contend with. In fact, out of the 31 messages elaborated
above, very few focus uniquely on ETS, per se.
Below are some alternative names suggested as being more
representative of the issue:
1. Neighbouring Tobacco Smoke ~
2. Second-hand Smoke
3. Other People's Smoke
4. Ambient Tobacco Smoke
5_ Tobacco Smoke Remnants
6. Trace Tobacco Smoke
7. Smoker Issues (we liked this one best because it is broad
enough to cover the issues below and focuses us on the smoker)
ETS/Health
Discrimination/rights
Opportunity to smoke/restrictions
Social acceptability/comfort and ease to smoke
r
01\14562235.AJA
25i06 '93 16:43 $`32 2 2878069 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS -.y-. )LATT WINOSIIR 2009/017
Smoker Issues and The Business
It was decided that we need to do a better job of explaining
the threat of bans and reduced social acceptability in
business terms. We agreed to meet with planning EEC/EEMA to
explore the questions below:
1. What is impact of smoking restrictions and bans on:
- Sales
- Incidence
- Market
- Social Acceptability
2. What is impact of less social acceptability on:
- Sales
- Incidence
- Market
3. What causes downfall of social acceptability?
4. -> What drives - incidence/volume?
- amount smoked
-> what drives types of consumption/brand selection?
- mix of price category
-> How and why do smokers quit?
1\14562235.A3A
u8 '93 16:43 $32 2 2878069 P.M.C.S BRUSSELS - MATT wINOguR
Possible Novel A
D D
roaches to Resear
Here we followed up the previous section by brainstorming
possible research projects that could be of value:
1. Conduct scenario studies by extrapolating US historical
figures to PM-EEC and analyze -> where/how to people smoke?
Margins/Volume?
2. Analyse French market over period of Evin smoking
restrictions implementation. Attempt to quantify impact~of
the new law.
3. Analyse UK trend toward unilateral bans and decrease of
social acceptability. Attempt to quantify impact of bans vs.
decreased social acceptability.
4. Hypothesize the impact of severe Horeca restrictions in
business terms and in terms of social acceptability.
2o1o/o17
5. Analyse behaviour and attitudes towards smoking at home or
in homes of others. The objective is to identify specific
cultural differences towards hospitality,courtesy, etc_
6. Study of how smokers are perceived versus homosexuals,
blue-collar, etc. "Would you marry a smoker?" We need to
better understand the repercussions of being a smoker in
today's society.
7. Study Tolerance/Intolerance and how attitudes differ from
culture to culture. Use this study to show European rejection
of the "Paradoxical American model/view of tolerance".
>
01\14562235.AJA
N
CJl
O
F-+
w
A
N
~
~
C!N
25/06 ' 93 16 : 43 $32 2 2878069 P. M. C. S BRUSSELS -*- MATT WINOKUR Z011/017
ANTIS
>
It was agreed that we needed to respond to the attacks of the
antis with our own arguments. There is a general feeling that
the antis are getting away with too many half or non-truths
and that we must position them as extreme and unreasonable.
Possib] e_ 'z'hemes
1. Anti-smoking has become a profit
industry.
business and its own
.
2. Expose the most blatantly unjust tactics/strategies of
antis.
3. Expose anti links to:
- pharmaceutical/WHO
- Mormons
- bureaucrats
- public health officials
- other
4. Position anti-smoking industry as self-perpetuating like a
bureaucracy with no constituency and accountable to nobody.
Use example of "Why more research on ETS if it has been
"proven dangerous" ?
5. Develop arguments through research on antis and
Intolerance, Zeal and Puritanism to position the movement as
extreme. (see argumentation section above).
6. Carry out research which unequivocally demonstrates that
REAL public health and occupational health priorities are
other than ETS/smoking. Be specific with examples and lists
of the most serious health and occupational safety issues.
cost money with few tangible results. We must tackle this
issue with programs that reach a "critical mass"_
The group considers the risk significant enough to warrant
inveszment with long-term commitment. The group agreed that
if we implement the right strategic plan today, it will save
the Company money later.
* To be succesful on smokers' issues, we need the same thing
a our marketincr ~ampaictns to be effevtive: consistency and
freguencv. It was felt that we should either have a real,
sustained program, or none at all. No half-way efforts which
01\14562235-AJA
