Tobacco Documents Online

4;, CIGARETTE ADVERT(iNG DOES NOT INFLUENCE YOUC PEOPLE TO SMOKE. , Fifty thousand school children from the fifth to the twelfth grades constituted our total sample. Almost nine thousand youngsters who smoked gave us their reasons.... A majoritystated'that they smoked for pleasure, for emotional improvement, or because of the influence of their friends. I cannot recall a single respondent who suggested that, he had' been influenced by television advertising. This is generally in accord with earlier findings. .... it must (be) admitted that the available surveys furnish no evidence that television cigarette commercials influence smoking behavi'or among young, people. Levitt, E., Testimony, Hearings Before the Committee on tnterstate and Foreign Comrnerce, U. S. House of Representatives, April 30, 1969, p. 1272. a Iso Levitt, Eugene, "Reasons for Smoking and Not Smoking Given By School Chilkiren," The Journali of Public H''ea (th, February, 1971, pp. 101-104 . A study of public school chiildrenihas concluded that cigarette commericals on television had no effect on their d'ecisions to smoke. Dr. Eugene E. Levitt, chief of the psychology section of the Indiana University Medical Center at Ind'ianapolis and a member of the executive committee of the Indiana division of the American C:3ncer society, said he found the smoking behaviour of friends and relatives the most important influence on school children. The study began with a list of factors assumed to be importanti..... Off those factors, television commercials had so little influence that computer analysis could not find it, occording to Dr. Levitt. Q W "Smoking Habit Picked Up from Friends," Special Report from the ~, New York Times News Service, September 9, 1969. W ~ 3/1

About 20,000 children aged between nine and sixteen years were questioned on their smoking habits during a survey carried out recently by a sub-committee of the National Health and Medical Researchi Council .... It' is interesting now to turn to the reasons given, most frequently by these children for smoking regularly. These were as follows: Boys Girls % % Relaxing 22 35 Something to do when bored or lonely 23 En j oymen t 13 14 Most of friends smoke, or to keep in, with friends 34 42 Australian Department of Health, "Smoking Habits of School Children," Health 19(3)1: 16 & 18, 1969. Why do young people start smoking? The reason given most often by the teenagers themselves is to act grown up (about 45 per cent)1. Or, they give reasons that could' be classified as peer pressure (38 per cent),. Indicative of peer pressure are survey results that show that 85 per cent of smokers compared to only 30 per cent of nonsmokers say that more than half of their close friends smoke. Another key reason given by teenagers for smoking is to emullate parents (21 per cent). All other reasons are cited by 4 per cent or less. ... "Gallup/Teens Know the Dangers of Smoking," O Newsday, September 14, 1977. ~ 4 C!t N W 3/2

There is no evidence to suggest that advertising itself is a signiflicant factor nowadays in encourag;ing youngsters to take up smoking or smokers to smoke more. It may be that in the distant past, before the health risks become a matter of concern, some advertising did indeed promote smoking;, but not the present {imited type of factuall advertisements. ... The truth is that in relation to the encouragement to smoke, advertisements are of negligible influence compared with other influences such as the example of parents and friends and'the portrayal on films, television and elsewhere of admired personalities smoking:with evident pleasure and social distinctiom. °Restrictions on Cigarette Advertising," Speech Given by John Hobson at ASH Anti-Smoking Conference in London, Transcript Issued by European Association of Advertlising, Agencies, Oct'ober 25, 1976, pp. 2-3. There is no evidence to support the view that a ban on odvertising would have a positive effect on smoking habits. No empirical research has been able to show that aggregate brand advertising leads to greater total tobacco consumption. Nor has anyt'hing, been found to suggest' that advertising entices non-smokers, young people in particular, into becoming smokers. It follows, therefore, that there can be no evidence showing that a banion advertising would result in reduced'tobacco consumption and fewer new smokers. Waernberg, K., "Ban on Advertising - What Then?" Smoking and Health. Vol. II. Health Consequences, Education , essation Activities and GoSernmenta Actl.ionj US Dept. Healthy Education & Welfare, June 1975, p. 854. , 3/3

We need'to know which of these influences, as measured by variables, are the ma i n ones on smoki ng. ... The boy who associates with, other boys who smoke and who participates in the leisure activities of older teenagers is under most pressure to smoke. Bynner, J.M., "Behaviourol Research into Chiildren's Smok i ng," R. H. S. 3: Ii60-151, 1970. . The first three reasons for smoking were: I. Cannot help it. 2. To be like others. 3. Like the taste. This study once again shows that the commercial channel does not influence the smoking by children, either by the advertisements or from the generali influence (i.e. actors smoking etc.). Factors influencing,choice of cigarettes are coupons and cheapness. Television commercials did not appear to influence their choice of brand or give them reasons to start smoking. They did, however, seem to influence their recall and choice of phrases used'to describe their reasons for smoking - but not to affect the child'ren's behaviour. Lemin, B., "Smoking in 14-Year-old School Chil'dren," Int. J. Nurs. Stud., 4: 304-306, 1967. 3/4

There is a fundamental difference in motivation when children or youths start smoking. With the younger ones it is more of a child's game, curiosity and playing a role which they know does not 'belong' to their age-group and'which they - as already said - are only playing. On the other hand, youths are often aware - during the 'growing-up,' state - of having less social status than grown-ups. They therefore feel an 'inner need'. They feel that they are in a process of comparing with and adapting to, in their eyes, an 'ideal end-situation', namely being,'grown-up' and therefore prematurely take up adulit behaviour, like smoking.... The statement 'only grown-ups are allowed to smoke' provokes them. They . want to know why parents, older brothers and sisters or acquaintances smoke whereas they themselves cannot, and'receive evasive answers to questions or simply hear that 'smoking is not for little children'. In this way children may acquire an, early interest in smoking with, the desire to try it themselves later.... Parental influence is the deciding factor in this phase (which is overlooked by most authors) of creating a predisposition in children. Not until later - perhaps when they start school - does the temptation by friends and brothers and sisters to try smoking increase in significance. At the stage of predisposition-creation the influence of advertising can be determined to be nil, especially as children then cannot yet read. The deciding factor for them is the living example of parents and neighbours, not any poster or advert isement . Roper, B., "Rauchmotivationen ,lugendllicher," Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Gottingen, 1978, pp. 219-221. 3/5

A , We discern a learning process by which youngstlers are primed to take up smoking, which includes at least the four follbwing steps: (a) Chi'Idren learn that their smoking parents don't immediately get sick and die as implied by the antismoking messages on, television and in school. Each year that such parents live undermines the creditability of the campaign. (b) They learn the mechanisms which these parents use to reject or neutralize the antismoking arguments. (c) They learn: from their smoking parents that 'smoking, is a prerogative of adulthood. And (4) they learn from older sibli'ngs and peers that smoking is still an effective way to gain status during adolescence. Meyer, A.S., et al., "Motivational Conflicts Engendered by the On-Going Discussion of Cigarette Smoking," Im Smokinq Behaviour: Motives and Incentives, (W.L. Dunn, .;r., Ed.) V.H. Winston & Sons, Wasliingtor, D~.C., 1973, p. 250 • Dr. Sylvan J. Kaplan, a psychology professor at Virginia Polytechnical Institute, who reviewed over 160 articles, books and research material on smoking, concluded that: " . . . . there is insufficient psychological evidence .... that cigarette advertising is a significan.t factor in inducing young people to smoke .... A great deal of evidence points to the conclusion that advertising is one of the least significant factors inducing teenagers to smoke. " Kaplan,, S.J., As Quoted in: Levitt, E.E., "The TV Cigarette Ad Ban: Unexpected Fallout," World Smoking and' Health, 2 (2): Fall 1977, p. 5. w ~ ~ Ul N ~ N 3/6

4 Q . ! It is quite correct, on one hand, not to make ads the culprit in. terms of why teenagers, for example, give up smoking, excuse me, take up smoking. Advertilsing cert'ainly is not the culprit. Pinney, J.M., Director of the Office of Smoking and Health, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Excerpt. From Radio Talk Show, "The Bottlom Line," WMAR - TV, Channel 11, Baltimore, Maryland, May 28, 1978 3/7