Tobacco Documents Online

Sunday, CBS NEWS 2'.020 M Street, U. W. Washington, D. C. 20036 PAUTHE NATION as broadcast over the CBS Television Network and the CBS Radia Network January 3, 1971 -- 11:30 A. M. - 12:00 Noon EST Origination: Washington, D. C. GUES'T : JOSEPI31P. CULLMAN' I I I Chairman of the Board, Philip Morris, Inc. REPORTERS: George Herman, CBS' News Morton Mintz, The Washington Post Earl Ube11, Science Editor, WCBS-TV New s PRODUCERS: Prentiss Chi1d!s, and Sylvia Westerman . NOTE TO E'DI'TO'RS :- PZease credit CBS, News •' "Face the Nation. m

GEORGE HEE,4tAN: Mr. Cu.llraan, some serious charges have been raised on the floor of the Senate and even in a tobacco publica-., tion that the tobacco companics are organizing to thwart the banion broadcast advertising of cigarettes. Now we understand a meeting has been calledito discuss this problem. Can you tell us about it and whether you plan to attend? MR. CULLMAN: I can tell you about the meeting. I do not plan tolattend'. That meeting will be attended by the Chairman of the Federal Coaamunications Commission,, the president of the Tobacco! Institute, and the president of the National Associationof Broad- casters. And the purpose of the meeting, I gather, is to try to clarify the new law which reflects the fact that cigarette aldver- tising will be off'the air. We volunteered to go ofAr the!air. We plan tolbe off the air. We agreed to do this; the law provides it; we plan to adhere~to the!spirit and the letter of'the law. We are not going to advertise cigarettes on the air. ANNOUN'CER': From C'BS Wash'ington, in color, FACE THE NATION, aspiontaneous and unrehearsed news interview with Joseph Cullman III, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Philip Pdosris Incorporated and Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Tobacco Institute. Mr. Cullman will be questioned by Earl UbeZ'1!, Science Editor of 4B&-TV'News, New York; Morton Mintz of the WashingtonlPost, and CBS News Correspondent George Herman. 1005081'715 HEUiAN: Mr. Cullman, as you know, some of these charges that certain cigarette companies plan to try to sneak in 'some hididicn

advertising, so to speak, if there isy any such thing, are so serious that, as I gather, the Chairman of the FCC has called this' meeting. Do you think that no one is planning to sneak in a little commercial here and there in the corner of the camera? MR. CULUSAN': Well, this question has come up recently. Of course, many of these:sporting events have been sponsored'by ciga- rette companies for a number of years. This is-not a new development and it has been known that they were going to sponsor these events for at least nine months. I would say that I am confident in the integrity of the other presidents andf chief executive officers of the other companies. I do not feel -- D am confident they are not going to subvert the law, they are not going toltry to circumvent the law -- what_we need here is clarification. The law says ciga- rette advertising will be off the air, and cigarette advertising wil'l be off the air. What I believe the meeting with Dean Burch will concern itself with is the question of clarification. This i's a new law and we need clarification. I think the broadcasters need clarification, and apparently the Federal Communications Commission is going to: help us in this matter. I"d like to:say that many of the articles that have appeared in the press, I feel, are misleading. The companies are very sincere, they are law-abiding, and they are gai'ng to abide by the law. 100'5081"716 htINT'Z: I have no doubt that you are abiding by the law l'iter- a1'1y, but say if your company sponsors a Viroinia Sliiri's tennis tournament, an invitational for women tennils players, isn't that really an effort to get around the imtent and spirit of the law, =3 dr ~

which is to stop., as I understand it, the spirit is to stop the use of the airwaves to promote cigarette smoking? MR. CULL''IIIIA11: Well, that's a good, que5tion,,I,ir. Mintz. I would say that, no-, the purpose for our sponsori~ng the Virginia Siim's invitaticzal tour:.ament,s is to help the ladies in tennis to geta! chance to get pr.ize money and to show their prowess before a lot of people in the areas where they are playing the tennis matches. There is no plan to telecast these tournanents,, and this is on-premise pro- motion in the areas where they are going to have the tournaments, and we plan to adhere to the spirit and the letter of thie 1'aw. These tournaments have not been telecast. Now, for example, we have been sponsoring the U.S. Open Tennis Championship at Forest. Hills for a number of years. jtite think that people have appreciated th~at sponsor- ship:. We won't b~e able to sponsor it in tAx:rs of television ccm- mercials in the future,, but our sponsorship of sporting events~will continue without television e,xposure!. UBELL: Your company makes.a number of other products besides cigarettes. Do you have any plans,: for example, to increase the amount of air advertising, broadcast advertisir.o, for those products which may bear, shall we say,, a nameresemblance or a look resem- blance to cigarettes? F-~ A4R. CULL'-L-%N: Well, that's been, raised too many times. We ~ CA dion't happen to have any such, products. We are also iniother busi- O Q7 nesses,, such as chewing gum and beer -- I am not going to mention - ~ . the products -- I would say that, no, there is. no intention, there ej will be no intention to subvert the law, to circumvent th'e- law, and I f~ee l a~~b~s o~lu~t~~e~ly~ confident t~h~a~~t~ this wi 11 nio~ u b~e~ d'~o~~ne~ by my

company,, and' I'feel just as confident it won't be done by the other companies, but I cannot speak for them today in that particular area. I'm glad you brought that up, because I think this brings me to- another point that I do want to make relate to that question. We have tried to be-responsible and responsive. We have been responsi- ble in many ways. Over the years we have~ciscontinued all campus promotional act,ivities~when this was brought to our attention as,not being appropriate.We have discontinued advertising in college newspapers. Vie have discontinued the use of celebrities,, the use of sporting figures, in our advertising, and the use of'testimonials by them. Further than that, we volunteered to go ofz'the air, which was a very big move,: to attempt to clear the air. So we have shown, I think, responsibility, and we have been responsive. We are al!so very concerned about the charges levelled against our product, andwe~ are very anxious~to do whatever we can to clear the air in this matter. We happen to be optimistic about the future,, and we happen to feel that this is, a great industry, and that this industry can face~the future with confidence:because when, as, and if any ingredient in cigarette smoke is~ identified as being injiurious to human health, we are confident that we can eliminate that in- gredient. H'BR.`.M": Before we get into th~e medical aspect, which I think now you are leading us into it,,I just want to finish off on the advertising question. Are you not involved in a lawsuit to test the constitutionality of this the Tobacco Imstitute or your MR. CU'LL?iAN : No, we are O O CA O OD law banning broadcast advertising -- ~ company? ~ not,, Mr. Herman. I think you are

S referring to the question of the Fairness Doctrine-- HEILNf~N ': Yes . MR. CULUM: --of the Federal Communications Commission. That relates to the question -- the Fairness Doctrine was invoked' by the Federal Communications Corimission, and they required that al~l broadcasters air anti-cigarette messages without charge in approxi- mately a percentage o:c one to three regular cigarette commercial!s. N~owthatkeareofftheair, the Federal Coramunicat ions Commission has ruled this is no longer a controversy, and hence broadcasters, who air anti-cigarette messages do not have to air the rebuttal by the tobacco incustry, but the Federal Communicat ions.Commissio went on to say that the stations may do this. The issue here is whether if anti-cigarette messages are aired by stations after the cigarette cor.amercialls go off the air, don't the tobacco companies have a right to rebut and answer the questions under the Fairness Doctrine, if it was a fairness doctrine. HER'.%SA,V: You personally then are satisfied that this ruling of a product advertising, a legal product advertisino,, off of some media of advertising and, not off of others, is a constitutional and fair process within the powers of the Congress? 10Cl50$17191 MR. CULLAAAI: Well, we volunteered to do this-- HEPUMAN: I understand. I'm just questicr~ing. the legality. ?4R. CU'LL141AN: Well, the legality' is somethir.b which I' d'ora't think I a: qualified to pass on here. I will say that the Congress passed the law; it has not been tested: yet fron a constitutional standpoint. It is beinb tested. I think you ma~~• also be -referring to~ a suit brought by a number of radio companies perhaps. That was

6 not brought ::y the cigaxette industry. UBELL: ?ir. Cuilman, now that you •are not advertising on radio and television, you are going to have a little bit of money left over. I think in your company somethi~ng,like $30 million a year perhaps; for the indlustry as a whole, a quarter of a billion. Aree you going to use that money, for exanple, to do more research to settl.e the health question? • MR. CULL:IAN: Well, research is going to get certainly an ex- panded amount of money. That matter comes up a11 the time -- that subject -- what are we going to do with the extra money?' UBELL: Well, what are you going to do with the extra money? MR. CULLMAN: Well, I can on2y speak for my company, and what I believe t;ie other companies will do. Of course, this is a very eompetitive husiness. Zti'e will continue to spend money for promotion- al purposes, and some of it will go in print, some wi11 go in point of sales, soae will go in on-premises promotion. We will be spending it on an expanded sales force, but a lot will go into expanded re- search in a desire to get the ansaaers to these questions. HERriA':: 1t7hat is a lot? What percentage of your advertising budget, for example.' 1005081'720 MZ. CULLN?1N: Well, there is a question that I anticipated. I don't know hoa•r to answer that question; they are so d'ifferent items. 1llhen you try to get a:nessage thro gh to 200 million Americans and 65 millior_ sr~~okers, and you compare that f'igure to a f'igure for re- search, this is a very difficult figure to come up with. I happen - to l:now roa:gh-y what our campany is going to spend; I t}dnk it is a large figure. We are building right now a whole new research

cuntcsr in ;~ictimond. We src; c>xhandiirng. We fiavc been expanding our co'mmitment to research,, both, product research, product irrProvement, ' 1ttr1' t r"<rnt rh irr thir at r- -I r+t -~mo1P i,ir ~n~l 1'nn a l t li

HERMAN': I'm just trying to put it in proportion, because the figures, as _ I've been able to get them--and~ they "re kind' of' mixed up in the facts and in different standards--but as I've been--as near as I've been able to figure out, it's about one per cent, or less off the advertising budget. MR. CULLA'iUMr That is--that is not true, Mr. Herman. I would say that in 1971, something, in the: area of a half to a third, will go into research compared to our advertising. NERrIAii: Is this for your company, or for the tobacco industry? MR. CU'LL1KkN':, Our company--I can't speak for the industry. HER'4AN: Because the tobacco industry advertising comes to, Iike 250 million a year and you,--would you figure half of that?. NtR. CULUIA~u: Well, that figure has been reduced to 2010, million. HER~SCN: All right. Would you think half ofthat--a hundred mi1~lion: a year--is going into research?' MR. CULLMAN: No, I wouTd'n "t say that. I can't speak for the other companies. I"m talking overall research, product research, product improveraent-- HIER~UUN: Not health research? 10'05 081'722 }4R. CULUUCU: --And health research,. But I want to say this, that I've been advised for a number of years, the problem here is not funds. The problem is direction, competence and'.trying to find out what do we want to ascertain and~ how do we want to ascertain it. HEIU#NT: Well,, I'11--24'orton is straining at the bit here:, but one question that I would'like to ask--one of the most controversial ` 1. of the recent experiments has beern, the one of the smoking beagles,s who were forced by a hole cut in their throa~ts to smoke cigarette

9 smolte, and came up with a number of cancers, neoplasms, growths, tumors,, all_ different kinds of words to describe it. The problem that I come up with is this. It was ir.:mediately jumped upon by the Tobacco In_°ZtLte and thoroughly denounced for various reasons, some of whic: have since evaporated, I understand, some of which have not. My question is this--noRr many d'ogs or laboratory animals of comparable size has the Tobacco I'nstitute financed experimentation' of that kind on? How many beagles have you had' smoi:ing? MR. CULLMA,\: Well, we"ve had anir:al` inhalation tests going on all over t:.e world, not sponsored only by the tobacco industry, but sponsored by independent research sectors(?) for over 2'S years. And'' I might say that these tests have always been negative. They have never been able to' induce lung cancer in animals due to inhalation of cigarette smoke. And I would 1ike to comment on t:at Auerbach-Hammond' Report. This is a very important development. HERMAti' : Indeed. MIR. CULLMA~,~': That was announced, as you may recall, on Februaxy Sth, at a press conference at the Walcorf-Astoria Hotel as a' maj'or breakthrough, a's the firsx time tha't a major animal had indeed been ind'uced' to get lung cancer from' L1'BELL: Outsid'e of man. smokir.b cigarettes. Tilt'. C'JLLMAN: Outside of man--that is correct. Animal, I b:elieve I said. I also want to say tnat a charge was leveled, only against o r product„ but a claim was made industry, as the resulit of these experiments, not O O O OD N that the cigarette N should assess its ~I advertising policies and its overall policies. This was a serious ,~ ~