Jump to:

Philip Morris

Smoking Becomes 'deviant Behavior'

Date: 24 Apr 1988
Length: 4 pages
2022875414-2022875417
Jump To Images
snapshot_pm 2022875414-2022875417

Fields

Author
Mansnerus, L.
Type
COMP, COMPUTER PRINTOUT
NEWS, NEWS ARTICLE
Area
PARRISH,STEVE/OFFICE
Litigation
Okag/Privilege Withdrawn
Okag/Produced
Characteristic
EXTR, EXTRA
Site
N326
Named Organization
Centers for Disease Control
Federal Aviation Administration
Harvard Univ
Hunter College
Natl Research Council
Northwest Airlines
Prevention Magazine
Readers Digest
Smokers Rights Alliance
Smoking Policy Inst
Syracuse Univ
Ash, Action on Smoking & Health
Boston Univ
Bw, Brown & Williamson
Author (Organization)
Lexis Nexis
Mead Data Central
Ny Times
Named Person
Berger, P.L.
Bogart, H.
Brenton, D.
Glassner, B.
Harris, L.
Pinney, J.M.
Rosner, R.A.
Surgeon General
Wayne, J.
Master ID
2022875166/5504
Related Documents:
Date Loaded
24 May 1999
UCSF Legacy ID
ajb02a00

Document Images

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size:

Page 1: ajb02a00 Log in for more options!
Services of Mead Data C:entral;, Inc. LEVEL 1- 21 OF 55 STORIES Copyright (c) 1988 The New York Times Company; The New York Times April 24, 1988, Sunday, Late City Final Edition PAGE 67 SECTION: Section 4; Page 1, Column 1; Week in Review Desk LENGTH: 1243 words HEADLINE: Smoking Becomes 'Deviant Behavior' BYLINE: By LAURA MANSNERUS BODY: It was cause for a libel award when a Chicago television commentator said:in 1981 that the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation was trying to snare teen-agers with advertisements relating smoking to drugs, alcohol and sex. The Idea, the commentator had said, was to present cigarettes as " an Illicit pleasure. " f Whether the industry meant to send the message or not, illicit is what cigarettes have become. " Smoking is quickly becoming a deviant behavior,'' said Barry Glassner, a sociology professor at Hunter College and Syracuse University. ''It's not jus t seen as something that's unhealthy or irrational.'' The recent pace of regulation has surprised even the antismoking organizations. According to Action on Smoking and Health; an advocacy group, 23 states restrict smoking in restaurants, up from 14 a year ago, and 15 have regulations for private workplaces, up from 10 a year ago. More than half of American companies restrict smoking on the job. There are hundreds of municipal ordinances. New York's, which took effect April 6, Is fairly typical of the new ones; it bans smoking in most enclosed public places and segregates smokers in .r,estaurants and workplaces. As of yesterday, the Federal Aviation Administration prohibits smoking on flights of two hours or less, and Northwest Airlines forbids smoking on all its North American flights. There are less official signs of disapproval, too. Corporate annual reports never picture the executives with cigarettes anymore, one consultant noted. The cover of this month's Reader's Digest asks, "is Smoking Ruining Your Sex Life?" , "In the last two vears we've made more proqress than in the arevious 30 said Robert A. Rosner, executive director of the Smoking Policy Institute in Seattle a non rofit rou that advises employers. The reason given most frequently for the change is new a a on passive smokin , described in a 1986 Surgeon General's report and in another 1986 report by ~he National Research Council, which estimated that ambient smoke might cause 2,400 lung cancer deaths annually among nonsmokers. "The one humonaous issue is that the averaae aerson can iustifv harmin themselves,•but can't justify harming somebody else,'' Mr. Rosner said. ~~ ~_ . ® ~-~`~- ® kEXIS . q 3 ~ ((++~~ t ~ L~7 -L p~~~~~~•~~~!!111~~~ _- ~~~ i ~eq ~~``''~~ ~:1/ y~. ~- _ Z
Page 2: ajb02a00 Log in for more options!
Servi¢es of Mead Data Central, Ina PAGE 68 (c) 1988 The New York Times, April 24, 1988 Some sociologists see something more complicated at work. Professor Glassner, the author of a forthcoming book on attitudes about fitness and health, finds a " craving for control'' reflected in all kinds of worries about the body. " There are so many dangers that are large scale and that we feel we have no control over, particularly in the environment, that this is a way to gain control, " he said. Peter L. Berger, a Boston University sociologist, calls the New York ordinance a ''viable democratic compromise " but casts the controversy in terms of class. " It's not surprising that the upper-middle-class agenda has been successful, " he said, adding that the wave of regulation is a "delightfully close rerun of Prohibiti'on."" While hesitating to judge the evidence on passive smoking, he said it appeared to be " much, much weaker'' than that on active smoking. " The reason it's become so important,"' he said, ''is not because of the weight of the evidence but because of the ideological usefulness of the idea.''' " Most people are not in a position to evaluate this evidence. What people believe comes from placing faith in a certain authority. People say, 'The Surgeon General said so.' Well, who's the Surgeon General? " Professor Glassner, who noted that he " hates " smoke, said, "There is a cost involved in smoking bans. You're taking away a group's prerogatives. This i's a country i'n which we value Individual freedoms, and we ought to be extremely careful about which ones we take away. " A libertarian strain persists even among nonsmokers. Dave Brenton, president of the Smoker's Rights Alliance of Mesa, Ariz., said about 20 percent of the group's 700 to 800 members are nonsmokers. " They understand that it's an individual rights issue," he said. " Who knows what they'll take away tomorrow? " C -But Mr. Rosner said most restrictions do not keep smokers frorn maintaining their habit. " My term for this Is "80's-style temperance. " he said. ''Smoke all you want - just don't do it in public places. '•F.ndeed,-anti-tobacco forces have known fiercer days. in early New England, blue laws penalized public smoking. Prohibition revived the sentiment; between O 1920 and 1930, even as per capita consumption doubled, several states prohibited ~ the sale of tobacco. N Respectability came with World War II, when cigarettes were included with ~ K-rations, and it was not until the mid-196D's - the first Surgeon General"s report on smoking was issued in 1964 - that the decline began. In 1966, ~ according to the Federal Centers for Disease Control, 42.2 percent of the ~ American population smoked; In 1986, 26.5 percent did. ~ After the 1964 report, popular images of smoking changed, too. Cigarette ads were purged from the airwaves, "Thank You for Not Smoking " signs appeared, and Humphrey Bogart and John Wayne died of lung cancer. Smoking, Education and Income LEJilS'/ uEJ,' 6 S ' LEX4S'~,~ EXC 6 S'
Page 3: ajb02a00 Log in for more options!
Senrices of Mead Data Centual; Inc. PAGE - 69 I ~ ~ I I . . . 5 4 6 28 ~ 45-64 25.2 26.7 25.1 65 and over 12.4 8.3 12.0 Total 23.7 25.1 23.8 q ® a, ® o ~= L EZ IS LE~ 13 ~~ ErEZ,- FS (c) 1988 The New York Times, April 24, 1988 Clearly, the message has had the greatest effect among the upper-middle class. There is a strong negative correlation between smoking and income and education, though not much difference by race: According to the Centers for Disease Control, 28.4 percent of blacks and 26.4 percent of whites are smokers. In the current climate, smokers have been generally compliant. John M. Pinney, executive director of the Institute for the Study of Smoking Behavior and Policy at Harvard University, said its surveys of attitudes about the Cambridge, Mass., ordinance showed very little desire for confrontation. " We're a very individual-minded nation in many ways,'' he said, " but we also tend to seek permission for the things we want to do.'' Most experts do not predict the eradication of smoking, not even in public places, but expect i't to become less and less acceptable. " If this pattern continues, " said Professor Glassner, " we'11 have a homogenized population in which everybody will be within the recommended weight ranges, and nobody will smoke anymore, and nobody will drink, and everybody will work out. " " As I say this, " he added, "I realize some people think this would!be an ideal society.'' AMERICA's SMOKERS By education and income (1987) (percentage who say they smoke) Education Not high school graduates 32% High school graduates 33 Some college 29 Four-year college graduates 18 Household income $7,500 or less 32% $7,501.-315,000 38 s15,001-$25,000 31 $25,001-535,000 27 g35,001-$50,000 23 $50,001 and over 23 (Source: Louis Harris survey for Prevention Magazine) BY AGE, SEX AND RACE (1986) (percentage who say they smoke) tch MEN Age 11-24 White 26.0% Black 14.3% Total 24.4% 25-34 4 32 45 9 33 6 35-44 . 37.4 . 36.4 . 37.1 N 0 45-64 0 30 6 35 5 30 65 and over . 16 0 . 26 6 . 16 7 N Total . 29.3 . 32.5 . 29.5 N WOMEN ~ ~ Age Wfi i te Black Total A N 17-24 22.7 16.0 21.5 25-34 29.1 30.9 29.2 3 -4 27 36 4 7
Page 4: ajb02a00 Log in for more options!
Services of Mead Data Central, Inc. PAGE 70 (c) 1988 The New York Times, April 24, 1988 (Source: Centers for Disease Control) GRAPHIC: Photo of 1936 magazine advertisement for cigarettes (pg. 1)1; grspha of number of people who say they smoke, broken down by education and Income (Source: Louis Harris survey for Prevention Magazine); alos by sex, race, and total (Source: Centers for Disease Control); cartoons SUBJECT: SMOKING NAME: MANSNERUS, LAURA GEOGRAPHIC: UNITED STATES

Text Control

Highlight Text:

OCR Text Alignment:

Image Control

Image Rotation:

Image Size: