Tobacco Documents Online

Issue Brief -- H.R. 5041 Advertising and Youth Youth smoking is a problem that needs to be addressed with real solutions. The tobacco industry does not want young people smoking. It does not target advertising to youth. In fact, the industry adheres to voluntary advertising guidelines to ensure ad campaigns do not attract young people. H.R. 5041 is designed to reduce the number of young people who smoke by severely restricting tobacco advertising and prohibiting all promotional and sponsorship activities. However, H.R. 5041 does more to violate an entire industry's right to commercial free speech than it does to encourage young people not to smoke. Specifically, this bill would control the content of all tobacco ads by limiting them to pictures of only the tobacco product and black letters on a white background. It also would prohibit all forms of tobacco promotions and sponsorships. But prohibition won't work; it never did. As voiced by the American Civil Liberties Union in previous testimony regarding similar legislation, this bill is nothing 0 N more than an "ad ban in sheep's clothing." And research has W ~ demonstrated that tobacco advertising bans have little effect on r ~ smoking consumption patterns of youth and adults. w 1 0

For example, the Children's Research Unit in London examined the impact of &dvertising restrictions on youth smoking patterns in five countries and found the influence of tobacco advertising to be insignificant in relation to the overwhelming pressures of family and friends. The study also found that the number of 15- year-olds who smoked was higher in Norway, where tobacco advertising has been banned since 1975, than Hong Kong, which has fewer advertising restrictions. Other experts and studies have reached the same conclusion: Pressure from friends and family member examples is more likely to be the motivating factor behind a child's decision to smoke. Further evidence of this are declining smoking rates among young people. Almost 29 percent of high school seniors smoked in 1977, compared to 18 percent almost a decade later. Tobacco consumption rates among adults also are falling. According to-the Surgeon General's Report in 1988, the number of adults who smoke has dropped from 40 percent in 1965 to 29 percent. Considering the insignificant influence of advertising on consumption rates, this suggested form of information control will be of little use in achieving further cuts in a smoking rate that is already declining. 2

The only thing it will do is set a dangerous precedent for other products that some people may not like. Whether it's sugar, caffeine, skateboards or motorcycles, the government is assuming a "big brother" role which is a threat to our constitutional freedoms. Anti-smoking groups have been successful in their efforts to educate the American public about the health risks associated with smoking. A 1988 survey by the National School Boards Association found that 75 percent of public school districts have anti-smoking education programs at the elementary level, 81 percent at the middle school level and 78 percent at the high school level. One of the latest efforts is the "Smoke-Free Class of 2000 Project." This education and awareness program is sponsored by the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association and American Heart Association. It targets children who entered the first grade in 1988 and continues through graduation in the year 2000. Between these various anti-smoking educational campaigns, warning labels on cigarette packages, current advertising restrictions, and high levels of anti-smoking media coverage, most American children and adults have heard and apparently accepted the anti- smoking lobby's message. 3

For example, a 1985 government survey found that, not only had the Americdn public heard the message, but 95 percent believed that cigarette smoking increased the risk of lung cancer. 4