Tobacco Documents Online

Addresses a conference of advertising professionals. States "in addition to proposing increases in excise taxes and smoking bans - in an effort to create a smoke-free society - anti-smoking activists are also trying to restrict or even ban cigarette advertising." Asserts that "no study has shown that disallowing tax deductibility for tobacco ads would have any effect on cigarette consumption," and that "our ads and promotional efforts are not directed at minors. Period." Argues advertising serves two purposes: "to promote brand loyalty among our customers, and to encourage brand switching among adult smokers of our competitors' brands." Describes industry practices to deter youth access and to discourage youthful smoking. Discusses concept of constitutionally protected commercial speech, and efforts to ban advertising. Asserts tobacco advertising bans could lead to bans on other advertising, and states "we need you to remind the public, legislators and appointed officials what advertising does, how it serves the public, and why it is a form of free speech, protected by the Constitution.

Outlines events for the week. Covers federal, state, and county/local legislative events. Includes discussion of: Waxman hearing; a legislative amendment regarding public smoking and health care facilities that treat children proposed by Senator Lautenberg; proposed state and local cigarette tax increases; proposed or pending state and local bills that restrict smoking or preempt such restrictions; and proposed state and local advertising or marketing restrictions.

Highlights Jolly Ann Davidson interviews in Maryland, North and South Dakota and Pennsylvania in regard to Helping Youth Decide booklet. Expresses disappointment that there were fewer interviews than expected on tour due to "war coverage."

Parenthetically states that the report is potentially biased because the evaluation is based on reports developed by people participating in or in support of anti-smoking campaigns. States that little has been done to rectify this bias but that the analyses are based on answers "actually recorded" from high school students. Claims that anti-smoking educational programs are "costly failures" that actually recruit new smokers. Expresses concern that industry will be blamed. Debunks the methodology and evaluative efforts of anti-smoking campaigns. Offers illustration. Lists, defines and offers examples of types of anti-smoking campaigns. States, "The fact is that controlled studies indicate that the anti-smoking campaigns in schools tend to increase the number of smokers and decrease the number of nonsmokers . . . " Includes tables.