Tobacco Documents Online

lb 07 ~!~ 1 6. Tobacco Subsidiaries Called by.• Georggans Agairst Smoktng Poi}ution (GASP) P.O. Box 450981 Atlanta, GA 30345 (404) 296-9526 Date Begun: 1984 Reason for Boycott: GASP maintains that the tobacco industry adversely affects the Third World, Latin American raintorests, and tndivid• ual human lives, and that subsidi- aries of tobacco companies pro- duce revenue which allows the in- dustry to maintain a heavy advertis- ing presence and amass consider- able political strength. By weaken- ing subsidiaries of tobacco multina- tionals, boycott organisers hope to weaken this political strength and provide greater opportunities for campaigns against smoking and for the rights of nonsmokers. Developments: U.S. Cigarette Sales Slump; Tobacco Companies Look Abroad for New Market of Potential Addicts The end of 1990 marked the ninth straight year that the volume of c.ga- rettes sold in the U.S. has declined. (?) Since 1988, the amount of cigarettes sold here has dropped more than 8 per- cent. (?) That's why both RJR Nabisco and Philip Morris are stepping up their efforts to peddle their brands in for- eign markets, claims an article in Bus- inness Week. As American cigarette consump- tion continues to fall, worldwide ciga- rette consumption has begun increas- ing a few percent each year. With the decreasing market and tolerance for their product at home, U.S.-based cigarette companies have mounted aggressive marketing cam- paigns abroad, with particular empha- sis on the Third World. Once entry is gained into the new markets, the cigarette industry markets heavily to women and children -- two groups who traditionally do not smoke. Slick promotional advertising strate- gies that would be outlawed in the U.S. have resulted in an explosive in- crease in cigarette smoking among peoples in the Third World. Many countries have responded to this epi- demic by trying to pass U.S.-styie leg- islation that restricts cigarette advertis- ing. But such attempts have routinely been crushed by threats and coercion from the U.S. government. U.S. Government Goes To Bat For Tobacco Industry Chums For the past several years, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) has aggressively negotiated petitions submitted by the U.S. Ciga- rette Export Association alleging un- fair trade practices against American cigarettes. After successfully negotiat- ing advertising and market access in Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan, the USTR and the multinational cigarette firms have set their sights on Thailand. Already the fourth largest im- porter of American tobacco leaf in all of Asia, Thailand has national laws barining all forms of cigarette advertis- ing for all cigarette brands, domestic and foreign. The USTR maintains that such a ban is an obstacle to free and fair trade, and the agency (is therefore free to call for the imposition of eco- nomic, trade, and military sanctions against the country until it removes such barriers. ????) Worth noting as well was Presi- dent Bush's recent nomination of a for- mer Phillip Morris executive to be- come one of the five Federal Trade Commission members. However, the controversial nomination later, "went away," as one GASP rep put it. Tobacco-Free Ice Cream, Boycott Picks Up Some Cool Sponsors Stop Teenage Addiction to To- bacco (STAT), a new national organi- zation fighting tobacco ads aimed at teens, recently joined the boycott against RJR and Philip Morris. For six months after joining the effort, STAT worked with Ben & Jerry's Gourmet Ice Cream on an undertaking to replace the RJR Na- bisco-made Oreo cookies used in one flavor of the company's ice cream. On October 10, 1990, the group was no- tifed that the company had joined the boycott and would in fact, be switch- ing to a substitute for Oreos in its ice cream. In a press conference three weeks later, Ben & Jerry's told reporters, "We just don't feel it's consistent with our company values to be buying in- gredients from a company whose par- ent company is a tobacco company." Since the endorsement, GASP and STAT have called upon consumers to specifically avoid purchasing brands of ice cream owned by tobacco con- glomerates. Don't buy ice cream from companies that sell cancer, an- nounces one flier,which goes on to list: Knudsen Sealtest Frusen Gladje Breyers The flier then advises consumers to "BUY BEN & JERRY'S INSTEAD':" One Good Image Is Worth ...Billions In Cigarette Sales Ever since Phiiip Morris bought the rights to promote the country's constitution during the document's bi- centennial, the opportunity hasn't been quite the image-boosting extravaganza the company had likely expected. It seems that everywhere around the country that Philip Morris travels tot,,~ have its picture taken with the 200-_:~) year-old document, protesters have~, been on hand to present their image ofC.R the company. -1.2 But there was recently one place*~-- lacking protesters, with a large mediaGo presence, and plenty of opportunities C4 to establish positive name recognition. ~ The months leading up to the war in the Persian Gulf presented American tobacco companies with an irresistable occassion to boost their images as pa- trintic anrl ch-rit^h1A , hilP -t thP °°mP

• time, allowing them totake full advan- tage of the high anxiety and nervous- ness of the allied troops. Thus, it came as little surprize when American ciga- rette companies, experiencing sagging sales at home, sent off thousands of free cartons of cigarettes to the hun- dreds of thousands of potential new addicts stationed in Saudi Arabia. Free Cigs, To Celebrate Dr. King During last year's holiday in honor of The Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., folks in Atlanta were invited down to City Hali to celebrate the civil rights leader at a party hosted by RJR Nabisco. During the reception, host- esses passed out RJ Reynolds cigarette samples. Two party guests, Gordon Draves and Chip Spradley, president and vice president of GASP, asked the cigarette crew to pack it in. When they were ignored, Draves and Spradley went to the mayor himself, Maynard H. Jackson, and quoted city of Atlanta Code No. 17-11008, passed July 7, 1986, which makes it illegal to give away free tobacco products in the city. "Mayor Jackson finally stopped them," Draves told a reporter from the Atlanta Journal and Constitution, "but it took almost 45 minutes." Cigarette Smoke Poses Greatest Cancer Risk for Non-Smokers The draft of a new EPA report on so-called "passive smoking" concludes that secondhand tobacco smoke is more dangerous to humans than all other carcinogens currently regulated by the EPA combined, including as- bestos, arsenic, benzine, radon, and ra- dionuclides. With this in mind, a California judge last year ordered a mother not to smoke in the presence of her 5-year- old son. "If society is justified in pro- tecting children from injuries in car accidents, then certainly it's justified in shielding them from health hazards in the home--including cigarette smoke," said the judge in his ruling. In his statement, the judge argued that the health risks to the child clearly outweighed the woman's right to pri- vacy--just as they would if the dispute had been over seat belts. The ruling was issued at the request of the father as part of a joint custody case. In another ruling designed to keep children away from cigarette smoke, last fall the New York City Council, by a 33-to-1 vote, banned cigarette ma- chines from all public places except bars. The city joins 10 states and 101 other cities in placing such limitations on access to cigarettes. The council stated that the rationale for the restric- tion is to reduce tobacco use among youngsters. Studies have revealed that roughly a quarter of 13-year-olds get their cigarettes from machines.

4. Nabisco, Kraft Foods, and other food products *e ' by Tobacco companies Addresses: H. John Greeniaus President and Chief Executive Office Nabisco Brands 100 DeForest Avenue East Hanover, NH 07936 Michael A. Miles Chief Executive Officer Kraft General Foods 120 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 Called by: Stop Teenage Addiction to Tobacco 121 Lyman St., Suite 210 Springfield, MA 01103 413-732-STAT (7828) Date Begun: October 10, 1989? Reason for Boycott: Stop Teenage Addiction to Tobacco (STAT) has called for a boycott of the subsidiaries of America's two largest tobacco com- panies in an effort to force them to stop the "aggressive" targeting of young people in tobacco advertising and marketing. As the number of smokers in the U.S. continues to de- crease, and as past generations of smokers continue to succumb to can- cer and other deadly illnesses associ- ated with smoking, companies such as RJR/Nabisco (the makers of RJ Rey- nolds Tobacco and parent company of Nabisco Brand foods) and Philip Mor- ris (a cigarette producer and parent company of Kraft Foods), are attempt- ing to fr.d "replacemer.t smokers" amongAmerica's youth, claims STAT. The group comlipares these compa- nies to drug pushers attempting to re- cruit new young nicotine addicts. STAT is demanding that RJ Reynolds and Philip Morris end marketing practices aimed predominantly at young people, including the use of cartoon characters in cigarette adver- tising, the use of sports and athletes in ads, and the use of "subliminal product placement" advertising in movies. The group further demands that these companies stop targetin young women in advertising, and tha they acknowledge that pregnant women and young mothers should not smoke. Lastly, STAT demands that the companies cease their attempts to un- dermine tobacco advertising regula- tions in foreign countries and agree to abide by all health warnings and ad- vertising restrictions applicable in the United States when marketing ciga- rettes in other countries. According to STAT, the tobacco industry is spending roughly nine mil- lion dollars a day to create new addicts for its products. The industry claims that such marketing efforts are not aimed at nonsmokers. Rather, the in- dustry maintains that its advertising is dcsigned to pro:;.ct;, a compd,iy s Cigd- rette brands to those persons who have already made the decision to smoke. Despite industry claims, STAT points to findings that paint a different picture. In a study recently published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, researchers estimated that minors under age 18 buy more than a billion dollars of cigarettes each year. The researchers attributed much of this adolescent nicotine use to cigarette advertising. More Teens Are Smoking A survey of 308,000 incoming college freshman for the class of 1992 found that smoking rates were sharply higher than in previous years. These figures reversed a 22-year trend that had showed the smoking rate to be de- clining. The survey, undertaken by the American Council on Education and the Higher Education Research Insti- tute, determined that smoking rates in- creased by 13.5 percent between 1987 and 1989. A Gallup poll taken during that time, in December 1988, showed that 13 percent of teenagers aged 13 to 17 were regular smokers, compared with only 10 percent a year earlier. This in- crease in youth smoking came despite a sharp reduction in adult smoking over the same period. Another survey in the Flagstaff, Arizona School District showed there as a 38 percent increase in tobacco- Related infractions by junior high and high school students between 1987 and 1989. The largest component was at the junior high level, where smoking infractions increased by 63 percent. None of these studies looked at smoking among school dropouts. Ac- cording to STAT, the smoking rate among dropouts is approximately 75 percent--far higher than smoking rates among those remaining in school. "The cigarette should not be conceived as a product, but as, a package... Think of the cigarette package as a sterage co:nta:::Ar for a day's supply of nicotine ... Think of the cigarette as a dispenser for a dose unit of nicotine." A Philip Morris Internal Re- search Strategy Paper Unprecedented Promotional Binge It is no coincidence that the in- crease in teen smoking coincides with an "unprecedented promotional binge" by the U.S. tobacco industry, claims STAT. "Between 1987 and 1988, the amount of money spent by the nicotine industry to promote smoking increased by 27 percent to a total of $3.26 billion --an increase seven times greater than the inflation rate that year," claims STAT. "No other 'mature' industry is in- creasing advertising expenditures like this." According to STAT, "The reason for this advertising binge is the nico- tine industry's desperate need to re- cruit replacement smokers for the adult smokers," who are either dying or quitting the habit at record rates. "The advertising being used by Philip Morris and RJR Nabisco to pro- mote smoking is targeted at the adoles- cent psychology," says STAT founder Joe Tye. The graphic imagery of the

ads has a powerful appeal to any teenagers, particularly those e insecure about their own physic , in- tellectual, or emotional development. The group states, "There is no way that the Surgeon General or the health edu- cation teacher can compete with the Smooth Character or the Marlboro Man when it comes to influencing these psychologically vulnerable people." Smoking and Sports Tye argues that many ads "violate even the tobacco industry's own Code of Advertising Ethics, which prohibits use of athletic imagery and intimations of social success in association with smoking." One of the main reasons young people don't smoke, according to Tye, "is ,fear of impairing their athletic per- formance." But tobacco promotions seek to obscure that negative associa- tion by associating tobacco products with sports events, claims STAT. "That explains the Marlboro Man in left field," as one STAT supporter recently observed. Tobacco companies are ma- jor sponsors of some sporting events. "Ads like those for Marlboro that fea- ture professional race car drivers, are intended to say that it's OK to smoke, that you can still be a successful ath- lete," claims STAT. In addition to sporting events, to- bacco companies are finding other ways to put the spotlight on their prod- ucts in ways that attracts youth. Smoking At the Movies "History is repeating itself," as- serts STAT. "Millions of Americans started smoking to be like Humphrey Bogart, Lucille Ball, John Wayne, and the hundreds of other movie stars who were paid by nicotine companies to promote cigarettes. reads a STAT. And like their heroes, many were killed by smoking-caused diseases. Now, through the use of sublimi- nal cigarette advertising, "a whole new generation of young people is becom- ing addicted to nicotine," claims STAT. Many cigarette companies pay movies producers to feature their ciga- rette brands in motion pictures. Tye believes that, as part of the deal, scri~Roger Rabbit?" STAT asserts that the writers may even be asked to inclu children's cartoon movie "Who scenes that glamorize smoking. Conse- Framed Roger Rabbit?" contained nu- quently, youth wanting to be like the merous scenes glamorizing cigarette stars in movies, or to be a part of a hip smoking. When questioned about the or glamorous lifestyle protrayed in tobacco ads, a Disney representative movies, are taking a cue from motion replied that no cash was accepted for pictures and are taking up smoking, the product placement, but Disney did claims STAT. "Eddie Murphy's en- accept props, t-shirts, jackets for stars dorsement of king-size Kents in Bev- and crew members, and other in-kind erly Hills Cop does more to encourage smoking than thousands of magazine ads." "Philip Morris paid more than $40,000 to the producers of the kids' movie Superman II," says Tye. "In re- turn, Lois Lane, who doesn't smoke in the comics, became a Marlboro chain- smoker in the movie." "Wherp nicotine companies ar- range for placement of their cigarettes in films... [they] often get exaggerated smoking behavior on the part of one or more of the leading characters," claims Tye. In the recent movie "Lethal Weapon 2," Mel Gibson smokes in just about every scene where he is not kill- ing someone or seducing a blonde. Whenever there is a "No Smoking" sign in sight, he makes a point of light- ing up. When the police chief points out that his office is a non-smoking zone, Gibson replies, " I don't give a f ," and lights another cigarette. Tye maintains that such scenarios are "of obvious appeal to the rebellious ado- lescent who is the primary target for much cigarette advertising." Tye points out that "long after to- day's billboards, magazine ads, and even the Virginia Slims tennis tourna- ment, have faded into oblivion, movies with built-in cigarette ads will still be around, especially in this age of the VCR." Not Disney, Too!? According to STAT, even movies from Walt Disney's studios have fea- tured glamorized cigarette smoking with specific cigarrette brand advertis- ing embedded within the movie. A number of Disney movies have fea- tured such scenes, including "Honey, I Shrunk the Kids," and "Who Framed items. STAT points out that such "do- nations" by tobacco companies "can amount to thousands of dollars." One Disney executive reportedly told STAT that the company had no policy concerning how cigarette smok- ing is portrayed in children's movies. STAT later discovered that Walt Disney World even has its own brand of cigarettes, '*:rginia Ovsls. "Moviegoer" Magazine Terminated Recently, STAT exposed an effort by RJ Reynolds Tobacco to promote its products to the predominantly young movie-going audiences. "Moviegoer" magazine, a slick 24- page publication with five full pages of advertising for Camel and Salem cigarettes, had been given away free at movie theaters around the country. Al- though the magazine contained no other advertising, and all of its costs were paid by RJ Reynolds, this rela- tionship was not evident in the maga- zine, which STAT says "was disguised to make it look like a legitimate publi- cation." When STAT charged RJ Reynolds with an "insidious campaign to maket cigarettes to children," and pointed out that more than 40 percent of all movie tickets are purchased by youth under the age of 21, the publication was qui- etly killed. Cig-toons Aimed At Kids? Another way Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds market their cigarettes to kids is by using cartoon characters in cigarette advertising, claims STAT. Tye believes that the cartoon character that advertises RJR's Camel cigarettes is substantially responsible for the ten percent increase in teenage smoking since 1987 --the year that the cartoon character was introduced.

• "Our contacts in junior high and high schools around the country tell us that Camel is making a serious run at Marlboro for being the cigarette of choice among teens," claims STAT. Currently, Philip Morris's Marlboro is the dominant cigarette brand for an es- timated half of all teenagers who smoke. "That's NotA Camel" The image RJR uses to promote Camel, is the cartooned image of what is allegedly a camel wearing sun glasses, and referred to as the "Smooth Character." But a camel is not likely the first identification that pops into She's Not Here, You Killed Her Fsur tobacco companies re- centlyv sent a letter to Mae Th- ompson of Nebraska asking her write to her congressional represen- tatives opposing higher excise taxes on cigarettes. Her lawyer responded to each of the four companies with a one-line letter. "Mrs. Thompson died of lung cancer on January 29, 1990." What RJR Really Thinks of Smokers RJR Tobacco ads portray smokers as "cool," "smooth," "fresh," sexy, slim, seductive, thrill- ing, chic, individualistic, and dar- ing, But what does the company re- ally think of smokers? A market re- search study conducted by RJ Rey- nolds' Canadian subsidiary catego- rized smokers based upon various personal attributes. According to in- temal company marketing docu- ments, smokers in the study who were "not health concerned," "not concerned about non-smokers," and who "enjoy smoking" were called: "OSTRICHES." The document was obtained by Richard Pollay of the University of British Columbia. one's mind when one catches a glimpse of the Smooth Character smil- ing down from a billboard. Indeed, the graphic imagery on the face of RJR's camel has even been the subject of a STAT-sponsored competition. In its 1990 newsletter, the group asked people to write in and identify the face of RJR Nabisco's "nicotine-pushing cartoon camel." The most thoughtful and creative entry was awarded $100. Just as Camels seem targeted at a young audience, RJR sales employees are zeroing in on youth, claims STAT. In a memo with the heading: "VERY IMPORTANT, READ CAREFULLY." and dated January 10, 1990, a Division Manager with RJR Sales Company told his staff to hang around stores where "young adults" buy cigarettes and to determine stores--including those near high schools--where young people purchase cigarettes. The pur- pose of this field operation was to find out where to place "premiums." Ac- cording to STAT these gifts, which in- clude such items as Camel T-shirts, are "rewards for the behavior of purchas- ing cigarettes." "Beach Rape" Ad Provokes Oreo Boycott In 1989, bad advice from Camel's "Smooth Character" led STAT to award RJR Nabisco with the group's Pied Piper Award. The award came in response to a highly inflamatory ad for Camels which ran in such youth-ori- ented magazines as National Lampoon and Rolling Stone, and drew the anger of numerous groups. This "Smooth Moves" ad was later dubbed the "Beach Rape" ad by protesters. The 'bad move' led to a boycott of RJR Na- bisco's Oreo cookies, which later broadened into a boycott of all food products produced by RJR Nabisco and Philip Morris. Don't buy your family's food from companies that sell cancer The ad featured the Smooth Char- acter "camel" giving tips for "bored," "lonely," and "restless" young men. Smooth Move Tip #334 told the reader to: "Run into the water, grab someone and drag her back to the shore, as if you've saved her from drowning. The more she kicks and screams the bet- ter." The advice was accompanied by a cartoon picture of a young guy carry- ing away a screaming girl while her friends look on in apparent apprehen- sion for her safety. The final page of the ad included a peel-off coupon for a pack of free Camel cigarettes. For those who "don't like to redeem coupons," Smooth Move #437 told readers to enlist the help of friends or strangers that would redeem the coupon for them. Silencing Criticism, A First Amendment Right? Just because Philip Morris has been toting the United States' Bill of Rights around the country, doesn't mean the document has begun to rub off, claims STAT. Even though the company bought the promotional rights for the Bill of Rights 200th anni- versary celebration, there appears to be some dispute as to whether the com- pany has full appreciation for the First Amendment. STAT accuses Philip Morris of using its economic clout to silence criticism from opponents of its tobacco policies. When the American Academy of Family Practice tried to place a health supplement in Reader's Digest, ac- cording to Howard Wolinsky of the Chicago Sun-Times, the effort was sabotaged by Philip Morris, whose Kraft General Foods subsidiary is a major advertiser in the Digest. , And when Emilio Carrillo of the Harvard Medical School tried to set up a booth to provide smoking-prevention materials for teens at the annual Puerto Rican festival in Boston, he was turned down. The festival had accepted $30,000 from Philip Morris. RJR Nabisco stands similarly ac- cused. In 1988, RJR Nabisco punished the Saatchi & Saatchi advertising agency for developing ads on behalf of Northwest Airlines' smoke-free flights. The company withdrew $84 million worth of advertising for Oreo cookies,

• • Lifesavers, and other nontobacco ac- counts--which the agency had carried for 18 years before being axed. Other ad agencies got the mes- sage. When an employee of an Atlanta advertising agency developed anti- smoking ads for the American Cancer Society on his own time, the agency's president issued a statement saying "We are now taking steps to prevent' this type of situation from ever oc- curing again." Powerful, Yet Vulnerable During the first 6 months of 1989 the tobacco lobby spent $241,000 in an effort to influence the Massachussets legilslature. The effort paid off. The following month the House of Repre- sentatives reversed its earlier approval of a bill that would have established smoking policies in the workplace. But as with most consumer prod- ucts companies, influence with politi- cians doesn't necessarily translate into consumer acceptance. Companies may buy politicians, claims STAT, but com- panies are dependent upon consumers buying their products. "RJR Nabisco, is particulary vulnerable to the STAT boycott," claims the group. "The buyout of the company... has left the company deeply in debt. In order to make interest payments, it has had to slash capital and advertising expendi- tures. It has also laid off 2,300 em- ployees in its North Carolina cigarette factories." According to Nabisco president John Greeniaus, the company is also vunerable in another way. In an inter- view with Advertising Age, Greeniaus stated, "On the rare occasion that something goes wrong, it's when an organziation thinks that somehow they can use Nabisco as a way to get at the tobacco company." Stop Marketing To Young Women! In addition to demanding that Philip Morris and RJR stop targeting teens, STAT is also ordering the com- panies to end their campaigns directed at young women. STAT maintains that Philip Morris's Virginia Slims cigarette targets young women in their prime child-bearing years with the message that smokingis an effective means weight management ands stress co. trol. In the six years following the i troduction of Virginia Slims, the nur ber of teenage girls regularly smokir more than doubled, claims STA STAT also wants the tobacc companies to acknowledge that pre, nant women and young mothers shou. not smoke Cigarette smoking is a m: jor cause of spontaneous abortion ar infant death. How You Can Help For people interested in suppor ing the boycott campaign, STAT offe a number of suggestions. One way i help out is by asking local hospital schools, churches, and other organiz, tions to remove Nabisco and Kra products from their approved biddir lists. Another recommendation is , get local educators, health professio: als, ministers, politicians, and others endorse the campaign. STAT asks th the names of all new endorsees ar their addresses be sent to STAT for i records. If you are a teacher or you leader, STAT asks that you invol, your students in the boycott as an ed cational experience Writing to health organizations, which you are a member and askir them to endorse the boycott is al: helpful, says STAT. Also, the groi recommends writiing to the Americ, Cancer Society, American Lung Ass ciation, American Heart Associatio American Medical Society, Americ. Public Health Association, and oth major organizations. For those people wishing to set i information tables in front of groce stores and other locations where fot is sold, STAT has posters, extra copi of Tobacco and Youth Reporter, & other resources that can be used f such activities. Materials Oreo Boycott T Shirts are $10.00 eac $8.00 each for 10 or more. Speci size: Medium, Large, Extra-Large. "Replacement Smoker" posters E $10.00 each; $5.00 each for 10 more. 2045748390

• Page 44 - 1. Marlboro cigarettes and Miller beer Address: Hamish Maxwell, CEO Philip Morris Companies, Inc. 120 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 telephone: (212) 880-5000 fax: (212) 878-2167 Miller Brewing Co. C_-lled F,v• ~• ACT UP/DC PO Box 9318 Washington, DC 20005 telephone: (202) 728-7530 Continued by: ACT UP/SF Box 14844 San Francisco, CA 94144 telephone: (415) 563-0724 Date Begun: Apri126, 1990 date ended: Reason for Boycott: ACT UP, the AIDS Coalition to Unleash Power, has called for the boycott to protest the support given by Philip Morris Com- panies, Inc., to US Senator Jesse Helms. The primary purpose of this boycott is to protest the company's support for Helms, not the health ef- fects of its products. According to ACT UP, Helms has endangered people's lives by voting against every piece of legislation that would have advanced effective re- sponses to the deadly virus. ACT UP wants Philip Morris, the company that produces Marlboro cigarettes and that owns the company that produces Miller beer, to cease all corporate con- tributions to and renounce all of its past support for Senator Helms. Background An examination of Federal Elec- tion Commission (FEC) records by four members of ACT UP/DC revealed in March, 1990, that PHILPAC (the Philip Morris Political Action Com- mittee) was the largest corporate con- tributor to the re-election campaign of Senator Helms. (The company denies this.) In April, the Raleigh News and Observer published identified Philip Morris as the largest corporate con- tributor to a Jesse Helms museum un- der construction near Munroe, NC. Before the month was over, ACT UP/ DC approached the company with its concerns. At a meeting with PM executives at the firm's DC office, ACT UP mem- bers asked PM to stop giving money to Senator Helms and to renounce all of its past contributions. The company refused and reaffirmed its support for Senator Helms. Philip Morris has a major business interest in North Caro- lina. It employs 3,900 people in its food, beer, and tobacco businesses there. In his work as a Senator, Jesse Helms has been a strong supporter of those businesses and a leader on to- bacco issues. ...that "there are a number of cor- porate PAC donors that have contrib- uted much more than Philip Morris' $19,000. The maximum allowed by federal law to date to Senator Helms is $30,000. The PAC with that distinc- tion (although it is not a corporate PAC) is the American Medical Asso- ciation." (emphasis added) With the issue at an impasse, ACT UP/ DC left the meeting and went into ac- tion. The media was notified, and ar- ticles about the impending boycott quickly appeared in USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washing- ton Times. On April 26, 1990, ACT UP/DC made the formal announce- ment from outside PM's DC office. First press conference (Enormous variety of actions. First ac- tion: tie up PM 8001ines) By May, articles about the boy- cott were appearing in the mainstream and the gay and lesbian press. Nearly 200 gay, lesbian, and AIDS support groups across the country were con- tacted by ACT UP/DC and notified about the boycott. (check this) (At about the same time?), the heightened attention brought to bear upon Philip Morris was beginning to spill onto its subsidiary, the Miller Brewing Co. (first paragraph) Helms' Record on AIDS According to ACT UP, between 1986 and 1990, Helms voted on eight separate occasions to block efforts to provide AIDS education and preven- tion materials. During that same pe- riod, Helms tried to invoke mandatory testing on four separate occasions. (Previous paragraph deals with the role of PM) Philip Morris Responds Philip Morris spokeswoman Tag- garty Patrick said that the company is one of the most civic minded firms in the United States, and that it has con- tributed more than $1 million to AIDS groups. Philip Morris labels ACT UP as an extreme organization. In August, 1990, DC neighborhoods were plas- tered with a poster bearing ACT-UP's logo. According to ACT UP spokes- man Michael Petrelis, the posters, de- picting "George Bush being sod- omized by Jesse Helms," were ap- proved at an ACT UP meeting. The poster, he explains, is a photo clipped from "a male pornographic maga- zine," with the faces of the president and Mr. Helms glued over the faces of the models. The poster bears the cap- tion: "Read My Hips, Mr. President. Jesse Helms Loves Your Position on AIDS. Get Off Your Knees, George." Mr. Petrelis calls the poster a satirical attempt to make the general public re- alize the dangerous nature of the alli- ance between Bush and Helms. The law takes,a different view. DC municipal code outlaws the public display of any poster that depicts "lewd, indecent, or vulgar" acts or that represents the "commission or in- tent to commit any crime." Noting that sodomy is both indecent and a

• Page 45 crime, Sgt. Gentile of the DC police told The Washington Times (8/28/90) that police would cite anyone caught putting up the posters. The Miller Boycott Miller beer became a target of the boycott despite the original intent of the DC organizers. It started as the Lesbian/Gay Pride Committee of San Francisco began to receive complaints about a $20,000 donation made by a local Miller distributor to the organiza- tion's upcoming Lesbian/Gay Pride events. Miller-bashing quickly as- sumed a life all its own. Anti-Miller/ anti-Helms posters began to appear in the city's gay and lesbian districts. To avoid controversy, the Pride Commit- tee banned Miller's promotional ban- ners from the event, despite the dona- tion. Free Phone for Boycott News In July 1990, the boycott re- ceived a major boost. ACT UP/San Francisco, the Dallas Gay Alliance, the Tarrant County (TX) Gay Alliance, each agreed to extend the boycott to include Miller beer. A toll-free num- ber (1-800-666-3308) was estab- lished to facilitate communication be- tween groups coordinating the boycott, a first for the gay and lesbian commu- nity. The w6 exchar,ge was chosen to ward *off fundamentalists and right wing extremists who might try to tie up the line. 666 is a Biblical reference to the "Mark of the Beast." On the retail front, several gay and lesbian bars in Dallas, San Fran- cisco, and Washington DC agreed to stop selling Miller and Marlboro prod- ucts. Activists in these cities and in New York City dumped Miller in the streets. According to boycott organ- izer Michael Petrelis, the Miller boy- cott was now nationwide. The Response from Miller The Milwaukee-based brewer was not unconcerned. Susan Henderson, a Miller spokesperson, told the Raleigh News and Observer on July 20th that "We're always concerned when a con- sumer group says it will stop buying our product." In Dallas and other cities, Miller made its concern visible. According to Cincinnati's Gay- beat magazine, when the 23-member Dallas Gay Tavern Guild met in July to endorse the boycotts, several Mil- waukee-based executives were present to try and dissuade the tavern owners from endorsing the boycott of Miller. In San Francisco, Miller took out full page ads in gay newspapers to tell its side of the issue. According to Gaybeat, the ads stated that the com- pany had long supported gay civil rights and efforts to end the AIDS cri- sis, that the company "totally dis- agrees" with Helms, and that it does not control Philip Morris' contribu- tions to Helms. Indeed, the Miller Brewing Co. has its own PAC, a PAC independent of Philip Morris', a PAC that has never given money to Jesse Helms. In Cincinnati, beer truck drivers have distributed flyers to oppose the boycott. Miller Sympathizers The Miller boycott has met resis- tance in Milwaukee, Philadelphia, Houston, and Los Angeles, among other cities. Following a meeting with ACT UP in August, 1990, officials of 11 key Chicago bars expressed support for the boycott of Marlboro, but re- jected the boycott against Miller, argu- ing that the brewer and its local dis- tributor had contributed over $90,000 to gay community events in past years. Bar officials also felt that the boycott would mostly hurt the lo- cal distributor, not Miller. One bar owner said: "You can't just act up, you've got to act smart." Said an- other: "I'm not going to pull ((Miller) Lite out of my bar, if customers don't want to but it, they don't have to." ACT UP/DC has officially voted down attempts to hold direct actions against gay community bars. Accord- ing to ACT UP member Brian Latker. "The gay community is not our en- emy, Jesse Helms is." Still, this opin- ion has not stopped some members from acting on their own in an individ- ual capacity. In Washington DC, one ACT UP/ DC member called the fire marshal on a local gay bar that had refused to stop serving Miller beer. When the mar- shals arrived, they said that they were investigating a report of overcrowding. Though the bar was not cited for any code violations, the manager was asked to restrict the number of people entering the club. In the manager's opinion, this definitely hurt business. International Endorsements In July, as the ACT UP boycotts were gaining national support, boycott organizer Michael Petrelis traveled to Sweden to attend the annual meeting of the International Lesbian and Gay Association. He returned with endorse- ments from groups in other countries. The boycotts of Miller and Marlboro had become international. The London chapter of ACT UP mailed an information pack to every gay pub and club owner in the city to urge them to stop selling Marlboro. The Empire Strikes Back Helms' 4th six year term in the Senate. On August 6, 1990, "Re-elect Jesse Helms", an arm of the Conserva- tive Campaign Fund filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) against ACT UP/DC, ACT UP/ SF, the Dallas Gay Alliance, the Tar- rant County (TX) Gay Alliance, Mi- chael Petrelis, and Nancy Soloman. In essence, the complaint charges that the groups and individuals named as de- fendants are acting like political action committees without having filed the papers required to collect funds for a senate race. On February 8, 1991, six months after the original complaint and three months after Helms' reelec- tion, the FEC notified the defendants in the suit that it had found "reason to

• Page 46 believe" that the four groups named in the August 6th complaint have violated U.S.Code and that it had decided to take no action against Petrelis and So- loman. ACT-UP Claims Success With Miller Boycott (Miller boycott activities, last quarter of 1990) On January 31, 1991, the Wall Street Journal reported that operating profits for the Miller Brewing Co. fell 54% to $5 million during the last quar- ter of 1990. Boycott organizer and ACT UP member Michael Petrelis was ecstatic. "This precipitous drop is largely due to our boycott. It proves that gay, lesbian, and AIDS activists can effectively marshall their forces to Arts Community Draws the Line The boycott has forced a some- what different debate in the arts community. Though Philip Morris is one of the largest corporate donors to the arts in the United States, should an artist or arts organization accept its money in light of its sup- port for Senator Helms, an outspo- ken critic of the National Endow- ment of the Arts (NEA) and a leader in the conservative movement to halt grants to artists whose work is considered by some to be obscene? The question has provoked a variety of responses. Silence The Washington Project for the Arts (WPA) in Washington, DC, gained hero status in 1989 when it picked up the Robert Mapplethorpe exhibit after it had been dropped by the Corcoran Gallery. "The organi- zation people are very split about what to do," said Philip Brookman, the WPA's director of programs. "We haven't approached them since we did the Mapplethorpe show and we won't approach them until we come up with a precise position." Silence is Not Enough Last September, at a WPA fun- draiser, Don't Take the Money Karen Finley and Danitra Vance were scheduled to co-host from the 1990 Bessie Awards in New York. The ceremony annually honors the best in non-mainstream theatrical performances. Both women with- drew because the ceremony was partially funded by Philip Morris. Ms. Finley, who recently had seen a grant to her from the NEA withdrawn by the NEA, said: "I- cannot participate in a project that makes Philip Morris look like a benefactor of the arts when they also fund the arch-enemy of art." The NEA withdrew its grant to Ms. Finley after Helms critized the fed- eral organization's judgment. While expressing support for the artists who chose to address the issues from the stage during the ceremony, Ms. Vance wrote: "Eve- rything is political, the arts are un- der attack, and in this war of sym- bols I just can't put on a pretty red dress, sit in the middle on a fence and hope people will shoot around me. According to an article pub- lished in the New York Times on September 7, 1990, Posie Di Sesa, a spokeswoman for Philip Morris, said: "We disagree with Ms. Vance. But since Philip Morris is not only a strong supporter of the arts but also of the First Amendment, she can choose to exercise her right as she sees fit. As we have said, we sup- port Jesse Helms because of his sup- port of our businesses. He does not represent our views on any other is- sues." influence the corporate pocketbook." (Despite this success, ACT UP stresses that the boycott will not end until Philip Morris agrees to renounce all of its past for and cease all of its present support of Senator Helms.) However, during that same pe- riod, the Journal noted that Philip Mor- ris' domestic tobacco business had posted a 19% gain in profit to $1.2 bil- lion. ACT-UP Stockholders In January, 1991, to help insure the success of its campaign against Philip Morris, ACT UP members pur- chased stock in the company. These new stockholders attended the annual stockholders meeting on April 25th in Richmond, Virginia. A Lightning Rod of Controversy The Bill of Rights contains the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States and provides the legal foundation for some of the most basic individual freedoms in America. The document has stirred emotions since its birth in 1791. It still stirs them today. On October 10, 1990, a tour cele- brating the 200th anniversary of 'the Bill of Rights began in Barre, VT. The tour, which will stretch until early '92 and touch all fifty states, has been sponsored by Philip Morris. ACT UP/DC has labeled the com- pany's Bill of Rights tour as a ploy, an attempt by the company to buy inno- cence by associating itself with a re- vered symbol. The Advocate reports that by the end of 1990, ACT UP had already staged protests at tour stops in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, Pennsyl- vania, Rhode Island, and Vermont. "People know when the tour will be in their city and are very excited about interrupting it," said boycott or- ganizer and ACT UP member Michael Petrelis. "We are ruining the tour for (Philip Morris) because television and the print media are focusing on the

• demonstrations and on Helms instead of the tour itself." Some gay and lesbian North Carolinians believe that the protests are counter productive. Janelle Lav- elle headed a gay group that worked against Helms' 1990 reelection. She told The Advocate that "The protests make working with other minority groups ...harder because Philip Morris is one of the most labor-positive and minority-positive corporations in North Carolina." She added that "Philip Morris has openly gay people working at several places. As North Carolina companies go, Philip Morris is a jewel." Petrelis says that ACT UP mem- bers tried to talk to North Carolina ac- tivists about the protests, but that no one ever returned their telephone calls. "The closet mentality still exists in North Carolina. The gay people in North Carolina better wake up." Philip Morris has spent $60 mil- lion to sponsor this tour. Despite the likely prospect that demonstrations will continue throughout the remainder of the tour's year-and-a-half, fifty state run, PM spokeswoman Taggarty Pat- rick told The Advocate that company officials are not troubled. "When people see the protests, they are seeing the Bill of Rights in action," she said. "Even many members of ACT UP have told us they enjoyed the exhibit." ACT UP has said that it would call off the protests, if Philip Morris agreed to renounce its support of Helms and stop making contributions to his campaigns. But Patrick said that the company would not change its po- sition. "We support politicians who are in our best business interest to sup- poM,. On January 13, 1991, the display hit North Carolina and the Raleigh Civic and Convention Center. Raleigh is the 14th stop on the exhibit's 50 city tour. North Carolina is the home state of Senator Helms. As opening ceremonies got under- way inside, various activist groups were at work outside. About 25 mem- bers of ACT UP Triangle were on hand to protest Philip Morris' sponsorship of the exhibit. According to the Raleigh News and Observer, the demonstrators were denied entrance to the hall until after the opening ceremonies had ended. Once inside, the group shouted slogans. When they were asked to be quiet, the group responded by chanting "Freedom of Speech! Shut Up!" Here are the remaining stops on the Philip Morris Bill of Rights tour. Oct 2-6, Bismarck, ND Oct 10-14, Sioux Falls, SD Oct 22-27, Davenport, IA Nov 2-7, Columbia, MO Nov 12-16, Milwaukee, WI Nov 19-24, Chicago, IL Dec 3-7, Louisville, KY Dec 11-14, Indianapolis, IN Dec 18-21, Jackson, MS Dec 28, 1991-Jan 3, 1992, Detroit, MI Jan 7-11, 1992, Cleveland, OH Jan 22-25, 1992, Charleston, WV Feb 5-9, 1992, Richmond, VA Boycott publications that accept Philip Morris advertising and write to the publisher to let her or him know what this issue means to you. Developments: After all hope of a ne- gotiated settlement with Philip Morris had fallen through, members of ACT UP/DC formally decided to call a boy- cott. The announcement was made on April 26, 1990. That day, members and supporters were urged (in English and Spanish language flyers) to use the company's toll-free lines to voice their outrage. (Philip Morris maintains a Smokers' Advocate hotline (1-800- 343-0975) and a Retailers' Order line (1-800-446-7030) for its customers. Page 47