Tobacco Documents Online

This letter sent to the Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation's marketing department exposes in detail the behind-the-scenes activities cigarette companies go through to get cigarettes placed into major movies.

It is quite revealing. Little do today's moviegoers realize the extent to which they are being be advertised to when viewing major movies. Little do they realize either that (much to the corporations' glee) they are actually paying for the "privilege" of absorbing this unique subliminal advertising.

The writer of this document explains to B & W:

"Cigarettes as Props

1. Recently there have been a number of high-visibility feature films in which one or more of the central characters smoke a particular brand of cigarettes. This has been happening because cigarette manufacturers have been paying for the exposure. Following are some notable examples:

Movie Actor/Character Brand

"Continental Divide" John Belushi Marlboro "Superman II" Margot Kidder Marlboro "Pennies from Heaven" Steve Martin Camel "Prince of the City" Treat Williams & Merit or key supporting players Marlboro "Absence of Malice" Sally Fields Carleton

Participation in movies is not limited merely to actors smoking a particular brand. For example, 'Superman II' also included a classic fight scene in which Superman and the bad guys throw a Marlboro truck back and forth at each other on Lexington Avenue. This truck was produced solely for the movie and exists nowhere else. There are other instances of cigarette advertising serving as part of the scenery (c.f. 'Neighbors', 'Pennies from Heaven')."

Under the section entitled "RATIONALE," the writer explains that:

"By appearing in movies, RALEIGH will be receiving an implied third party endorsement. In the movie context this endorsement is considered very impactful since unlike the passive exposure of advertising and PR, the movie exposure requires a pro-active role for the viewer (i.e, the viewer must _go_ to the theatre and _pay_ to watch the films)."

He also explains how the placement of cigarettes in the movies favorably impacts the audience towards the brand"

"...Although the placement _may_ not be consistent with RALEIGH's image, the placements will almost certainly be consistent ith some psycho framework into which the viewer wants to project. The Brand can become identified with something or someone that is desireable to a specific viewer set."

According to this document, the practice of paying to place products in movies is practically ubiquitous. The writer lists some other products whose manufacturers and/or service providers have placed them in movies: "Coppertone, Budweiser, Coors, Apple Computers, Kawasaki, United Airlines and American Airlines are a few other sponsors who have recently bought into films."

This 1987 marketing document reveals an ad agency testing various themes about secondhand smoke on behalf of the Philip Morris Tobacco Company (PM). The ads themselves show how PM intended to respond to the public health threat caused by secondhand smoke from their products, and how the company intended to manipulate the public's understanding of health information. PM's ad agency described its mission this way:

"The purpose of the overall [ad] project was to look for a way to stem the ever increasing tide of legal restrictions on smoking. Philip Morris is looking for a way to avoid further legislation to restrict where people can smoke...It was hoped that disarming the issue of secondary smoke would be a strong device to slow anti-smoking legislation."

A major theme of the ads was that "the case isn't proven" that secondhand tobacco smoke harms nonsmokers, ironically the same theme that the tobacco industry used for years to reassure smokers about primary smoking and keep them smoking.

The people who viewed these ads were surprisingly savvy about the tobacco industry's intent and methods. The first ad, entitled "Scientist," featured a woman pharmacologist dressed in a white lab coat telling the audience that the case hasn't been proven that secondhand smoke is harmful. Participants questioned the credibility of the woman, pointed out that she was a pharmacologist and not a doctor, and that the purpose of her wearing a white lab coat was to manipulate the audience into believing she was a legitimate authority figure.

Another ad, "Black Man/White Man," equated smoking restrictions with racism. Participants had a strong negative reaction to this analogy, and pointed out its absurdity:

"...most disagreed that smokers suffer from discrimination. Non-smokers were quick to voice the fact that smokers can go anywhere, they just may not be able to smoke: 'How have his rights been violated? He can go anywhere. That's a bunch of garbage... ' '...it was ridiculous, because they can go into a restaurant.' Although some credence was given to the rights of the smoker, non-smokers were not about to give up their own rights. '...one smoker in this room would infringe on the rights of seven people.' 'The way I feel about it, my sitting here and not smoking is not bothering anybody, but if I was sitting here smoking, I'd be bothering somebody. So, he (smoker) is the one who is infringing on the rights.'

General comments by the focus group leader indicate the participants' cynical attitude about secondhand smoke ads in general:

"From listening to all six groups, several points were brought up that seemed universal across smokers and non-smokers: 1. The use of the Phillip Morris name as a sponsor for the advertisements was a definite negative. Smokers and non-smokers alike tended to not believe the ads based on the use of the Philip Morris name. One respondent stated: "...I wouldn't trust it because it came from the manufacturer and it almost constitutes an ad for smoking... I don't trust what a cigarette manufacturer would tell me about it (second-hand smoke)."

The tester reported that some participants felt "all of the ads were thinly veiled attempts to get advertising for cigarette companies back on the air." He commented that many of the smokers tested were "guilty" smokers who wanted to quit smoking because they knew they were hurting themselves. The tester pointed out that "For this reason, smokers were not anxious to jump on the bandwagon that says secondhand smoke isn't harmful to non-smokers."

Handwritten comments on the document, ostensibly by cigarette company representative or proponent, trivialize the public health knowledge held by the participants and request a toning down of adjectives like "all" and "many" in describing the universality of feeling among them. An interesting example is at the bottom of Page 2041096511, where the tester wrote that "There was a basic DISBELIEF across all groups that secondhand smoke is not harmful." The handwritten comment next to this statement dismisses this important obervation out of hand, saying merely

"Tone down. Bothersome."

Describes progress on Newport 120's point of purchase promotional materials. Highlights problems with the photo for the advertisement and coupon coloration. Lists pieces (e.g. coupons, tent cards, stickers) needed for two phases of production and pieces not yet needed.

Presents a number of questions about targeting that could potentially be raised by "critics," and details Philip Morris' answers to those questions. Describes how Philip Morris attempts to avoid targeting youth with its ads. Summarizes strategies for targeting minorities and women. Explains the association between sporting events and smoking. Covers both print and outdoor advertising, as well as promotions and event sponsorship. Lists twelve attachments, none of which are included.

Begins with "Counterblaste to Tobacco" issued by King James I in 1604 to chronicle how "[s]moking and health issues have been part of health education programs...and the subject of a wide variety of programs conducted by various educational, social, medical, political and other groups". Includes sections: "Early warnings; The warnings continue; [and] The message was heard". Indicates "historic awareness" and "third draft".

Recounts the 400-year history of the anti-smoking movement, beginning with the "earliest warnings" of King James I in his "counterblaste to Tobacco." Discusses nicknames used for cigarettes beginning in the 20th century that denote the public's familiarity with the dangers of cigarette smoking. Names individuals, organizations, and publications that have been associated closely with the anti-smoking campaign. Attempts to place the 'anti-smoking campaign' in a context of 'propaganda.' Duplicate of Bates #2021269115.

Summarizes transcript testimony from April 14, 1994 Waxman hearing on tobacco products. Capsulizes opening remarks made by tobacco company representatives, Congressional representatives, and other government officials. Discusses topics concerning youth access, advertising and promotion, nicotine concentrations and addiction, fire safe cigarettes, tobacco reconstitution and flavoring, DeNoble study findings, smoker behavior, and tar and nicotine yields. Includes references to page numbers in transcript document.

Summarizes anti-smoking history from the 1604 publication by King James I of the Counterblaste to Tobaccco until present day. Argues, "[e]veryone has heard about the alleged risks of smoking." Lists organizations and prominent individuals opposed to smoking. Notes in recent time the anti-smoking message has been spread through the popular press. Summarizes the Reader's Digest efforts in the anti-smoking campaign. Concludes that the efforts of the anti-smoking forces have not gone unnoticed.

Outlines objectives of program designed to restrict minors' access to tobacco, giving reasons behind development and listing program highlights. Identifies first objective to "prevent minors' access to tobacco products by restricting purchase at retail" with review of potential communication vehicles with minors. Relays overall objective "to demonstrate responsible tobacco retailing and marketing by preventing minors from purchasing tobacco products." Covers issues of "Driving Forces", "What Do We Want to Accomplish?", "Quantifying Success", and "Tactics to Make it Happen." Offers listing of "Suggested Contacts" for organizations and matrix of "Educational Programs" with suggested contacts and elements.

Begins with "Counterblaste to Tobacco" issued by King James I in 1604 to chronicle how "[s]moking and health issues have been part of health education programs...and the subject of a wide variety of programs conducted by various educational, social, medical, political and other groups." Includes sections: "Early warnings; The warnings continue; [and] The message was heard." Indicates "historic awareness" and "third draft." Duplicates Bates 2021194195.

Reports on a lawsuit in Germany against Reemtsma that could have implications for the tobacco industry. Explains that the lawsuit is based on an advertisement "showing a healthy young girl speaking in favor of the particular brand," which suggests that smoking this brand does not have negative health effects for women; but because it is unhealthy to smoke, the ad is forbidden by the German anti-competition laws. Warns that R.J.Reynolds could have been the target for this legal action in Germany, and that the playing field may not be even because of the ethics a non-smoking, anti-tobacco judge.

"Comments Made at the Annual Meeting, December 14, 1984," focuses on "tobacco excise taxes and other legislative threats." Reports that excise tax legislation is highest priority for 1985 and that 28 states pose serious excise tax challenges. Stresses need to prevent congressional excise tax increase. Outlines strategy: (1)"intense lobbying by the Federal Relations Division" (2) "pull together sizable block of Congressmen" to vote against tobacco tax (3) maintain pressure on key members of Congress. Provides update of key positions and issues in Congress. Asserts major goal is to hold traditional tobacco state delegation together. Also reports a good year influencing state activities, structure and programs. Details legislative victories. Outlines four ways to support "Federal Relations and State Activities": (1) "producing documented materials" (2) "provide expert witnesses" (3) "developing coalitions" (4) "challenging anti-smokers." Describes programs from the Industry with the community. Notes attempt to influence other legislation related to smoking, namely airlines and the workplace. Anticipates legislative problems for the industry including warnings on addiction, ingredients and other tobacco manufactured products. Reports efforts to verify "the work of the anti-smoking scientist." Notes the publication group has produced "attractive, effective material" for PR use. Indicates four federal agencies to study cigarette smoke and nonsmokers.