Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on tobacco advertising
Essay on tobacco advertising
Essay on tobacco advertising
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on tobacco advertising
The Evils of Tobacco Companies
In our contemporary society smoking has sort of lost the appeal it once had. Families and states are suing big tobacco for multimillion-dollar lawsuits. Their advertising and promotions have been taken away from them. The whole world of tobacco is being turned upside down. The Seven Dwarfs are doing what ever they can to keep the appeal that smoking once had. The tobacco industry is trying to slow the social erosion of tobaccos appeal by creating the national smokers alliance, trying to smearing the statistics that hurt the appeal of smoking, and by trying to silence Dr. Jeffery Wigand.
In response to the growing number of smokefree ordinances showing up all over the country, Big tobacco hired a public relations firm to create the National Smoker's Alliance. The public relations giant Burson-Marsteller was funded by an estimated $4 million in Philip Morris and Brown and Williamson seed money. Burson-Marsteller has a history of spinning bad corporate practices into positives. This public relations giant also has a hand in another tobacco industry advocacy group: The Tobacco Institute. www.no-smoke.org
All the NSA is, is a front for big tobacco. It is a total puppet for the tobacco industry. They use the NSA to manipulate government officials. They had enough pull in the California legislature to postpone a smokefree ordinance for a year. That is all they accomplished. On a much smaller scale they have even tried similar things here in Michigan. After a year of community education on the issue of smokefree public places and workplaces in Marquette, a ordinance was introduced and scheduled for public hearings by the city commission. Three NSA representatives showed up. They joined forces with the Michigan Restaurant Association and distributed tobacco industry-sponsored studies claiming smokefree ordinances hurt restaurant sales. A coalition against the NSA returned fire with information on the NSA to the local media and the city commissioners. On July 27, 1997 the Marquette City commission voted in favor of Michigan's first 100 smoke free ordinances. It just goes to show how far they will go to keep smoking popular. www.no-smoke.org
Big tobacco has even went as far as to attack the science used to estimate how many people die from cigarette smoking each year by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). A claim was made that the government counts as a smoking-related death all smokers who die from a certain disease, even if they had other risk factors for the same disease.
The tobacco industry seems like a beneficial addition to our economy. It has basically been a socially acceptable business in the past because it brings jobs to our people and tax money to the government to redistribute; but consider the cost of tobacco related treatment, mortality and disability- it exceeds the benefit to the producer by two hundred billion dollars US. (4) Tobacco is a very profitable industry determined to grow despite government loss or public health. Its history has demonstrated how money can blind morals like an addiction that is never satisfied. Past lawsuits were mostly unsuccessful because the juries blamed the smoker even though the definition of criminal negligence fits the industry’s acts perfectly. Some may argue for the industry in the name of free enterprise but since they have had such a clear understanding of the dangers of their product it changes the understanding of their business tactics and motives. The success of the industry has merely been a reflection of its immoral practices. These practices have been observed through its use of the media in regards to children, the tests that used underage smokers, the use of revenue to avoid the law, the use of nicotine manipulation and the suppression of research.
“Killing Them Softly,” an essay by Jacob Sullum, addresses the issue of Senator Judd Gregg’s bill to give the Food and Drug Administration control over tobacco products. This bill would allow the FDA to make such decisions as halting tobacco companies’ marketing of safer tobacco products and reducing the nicotine content in cigarettes. Sullum argues that by giving the FDA the power to make such decisions, individual consumers would be disadvantaged and lives could possibly be lost instead of saved. If given control of such decisions, the FDA would not allow the introduction of safer tobacco products as they feel this will increase the number of smokers. They feel more people will begin using these products that are advertised as less harmful substances, whereas Sullum feels it would be better for people to change their habits to these “safer alternatives.” Sullum fails to consider benefits of relinquishing control to the FDA, however. By considering some of the positive results, Sullum might develop a different opinion and support the bill as he should.
Smoking is the most preventable cause of death in our society. During 1995, approximately 2.1 million people in developed countries died as a result of smoking. One tobacco use is responsible for nearly one in five deaths in the United States. Lung Cancer mortality are about 23 times higher for current male smokers and 13 times higher for current female smokers compared to a lifelong never-smoker.
and 18. These kids add up to 90 percent of all new smokers (Roberts 38). These
...rictions, and carry out an antithesis campaign against tobacco advertising. With more adds showing teens the harms of tobacco usage and through education, this use of “counter-adding” could go a long way in terms of preventing more youth from picking up such a bad habit. In addition, I think far more legislation should be aimed towards restricting what is actually being put into cigarettes rather than advertisements, as these toxins and poisons are what responsible for the 430,000+ average deaths each year from smoking. Yet, today is today, and as long as companies like Altria and Reynolds American have the money play Washington they’ll get what they want. Now its just up to everyone else, for the sake of the health of our future, to help push legislation that will help deter the aims of companies that basically distribute cancer to hundreds of thousands each year.
Over the years, the partnership between health ministers and health groups has produced some very substantial gains on the subject of tobacco use. Smoking bans that were thought of as radical 20 years ago are now commonplace. Public awareness of smoking risks has never been higher. And our new Tobacco Act sets a world standard for anti-tobacco legislation.
Smokers all over the United States in recent years have brought class-action suits against the tobacco companies. Plaintiffs argue that the tobacco companies had knowledge of the health risks that could be associated with smoking, but they chose to withhold this information from the public. Since they chose to withhold this information the companies should be responsible for the cost of their health problems. Smokers have been rather successful in this endeavor especially since it has been a scientifically proven fact that smoking causes lung cancer. In Florida alone smokers and their families were awarded 200 billion dollars (Thomas ).
Every year cigarette smoking is responsible for 500,000 premature deaths (Nugel), you do not want to be just another statistic, do you? America’s first cash crop was tobacco. That means that tobacco has been around for a really long time. It was not until 1865, though, that cigarettes were sold commercially. They were sold to soldiers at the end of the Civil War (Dowshen). From then, cigarettes spread like wildfire, and it was not until 1964 that anyone made a stand about the negative effects of tobacco and cigarettes. People start smoking for all different reasons, some to fit in and some to “escape”. Regardless, it is a horrible habit. 3900 children will try their first cigarette today. Amongst adults who currently smoke, 68% of them began at age 18 or younger, and 85% at 21 or younger (American Lung Association). And of all those people, 70% say if they were given another chance they would never have picked up that first cigarette (Tobacco Free Maine). Smoking is responsible for 1 and 5 deaths in the united states, and is the number one preventable cause of death (NLH). Smoking burns and there is no doubt about that, but before one picks up that cigarette, understand the negative effects on not only oneself, but others affected by ones poor choices, like second-hand smoke. Because of smoking cigarettes, many types of cancer, decrease of life quality, and negative health effects have become all too common in the world today.
Each year 440,000 people die, in the United States alone, from the effects of cigarette smoking (American Cancer Society, 2004). As discussed by Scheraga & Calfee (1996) as early as the 1950’s the U.S. government has utilized several methods to curb the incidence of smoking, from fear advertising to published health warnings. Kao & Tremblay (1988) and Tremblay & Tremblay (1995) agreed that these early interventions by the U.S. government were instrumental in the diminution of the national demand for cigarettes in the United States. In more recent years, state governments have joined in the battle against smoking by introducing antismoking regulations.
Smoking cigarettes is a detrimental practice not only to the smoker, but also to everyone around the smoker. According to an article from the American Lung Association, “Health Effects” (n.d.), “Smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S., causing over 438,000 deaths per year”. The umbrella term for tobacco use includes the use of cigarettes, cigars, e-cigs and chewing tobacco. While tobacco causes adverse health consequences, it also has been a unifying factor for change in public health. While the tobacco industries targets specific populations, public health specifically targets smokers, possible smokers, and the public to influence cessation, policies and education.
As a Vice-President of the Academy of Tobacco Studies, a Washington tobacco lobby is masquerading as a research organization debunking the health risks of tobacco use. Nick Naylor is the public face of the tobacco lobby. As the Tobacco industry lobbyist, he faces a seemingly impossible task: promoting cigarette smoking in a time when the health hazards of doing so have become too obvious to ignore. Utilizing his natural communication skills, Nick uses argument and twisted logic to place his clients in positions of either altruistic do-gooders or victims. He comes up with the idea of re-glorifying smoking in movies, associating it with sex and reputation.
The tobacco industry is important to the economy. In 1991, worldwide tobacco sales exceeded $59.8 billion and in 1992 the industry was rated as one of the top one hundred advertisers (Pechmann and Ratneshwar, 1994). However, there are high prices to pay - socially, economically, and personally - as a result of this industry. Annual mortality figures indicate that cigarette smoking is the number one cause of preventable death in the United States. An estimated 390,000 people die each year of smoke related illnesses, which is greater than the combined mortality for cocaine, crack, AIDS, homicide, suicide, and alcohol abuse (Botvin, G., Baker, Botvin, E., Dusenbury, Cardwell, and Diaz, 1993).
The pro-ban forces gave the example of “Joe Camel” a cartoon character that the U.S. government forced RJ Reynolds to stop using because it made cigarette consumption look too attractive to youth. Afterwards, cigarette consumption among young people in western countries has been in a downward spiral that continues unabated to this day so the mission statement “accelerating the decline of youth tobacco use” has come to fruition, although not in a way that the company had planned. Those opposing the ban also put forth compelling arguments. They stated that the nation of India was in a unique situation in that only 16% of those purchasing tobacco were buying cigarettes.
.I believe that the Tobacco industry is unethical, They provide a product that causes addiction and eventual death if smoking continues thought the majority of a person’s life. I think that the tobacco industry needs to take more responsibility for their product. I believe they should do this by not advertising on the false image of being a cigarette smoker and focus on what consumers are actually going to receive for their money when purchasing cigarettes. They should focus on the feeling it gives people, and what the cigarette experience actually is in the most literal terms. Also cigarette companies should tell costumers upfront in easy to read labels the long term and short term effects of smoking to let people clearly know what they are buying and what it’s effects are.
The sale of cigarettes and tobacco is a multi-billion dollar industry, but is it truly worth all the problems that stem from their use? Health care costs are extremely high due to all the health problems associated with cigarettes and tobacco. Even though research has proven time and time again the harmful effects of cigarettes, and the rising cost of health care caused by cigarettes, our government will not take a stand and stop all manufacturing of the horrible toxins. Every year, new medical reports are issued regarding the harmful effects of smoking cigarettes. Hundreds of thousands of people around the world die every year from diseases caused by smoking.