davidle@microsoft.UUCP (David LEVINE) (01/17/90)
>I don't follow that last part; how does banning advertising promote education? >As big and evil as they are, i think tobacco companies, should be allowed to >say what they want. Of course they can't lie and say cigarettes are harmless, >so the only thing they can do is the typical brand name recognition stuff. I >don't think many people are going to start smoking just because they saw a >commercial on TV, or are going to be prevented from quitting by such. Sure, part of the ad campaign is for brand name recognition. But the other part is portraying smoking as glamorous and fun. The only cig. ad I have *any* respect for is "If you smoke, please try Carlton". The rest try to associate smoking with sexy women, macho men, verdent waterfalls and other positive images. The *reinforcement* of these images over a lifetime really ad up (thats why the manufacterers pay billions for the ads). I don't smoke but I do drink beer. I also know a few people who are alcoholics and who *only* drink beer. How many beer commercials has the average 16 year old seen? Most portray beer as an essential social lubricant that all the "with it" people drink. True as this may be in some circles, the number of positive messages about beer drinking dwarfs the feable attempts by non-profit organizations to warn about the dangers. If anti-smoking/drinking information ever gets to be on a parity with promotional campaigns then we might see a real reduction in demand. Even if demand did not decrease, I'd still like to get rid of the commericals because they offend me. Yes, there is a freedom of speech issue here, but advertising death is never OK in my book. David Levine ===================================================== === The opinions expressed above are entirely mine == === The facts expressed above are probably wrong == =====================================================
ashepps@telesci.UUCP (Anton C Shepps) (01/18/90)
In article <10295@microsoft.UUCP> davidle@microsoft.UUCP (David LEVINE) writes:
-> The *reinforcement* of these images over
->a lifetime really ad up (thats why the manufacterers pay billions for
->the ads)
-> ...the number of positive messages about
->beer drinking dwarfs the feable attempts by non-profit organizations to
->warn about the dangers.
FYI, many studies have been conducted to find out whether advertising of
alcohol and tobacco promotes use of those substances. These studies show
that the only thing advertising does is change market share. The ads never
actually increase the market for these products.
--
o o Anton Shepps, ashepps@telesci.uucp | {princeton|rutgers}!telesci!ashepps
V The above article is in the public domain and can be quoted, stolen,
--- propagated, and/or reproduced without fear of reproach from this author.