Tobacco companies that tell teens not to smoke?

Question

What to you think of the RJ Reynolds TV ads that tell adults to talk to their kids about not smoking?

At some point in time, all current smokers will be dead - trust me on this. Does it make sense that a big tobacco company would say 'future market share, don't buy our product'?

Of course not.

By the way, outside of the US, advertising regulations are much more lax. The tobacco companies are doing a very effective job targeting teens (especially young women) in Europe and Asia.

If one child is spared by a 'don't smoke' message, then the campaign is worthwhile. But it isn't about that.

It's about a megacompany wrapping the cloak of good corporate citizen around themselves (to comply with US ad laws) while exploiting the same (and bigger) audiences in foreign countries.

Is anyone outraged by this spin?

Answer 1

I agree that the cigarette companies are using such self
serving messages to try to bolster their opinion with the
public more than trying to save children.

If they just wanted to save the children, they could fund
another organization to place the ad or just put lots and lots
of money into the American Cancer Society.

Has anyone figured why all those tobacco execs who stood
up in front of Congress saying that they didn't believe there
was any connection between smoking and cancer haven't
been hauled off to jail or heavily fined for lying?

Answer 2

"At some point in time all current smokers will be dead" . News flash! At some point in time, all current non-smokers will be dead also! Sheesh!

It was my understanding that part of the tobacco court case class action settlement was RJ Reynolds being REQUIRED to run public awareness ads about the dangers of smoking..........in addition to the payout of millions of dollars ( that mostly lined the attorneys pockets). This was where the real exploiting was done!

I imagine that when the governments overseas start seeing the megabucks in their eyeballs, they too will have a class action against the tobacco companies.

And maybe against the fast-food chains too since the high caloried burgers and fries will also increase a person's risk of obesity and heart disease and so on. And I'm sure we can also go after the candy producers and the list could go on and on. It's just plain ludicrous!

But yet, no one ever goes after the beer and alcohol producers........(I guess the consumption of booze is A-OK for your health) so the heat is off of them probably cause they did something that the tobacco companies failed to do: they greased the politicians hands and have for years.

I frankly think that what's good for the goose is good for the gander....however, you will never see Seagram's or any beer and alcohol brewers on TV saying that the use of their products may cause divorces, poverty, shootings, stabbings, liver disease, unwanted pregnancies, birth defects, hallucinations and black-outs, fatal car accidents, prison sentences, etc. Give me a break!

Answer 3

I want to know what else you want these companies to do. In addition to putting warnings on every pack, they've lost lawsuits to people who have sued them because of cancer. How stupid. Everyone knows the risks of smoking, OK. It is old news and a ridiculous notion to further any other agenda against these companies. Do you have any clue how many people would be out of a job if all these companies closed down? Do you care? Smoking cigarettes is a CHOICE. I made that stupid decision when I was a teenager and it had nothing to do with advertising. I wish I never would have, but here I am, trying to cut back and eventually quit. I do not blame RJ Reynolds for this. I blame MYSELF! I take responsibility for my own actions. I think these companies are telling teens not to smoke because it is the law. Also, I don't know what ads you're looking at, but Camel's new advertising strategies have switched to boring mode. They have this 1920's theme going on these days. So, tell me, what age group is that targeting? I don't know one teen interested in "the roaring twenties."

Answer 4

No, not outraged. I was a smoker for 30 years. 3-4 packs a day. I quit almost 4 months ago and am very happy for that but...

I don't understand the whole, 'bash the tobacco company' thing. Smoking was my choice. Yes, I know it is addictive and bad for you - I chose to smoke anyway. That's on me. I am glad that I still live somewhere that I got to make that choice.

They are in business to make money. I am not convinced that tobacco is the number one killer anymore. They say that one in two smokers will die from a smoking related disease. They also say that tobacco is the only product that, when used as directed, kills. Not true.

Sweeten to taste. Sugar. The Atlanta Centers for Disease Control recently reported that of those children born in the year 2000, one in two would contract diabetes. In 1850, one person in 943 contracted diabetes. In the year 1900 it was one person in 188. In the year 1950 it was one person in 43. In 2000, one in two.

Where is the outrage? It's killing us and we aren't doing anything about it. The sugar companies aren't pointing this news out to us... it's not in their best interest to do so. Same with the tobacco companies.

Answer 5

"all current smokers will be dead - trust me on this"

Yes, I absolutely trust you on this one.

actually, all non-smokers and smokers will eventually die. It's not as if you won't die if you don't smoke.

So anyway, what do you want to do about it? Tobacco companies have to comply because Americans have spoken. It's all about power.

Also, right now, people are already aware that smoking will cause all cancer, etc etc.

I'm not siding with the tobacco companies. But, I am sick of people always putting the blame on those "Big, Bad, Corporations".

=Big, greasy, fat-inducing fast foods
=Big, bad, greedy, oil companies

I know, your intentions are good. But, it's also time to take responsibilties for ourselves and stop shifting the blame onto something else.

Answer 6

Governments need people to smoke as it generates so much money.

THEY COULD HELP BY SHOWING THESE PICTURES BELOW!

I totally agree and have been smoke free now for 5 weeks. I run everyday and feel great that I don't smoke.

Check out my images I put on freedom from tobacco, THIS IS THE REALITY OF SMOKING.

The big companies pay stars to be seen smoking so to be attractive to the younger generation.

Johny Depp has a lot to answer for.

There are 2 pages of photos and they can be found here....

http://groups.msn.com/freedomfromtobacco...

If you smoke I hope you stop soon.

I have and feel GREAT!

Answer 7

i know what you are talking about. It is bizarre.

When i am at my MOST cynical, i think the "do not smoke" ads by the tobacco companies are a very clever psychological thing -
teenagers want to be adults, NOW.
they want to look/act older ( if not more mature.)
o a tobacco company tell them that they shouldn't smoke till they are adults will just get some teenagers to start smoking even earlier.

Answer 8

I am outraged. It reminds me of those ads where baby formula makers were telling third world women that formula was so much superior to breast milk.
As for the ads here, I don't know whether they are the reason or whether it is all the other anti-smoking campains, but our kids do seem to smoke less.

Answer 9

At some point in time ALL NON-SMOKERS will be dead too. So what is your point. PARENTS should do their job and teach their kids that smoking is bad for you. DON'T blame the tobacco companies.

Answer 10

I may be reading more into the ads than is actually there, but I really think the kids who say "no" in those ads are kind of dorky. Dorkier than the ones that ask them to smoke with them. What kind of message does that send to regular kids?