Interesting question/debate!?

Question

Why is it that we have not seen a "cigarette comercial" on tv in years and yet almost EVERY commercial break is riddled with those for alcoholic beverages? Just a small quandry about the inner workings of our society and the rules of politics as they govern these two things. No prayer in schools, no cigarette commercials or ads in magazines, yet promotion of alcohol products everywhere you look. Does anyone else find this interesting or even worth pondering? Interesting that we seemingly are always hearing something about some money monger suing some tobacco company for something yet I do not seem to recall even ONE mention, EVER about anyone suing any alcohol company for anything and I find it very interesting that this is not a bigger deal. If I were a tobacco company I would be raising all kinds of havoc over this yet they do not seem to be and if they are then we are not hearing about it. I just think it a very large public injustice to target one and not all. Hypocritical!

Answer 1

Because there were huge lawsuits against the cigarette companies for false advertising and fraud. As part of the settlement, the tobacco companies agreed to change their advertising policies. Many voluntarily stopped advertising, just to avoid further complaints.

And there have been lawsuits against alcohol companies. But unlike the cigarette companies, there was no claim of fraud or false advertising. So the alcohol companies never changed their ad policies.

There's nothing to "raise havoc" over, because it is not government censorship. The govt isn't deciding who can advertise and who cannot. And while the tobacco companies may be unhappy with their settlement agreements, that was their choice and they are contractually bound to it.

Answer 2

I recall reading numerous times that a small drink now and then is actually healthy. Unlike tobacco use which has no safe application in humans so forget about potentially beneficial uses. In the end, tobacco use will almost certainly result in some sort of significant health issue while for the majority of the population alcohol use will not. Note that alcohol can serve as an anesthetic, antiseptic, disinfectant, mouthwash, baking supplement, cooking ingredient, lamp fuel, and gasoline additive. I can't think of a single beneficial use of tobacco.

Answer 3

using fact for some reason, eating is greater ordinary in at present's society than smoking. There are an extremely few cigarette commercials in magazines yet you're suited in asserting alcohol is everywhere. There are t-shirts, hats, and swimtrunks that publicize alcohol yet i've got not considered any garb with cigarettes. Like I even have mentioned already, smoking isn't ordinary in at present's society close to as much as eating. As a smoker, i believe like an outcast using fact of at present's society. i'm hoping i grew to become into in a position to help some, regardless of the reality that probable not.

Answer 4

concider the fact that the Kennedys and other politicians make MILLIONS from the sales and distrbution of alcohol and only a few out numbered southern pols get more from the tabacco ind...most if not all pols drink and only a few smoke...makes sense doesn't it...
i've never had a drink in my life( by choice--just don't like it) but i do smoke 2 packs a day

Answer 5

I doubt that we still have a bad taste about Prohibition left in our mouths. But consider this, people can and do drink "responsibly" (I know, some people believe that's an oxymoron). They may even benefit health wise from it. There is no second hand drink, etc. So that's why I don't see it as hypocritical.

Answer 6

Of course it's hypocritical. The way they are trying to ban smoking in pubs etc is hypocritical. Why don't they ban cars and aeroplanes? I'm sick of breathing in other peoples fumes!

Answer 7

the tobacco buzz isn't nearly as good as the alcohol buzz