They sue the tobbacco companies, and tell them they can't advertise anymore, when alcohol is more harmful for you than cigs, and alcohol is advertised all over the place! Shouldn't somebody sue the alcohol companies and make them stop advertising!?
2006-11-22 10:02:26 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Food & Drink ➔ Beer, Wine & Spirits
epbr, ur retarded.. alcohol screws up ur liver, alters your state of consciousness, and is just as addictive as cigs!
2006-11-22 10:07:56 · update #1
jennifer m... do you ever see ppl acting responsible like on the commercials? NO! they're always getting smashed! and talking about how smashed they got the next day! go sit in a college class one day... you'll hear how tore up ppl got, and they're proud of it!
2006-11-22 10:10:27 · update #2
It is ironic, but the hard liquor ads JUST started a few years ago. There was always an unwritten code amongst hard liquor makers not to make TV commercials, but Seagrams decided to be the first to advertise their products on TV and everyone else followed. Beer and wine have always advertised, but you will never, ever see anyone in an ad actually "drinking" anything. They will hold a bottle or glass, pour it, toast it, anything to appear as to be drinking, but you will never see them actually swallowing beer in an ad. Crazy double-standards, you are right.
2006-11-22 11:08:55 · answer #1 · answered by constablekenworthysboy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Tobacco companies are essentially being given a punishment because they abused their freedom. They knew for years and years that smoking was lethal, yet they took measures to hide this fact and seduce new people into the addiction.
Now, alcohol can done similar things in the past (beer used to be marketed as a health food and called 'liquid bread'), the main difference being that there were no massive, secret cover-ups nor egregious attempts to seduce new people into alcoholism. Nor, apparently, are even all the claims of alcohol being healthy apparently exaggerated - many studies do seem to indicate that very small portions of some wines are even beneficial to your health.
The bottom line really, though, is probably money and societal attitudes. Right now the pendulum is swinging away from smoking. Alcohol had the same problem during the prohibition era in the 1920's, if you recall!
Personally, I loathe almost all advertising. So I'll recuse myself from the decision over whether such bans are appropriate or not.
2006-11-22 10:11:49 · answer #2 · answered by Doctor Why 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
personally i didnt agree with eliminating the cig ads. so no, leave the alcohol ads alone and bring back the cigs, a lot of them were very entertaining. i cant think of one thing i have purchased based on an ad i read or saw. i buy to satisfy a need. I choose the product based on either my or someone i know who has had experience with said product. if its something no one i know is familiar with, i make an educated guess by judging its construction and durability towards the task for which it is intended. if anyone purchases because of an ad they are just stupid and easily led. taking into account that advertising is more than a multi trillion dollar industry, i would have to say that most of the population are stupid. by the way i do not drink or smoke, i used to do both, but i dont care if anyone else does.
2006-11-22 10:10:05 · answer #3 · answered by fn_49@hotmail.com 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In April 1970, congress handed the commonplace public wellbeing Cigarette Smoking Act. the commonplace public wellbeing Cigarette Smoking Act is a u . s . federal regulation designed to shrink the practice of smoking. It required a extra suitable wellbeing warning on cigarette programs, saying "warning: The commonplace practitioner commonplace Has desperate that Cigarette Smoking Is risky on your wellbeing". The act additionally banned cigarette commercials on American radio and tv. further acts handed in 2010 banned cigarette company's from sponsoring carrying events. that's why there substitute into not extra Winston Cup.
2016-11-26 01:58:29 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nah.....why be so "sue happy"? You sue, I sue, we all sue and who makes out? Lawyers! Who needs that?
I see your argument, but I wouldn't care if they advertised cigs on TV--why are we sooo afraid of free will and choices? I don't smoke, seeing some ads won't make me smoke.
Kids smoke, not seeing TV ads is not keeping them from smoking....so what's the point?
2006-11-22 10:06:20 · answer #5 · answered by Lori 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It's not gonna happen. They promote occasional social drinking, not getting smashed, so it's not looked upon as "unacceptable". Besides, I think most alcohol commercials are pretty entertaining.
2006-11-22 10:05:35 · answer #6 · answered by Me 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Boy I am sure glad you condemned them alcohol driven devils! They are horrible! Same with the tobacco users! Wow you are so enlightening. As a user of both I didn't have a clue that using one or the other was bad for me. Thanks for saving my immortal soul. See you Friday night at the Chicken and Beer dance!
2006-11-22 13:59:05 · answer #7 · answered by chechk 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
hey now Mr. man alcohol is GREAT i mean great and beer commercials are head and shoulders above all other forms of advertising so relax with the beer bashing and besides who wants to see some dumb camel on TV?
2006-11-22 10:06:47 · answer #8 · answered by samuel b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
or should people take responsibility for their own lives instead of relying on a nanny state to legisalte on what's good and what's bad for them, and then sue the heck out of everybody "you never told me guns were dangerous"
2006-11-22 10:04:16 · answer #9 · answered by rchlbsxy2 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋
who gives a crap i do both!!!! why ruin my favortie hobby why dont you go knit something and let the fellow party animals have fun while you stay home and watch commercials for us
2006-11-28 03:30:51 · answer #10 · answered by wildcat30 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋