Essay about Smoking and Advertisements

Tobacco ads have stood out to me from a young age, I was used to seeing cigarette ads in every magazine and street corner. When I was 11 I joined a tobacco advocacy group, I wanted to inform young people my age about the dangers of tobacco but mostly I joined because they paid me. I found these two ads and I remembered sitting in an empty classroom analyzing tobacco ads and discussing how they appeal to us. I found two ads, both from the most recent issue of a popular celebrity gossip magazine. The first major difference one notices is that of the ads is catered to a completely different audience. Blu E-cigarettes cater to the new age of tobacco consumers. While Newport menthol cigarettes are tried and tested, a classic. The major differences in this ad make it difficult to pick which one is most effective at getting more buyers of their product. Newport’s ad is

Tobacco companies advertise in magazines, promote their products in convenience stores and market their brands through websites and social networks. Many of these tobacco industries get publicity and attract more young customers when using the newly in media to promote their products. Many of these tobacco companies don’t understand that tobacco advertising is a huge public health issue that increases smoking. Tobacco company advertising and promoting is the start of the use of tobacco among teenagers. Now, these media and magazine advertisements about cigars have caused teenagers to be exposed to cigarette advertising. Not only that but also these teenagers find ads appealing and also increase their desire to smoke. Cigarette companies spent about $8.37 billion on advertising and promotional expenses in the United States in 2011.

Winning the war against cigarettes. (n.d.). Retrieved October 1, 2015, from American Cancer Society: http:www.cancer.org

It has been proven that smoking is the cause of 30% of general cancer deaths and 80% of lung cancer deaths in the U.S. Lung cancer has also been found to be the biggest cause of cancer deaths among breast cancer, prostate cancer, and ovarian cancer. This year alone, 190,500 of about 600,900 cancer deaths will be caused by smoking tobacco. This means that one in every three cancer patients will die due to tobacco products. In fact, smoking tobacco caused such high amounts of lung cancer that tobacco companies are legally required to include a surgeon general’s warning that outlines the potential of developing cancer on their packaging. The numbers and warnings of smoking-related lung cancer can be seen everywhere from statistics to the companies themselves being held liable for the illnesses their products

In my opinion, this case was a historic decision as the punitive damage award marked as a punishment for not only Philip Morris, but the entire tobacco industry. Philip Morris Inc. used false advertising and campaigns for decades to battle the scientific evidence of the link between cigarettes and lung cancer. In one of their misleading campaigns, they stated: “they would stop selling if cigarettes were harmful.” Through this method, they caused a lot of damage that affected a lot of families across the United States. One of the main reasons, I believe this case lasted till ten years was due to the punitive damage reward of $79.5 million awarded by the jury.

The Courier Journal analyzed how tobacco impacted the life of six Kentuckians: a farmer, a tobacco retailer, a cigarette factory worker, a smoker, a small business owner, and a cancer patient. The farmer argued that tobacco kept their family farm in business and that tobacco was no more harmful than coffee. The tobacco retailer talked about how his sales would fall if the price of a pack of cigarette was raised. According to the cigarette factory worker, she was intrigued by how the government would choose to spend the money that they would make from the taxes. The smoker argued that he had begun smoking when he was 9 years old and that teens would continue to smoke no matter what. The small business owner was concerned that her business would go under if farmers no longer had the money to spend at her store. And according to the cancer patient, she had been charged over $235,000 in medical bills. (Hopkins

There is a vast difference between the cigarette commercials of the 1980's and the anti-tobacco Truth ads of today. We were sold a lie, and now many have paid the price with their health and their life. Should it be the responsibility of the tobacco industry to care for these people who have life threating illnesses caused by their products? Should they also handle the burial of the individuals who die as a result of tobacco usage? In this industry, someone has to look out of the consumers that are not looking out for themselves.

Smoking, one of America's favorite pastimes, has fallen under constant fire from legislators who are contending that electronic cigarettes are not only as harmful as their non-electric counterparts, but that the former ought to be regulated as tobacco products. The cases made upon either side stand firm, though legislators find themselves splitting hairs defining upon what is and is not a tobacco product, with vaporizers being such intricate pieces of technology, with only portions of which contain nicotine. The case against the vaporizer stands that while they help users of traditional tobacco kick the habit, they leave an addiction to nicotine, fueling the economy of the vaporizer instead of that of big tobacco. While many will denounce

Facts (Focus on legally relevant facts) - In 1999 a set of Massachusetts’ laws were passed, regarding the advertisements of cigars, cigarettes, and smokeless tobacco. A portion of the laws did not allow products or sales of these products, from being displayed outdoors within a 1000-foot radius of a school or playground. Lorillard Tobacco Company (and others) sued in federal

In the academic journal, “The Cost Recovery Act and Tobacco Litigation in Canada: A Model for Fast Food Litigation,” the states:

The Tobacco Products Control Act of 1989 sought to impose restrictions on the promotion of tobacco products. These restrictions concerned limitations in three commercial categories: advertisement, promotion, and labelling. Under the Act, tobacco products cannot be advertised, and products must be labeled with viable health warnings and a list of toxins. The packaging must be minimal, as to not be ostentatious to persuade Canadians from buying. Furthermore, the Act would prohibit the distribution of free samples. Appellants RJR-Macdonald Inc. dissented, stating the Act was a direct infringement upon the Charter’s s.2 freedom of expression clause, and appellant Imperial Tobacco Ltd. further dissented.

In the United States today, more than forty six million Americans are addicted to cigarettes. More people have died due to cigarette smoking than from narcotic drugs, World Wars I and II, and the Vietnam War combined (Bailey 1). The annual death toll for cigarette smoking is more than four-hundred thousand Americans a year, and is the number-one preventable cause of death in the United States. If Americans are aware of the lethal effects of smoking, why is it still so popular? Guy Smith, a Phillip Morris Tobacco Company executive, claims that their research shows that advertising is the top reason people start smoking (Bailey 34). Most people will argue that this is not true because the do not like to be “sold” and

However our concern here is not only about the cigarette as a product but with the ethics of cigarettes as well, that affect the social process of marketing. This is because marketing process makes things worse and is also considered as unethical, and as a result has a significant negative impact on the societal welfare. Multinational tobacco companies apply sophisticated strategies ( such as putting flavor in the cigarettes and placing cigarettes in the shops near the sweets to make them more appealing) and invest huge amounts of money for marketing, in order to establish brand familiarity and future loyalty among young peoplem, to secure profits in the long run. 'The tobacco epidemic is a man-made international health crisis, created and sustained by multinational tobacco corporations.' (Yach, Brinchmann, Bellet page 2).

Smoking tobacco has been a part of American culture since its very conception. Throughout our history, tobacco has been advertised as a simple pleasure for those who seek it out. Whether you are sitting on the porch with a couple of friends or in a dimly lit jazz club, tobacco ads give off a false sense of comfort, power, and success. Until around the mid-1900’s, smoking cigarettes was not considered unhealthy. It was only later that the public realize the detrimental health consequences that came with smoking tobacco. To spread this information, specific advertisements were aired to help inform the public of the dangers of smoking. While these ads have changed over time, the same message and warning still remains evident.

Cigarette smoking is something people all over the world have been doing for about 2000 years. Back in 2003, the first electronic cigarette was successfully created by a gentleman named Hon Lik. Lik was a 52 year old pharmacist at the time, whom of which was also a smoker. The inspiration behind making the electronic cigarette came after Lik’s father passed away from lung cancer due to him also being a heavy smoker. “A Historical Timeline of Electronic Cigarettes.” cassia.org. Consumer Advocates for Smoke Free Alternatives Association, 15 June 2017. The idea behind creating this device was to give smokers a way to still ingest nicotine, the most addictive chemical in tobacco cigarettes, without the countless negative health effects that