Tobacco 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 should be prevented from using advertising tactics that target teenagers. There has always been controversy as to how tobacco companies should prevent using advertising tactics to target teenagers. As controversial as this is tobacco companies shouldn’t advertise teen smoking. Many teens may be lured to believe cigarette advertising because it has been part of the American Culture for years, magazine ads and the media target young people, and these companies receive a drastic increase financially; however, the advertising by these cigarette companies has disadvantages such as having to campaign against their own company, limiting their cigarette advertising and becoming a controversial dilemma as to encouraging teenagers

Although tobacco advertisements are banned, people still consume it. The ban started in 1971 and since then has become even more strict on the sponsoring and promotion of tobacco brand logos. Now, all tobacco ads used, dissuade users from consuming. Advertisements in general can be obnoxious and tiresome, but they are sometimes necessary for the seller to get their point across. Ads are either trying to get money from the consumer or driving to change a person’s mind positively. The main reasoning for the creation of advertisements is to persuade the viewer or audience through the evocation of ethos, pathos, and logos, to have a change of mind about the product. The ads I chose are both similar, but have different goals towards their audience.

The Stella Liebeck v. McDonald's is only one of many lawsuits that end up in the person getting a big paycheck for something that the company had no control over. Many instances are of people purposefully falling

Since the first major lawsuit settled against tobacco companies in 1998, there has been much controversy over whether or not these lawsuits are justified. On the pro side of the argument there is much evidence to support that the tobacco industries have long known about the dangers of cigarette smoking. Furthermore that this knowledge warrants the need for compensation. In addition the industry has concealed this knowledge from the public. On the con side of the argument evidence shows that these lawsuits have been based on false claims primarily in regard to health care costs for smokers. Furthermore, the regulations set by the settlement of the 1998 multistate lawsuit have established a legal president which allows individuals

Then the gain percent decreases and it isn’t such a lucrative business anymore. It’d be best for them to make business in another department. Therefore, I agree with Coffman’s claim of making other companies that sell products just as harmful as tobacco pay the same financial settlement to the states. I stand with this claim because tobacco has the same impact on people as alcohol and guns. Just like tobacco, alcohol deteriorates health and causes organ malfunction which lead to death and in some cases, even premature death. Guns have the same end product as tobacco because if guns are used against other people, many end up dead. With tobacco it leads you to lung cancer and later, death. In fact, guns have a worse

In the case of Mulford v. Altria Group Inc. Case No. Civ. 05-659 MV/RHS (2007), Mexican smokers brought suit against manufacturer Philip Morris and Altria Group, Inc., for violating Federal Trade Commission Law and New Mexico Unfair trade Practices Act by deceptively marketing cigarettes as "light" and "lower in tar and nicotine". The Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiffs for the manufacturer fraudulent misrepresentation.

Philip Morris argued that the $79.5 million awarded by the jury was excessive as the ratio of harmed suffered doesn’t match the award. I believe that this award was not excessive as the punitive damages awarded by the jury is serve as punishment for Philip Morris and an example for the tobacco industry. Philip Morris committed fraud due to their false campaigns and advertising and destroyed a lot of families in the process. They did not let the public know about the addiction of nicotine and the harmful effects of cigarettes. Through my research, the social cost and impact caused by the tobacco industry far exceeded the punitive damages reward awarded to Mayola Williams by the jury.

A recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Canada on the subject of smoking is the main topic of my articles. The landmark ruling made on September 30th gives the province of British Columbia ammunition against big tobacco companies. "The decision allows British Columbia to sue tobacco companies for damages related to smoking-related health care costs dating back 50 years" (Bell Globalmedia Inc [BGMI], 2005). Many expect the ruling in BC will act as a model for other provinces to follow suit. The resulting lawsuits could potentially cost Canadian tobacco companies like Benson & Hedges, Imperial Tobacco, and Rothmans hundreds of billions of dollars. Similar

During a much more civilized era in our country, none of this could have happened. Nazi-like vilification tactics had to be employed whereby decent Americans were convinced that both smokers and tobacco companies are two groups of people deserving of any treatment.

The details in the McDonald's v. Stella Liebeck case are very similar to the details of the case in Class Action. However, the legal knowledge surrounding the cases were different. For example, in Class Action the company Argo knowingly put out a defective car because it was more financially convenient to pay for settlements than it would have been to recall every single vehicle and fix them. Similarly, McDonald's was aware that their coffee was held at very hot temperature standards that were extremely dangerous to their unknowing customers. McDonald’s argued on the basis that consumers preferred hot coffee so it was good for profit (Haltom, McCann 2004). A McDonald's safety consultant testified that they received 700 complaints of burns

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

New Tobacco Atlas Estimates U.S. $35 Billion Tobacco Industry Profits and Almost 6 Million Annual Deaths. (2012) Retrieved August 2, 2015, from

Tobacco products are ever so threatening in the United States, where according to U.S. Food and Drug administration 25% of the deaths in men and women age 35 to 69 are caused from smoking related diseases (U.S. Food and Drug Administration, 2017). This number was even higher among substance abusers and people with mental health problems (Bandiera, Anteneh, Le, Delucchi, & Guydish, 2015, p.1). Even if someone does not die from smoking cigarettes they are at increased risk of contracting an otherwise preventable disease. Due to an exponentially growing amount of people becoming affected with diseases related to tobacco use, the United States government were forced to take action to try and stop the progression of these horrible diseases. These actions have come to no avail, since people who are addicted to cigarettes are not going to stop buying them just because of a price increase. Banning the production and distribution of tobacco products will contribute to a

The use of tobacco is a very controversial topic here in the United States. The harmful side effects of tobacco are well known and consequently, many believe that it should be outlawed. Though this has not yet occurred, constant regulations on the industry and