Smoking & Advertising Essay, Research Paper

Everyday 3,000 children start smoking, most them between the ages of

10 and 18. These kids account for 90 percent of all new smokers. In fact,

90 percent of all adult smokers said that they first lit up as teenagers

(Roberts). These statistics clearly show that young people are the prime

target in the tobacco wars. The cigarette manufacturers may deny it, but

advertising and promotion play a vital part in making these facts a reality

(Roberts).

The kings of these media ploys are Marlboro and Camel. Marlboro uses a

fictional western character called The Marlboro Man, while Camel uses Joe

Camel, a high-rolling, swinging cartoon character. Joe Camel, the “smooth

character” from R.J. Reynolds, who is shown as a dromedary with complete

style has been attacked by many Tobacco-Free Kids organizations as a major

influence on the children of America. Dr. Lonnie Bristow, AMA (American

Medical Association) spokesman, remarks that “to kids, cute cartoon

characters mean that the product is harmless, but cigarettes are not

harmless. They have to know that their ads are influencing the youth under

18 to begin smoking”(Breo). Researchers at the Medical College of Georgia

report that almost as many 6-year olds recognize Joe Camel as know Mickey

Mouse (Breo). That is very shocking information for any parent to hear.

The industry denies that these symbols target people under 21 and claim

that their advertising goal is simply to promote brand switching and

loyalty. So what do the tobacco companies do to keep their industry alive and well?

Seemingly, they go toward a market that is not fully aware of the harm that

cigarettes are capable of.

Next to addiction, the tobacco industry depends on advertising as its most

powerful tool in maintaining its success. Addiction is what keeps people smoking

day after day; advertising cigarettes with delusive images is what causes millions to

be tempted enough to begin the lethal habit. Cigarettes are the most heavily

advertised product in America. The tobacco industry spends billions of dollars each

year to ensure that its products are associated with elegance, prosperity and finesse,

rather than lung cancer, bronchitis and heart disease (Taylor 44). Since there is little

to distinguish one brand of cigarettes from the next, cigarettes must be advertised

through emotional appeals instead of product benefits. Thus, the cigarette’s appeal

to the consumer is entirely a matter of perception, or rather, misperception.

There are a few American publications – such as the Readers Digest, Good

Housekeeping, the New Yorker, and Washington Monthly – that do not accept

cigarette advertising as a matter of principle. But for the majority of American

publications, the millions of dollars they receive each year from tobacco

advertisements is not only enough to keep the advertisements running throughout

the year, but enough to control the material they publish. On many occasions,

newspaper and magazine editors have pulled out articles on smoking and health that

they would have otherwise published if the articles did not have the ability to

interfere with their relations with the cigarette companies. An article in the Columbia

Journalism Revue, analyzing coverage which leading national magazines had given

to cigarettes and cancer in the 1970s, concluded that it was:

. . . unable to find a single article in 7 years of publication that would have given

readers any clear notion of the nature and extent of the medical and social havoc

being wreaked by the cigarette-smoking habit. . . one must conclude that advertising

revenue can indeed silence the editors of American magazines. (qtd. in Taylor 45)

Of all of the newspapers and magazines in America, those with the largest

percent of teenage readers seem to be the tobacco industry’s favorite places for

advertising. Similarly, tobacco advertisement remains most popular among billboards

located closest to colleges, high schools, and even junior highs. This approach of

advertising to young people has been kept a closely guarded secret since, besides

being illegal, the companies are ashamed of it. If they had a choice, cigarette

companies would simply keep their business between the adult population and not

have to worry about enticing children into smoking – but that is not the case. There

are two fundamental reasons why it is necessary for the tobacco industry to market

their products towards young people (Hilts 63-64):

Nicotine addiction, which is paramount to the industry, does not develop in

adults. Among adults over age 21 who begin smoking for the first time, over 90

percent soon stop completely (65). Among young people ages 12 through 17, who

smoke at least a pack a day, 84 percent reported that they were “dependent” on

cigarettes. Virtually all tobacco use begins at childhood. Half of the adult smoking

population has started by age 14 (Glantz et al. 59); nearly 90 percent of those who

will smoke as adults are already smoking daily by the time they reach age 19. It can

take up to three years of smoking to establish a nicotine addiction; adults simply do

not stick with it long enough (Hilts 65).

The second reason why it is vital for companies to invite children to smoking,

has to do with the state of mind of the adolescent. Children, by nature, are attracted

to many things that the cigarette has to offer them: defiance of authority, a sense of

individualism (which is an illusion, considering they are one among some 50

million), emulation of an admired image, social acceptance by peers, a perception of

masculinity (for males) or sexiness (for females), and many other false notions that

help settle various insecurities of the adolescent. Tobacco executives realize that if

they introduce their products as being capable of relieving numerous social

pressures that teenagers undergo, their products will be perceived this way (to an

extent) by a large percentage of children; these children will let the industry affect

their actions and, ultimately, their lives.

It is for these two reasons that the industry must focus their attention on

persuading young people to start smoking. Cigarette companies view their

advertising approach as an investment. Young people, who are only a small

percentage of the market, slowly accumulate in numbers, year by year, and increase

their habit as they grow older. Eventually, this small group of consumers develops

into the majority of the tobacco market (Hilts 77). It is moreover advantageous for

companies to target youths since young smokers have greater “brand loyalty” – a

very high likelihood of staying with their first regular brand of cigarettes for years or

even for life (76).

Tobacco companies have learned exactly how to market their product to

children through extensive research and psychological study of youths; the most

intense studies did not start until after the scares of 1954. In the late 1950s, Philip

Morris found through comprehensive research that young males started smoking

because, to them, it represented an independence from their parents. What PM’s

advertising agency came up with were “commercials that would turn rookie smokers

on to Marlboro . . . the right image to capture the youth market’s fancy . . . a perfect

symbol of independence and individualistic rebellion” (qtd. in Hilts 67). With this in

mind, they decided that images of a lone, rugged cowboy would catch the attention

of male children. The Marlboro Man soon began to capture the largest percentage of

starters and clearly put Philip Morris at the top of the tobacco industry; PM tried to

duplicate the success of Marlboros by creating Virginia Slims for young girls in the

late 1960s (66-69).

There is no doubt that peer group influence is the single most important

factor in the decision by the adolescent to smoke . . . The adolescent seeks to display

his new urge for independence with a symbol, and cigarettes are such a symbol

since they are associated with adulthood and at the same time the adults seek to

deny them to the young. (qtd. in Hilts 83)

R.J. Reynolds eventually did respond to the youth market in 1988 with

Camel cigarettes. RJR’s market basically remained the same since 1913, before they

modified their advertising approach 75 years later (Hilts 70). Camels, which had

previously been pitched to smokers over 50 years old, were suddenly targeted

towards those under 20 years old with the introduction of the cartoon Joe Camel in

February, 1988 (79-80). RJR established a program to sell their cigarettes to what is

referred to in their documents as “YAS,” or “young adult smokers.” (They were

referred to in the documents as young adults only for legal purposes; orally, it was

agreed that the targeted groups were much younger.) The program carefully

governs, among other things, the placement of ads and propaganda. They ensure that

stores within 1,000 feet of schools carry more promotions than other stores; that

promotions are closest to candy counters more often than anywhere else; that

displays are more often set at a height of three feet or lower; and that stores in

neighborhoods with a large number of children under 17 receive a greater number

of signs promoting their cigarettes (92-93).

The effectiveness of the tobacco industry’s psychologically designed

promotions has been remarkable. Coinciding with the 1967 ad campaigns which

targeted young girls, there was a sudden rise in teenage, female smokers: 110

percent in 12-year-olds, 55 percent in 13-year-olds, 70 percent 14-year-olds, 75

percent in 15-year-olds, 55 percent in 16-year-olds, and 35 percent in 17-year olds

(Hilts 69). Within three years after Camels were introduced to children in 1988, the

brand jumped from 3 percent to more than 13 percent of the cigarette market; the

jump was even larger among the youngest groups (70). An R.J. Reynolds executive

was asked exactly who the young people are that are being targeted, junior high

school kids, or even younger? His reply made RJR’s objective clear: “They got lips?

We Want ‘em.” If this is truly who the tobacco industry is aiming for, their

achievements are considerable. More than 100,000 American children ages 12 and

under are habitual smokers (Mixon 3). Every day, 3,000 to 5,000 American kids

light a cigarette for the first time. Children spend a billion dollars a year on

cigarettes. Tobacco companies must make sure that they recruit enough new

smokers every day, taking into account that they loose one of their life-long

customers to disease every 13 seconds (Starr and Taggart 706).

Tobacco products have claimed the lives of more people than those who

died in World War Two (Jaffa 85). The sum of its victims exceeds the number of

deaths resulting from alcohol abuse, illegal drug abuse, AIDS, traffic accidents,

homicides, and suicides combined (Glantz xvii). There are thousands of documents

from tobacco companies which reveal that the industry has been remarkably

successful in protecting its ability to market an addictive product that not only kills its

customers by the millions, but also shrinks the economy by 22 billion dollars

annually (Starr and Taggart 706). The industry has uniquely been able to market its

lethal products by tactfully instilling completely irrational desires in the vulnerable

minds of children. Although tobacco products have been proven to be seriously

hazardous to health, some 50 million Americans continue to smoke regularly; this is

not necessarily a matter of “personal choice” as the companies claim. Rather, after

seducing young people’s minds (by explaining smoking as glamorous rather than

deadly), the whole business trusts that these youths will continue to smoke because

they will develop addictions to the nicotine in tobacco. Along with some help from

the government, the industry fights regulation of their product through the skilled

legal, political, and public relations tactics that helped them create an imaginary

controversy on the effects of smoking. This situation, however, is slowly changing.

The deception of the tobacco industry has recently become better publicized through

the revelation of internal documents which previously have been suppressed by the

companies. (Among these documents, those of Brown & Willamson and have been

greatly exposed.) Every day, organizations such as the FDA (Food and Drug

Administration) are taking steps to control the virtually unregulated sale of cigarettes

and other tobacco products. Until something effective is done, however, the best

way to fight the merchants of death is to influence their prey – the impressionable

minds of children – before they do.