Tobacco and Public Health - TCSC Indonesia

42
CIGARETTE ADVERTISING IN THE UNITED STATES IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY
generally unavailable in stores; Pollay and Dewhirst 2001). Now ® was described as a ‘breakthrough’
(1980, as cited in Pollay and Dewhirst 2001), while Carlton ® advertisements
claimed that ‘Latest U.S. Gov’t Laboratory test confirms, of all cigarettes: Carlton is lowest’
(1985, as cited in Pollay and Dewhirst 2001). In 1980, Brown and Williamson introduced
Barclay ® ,a cigarette they promoted as ‘99 per cent Tar Free’ (as cited in Pollay and Dewhirst
2001). However, this cigarette employed a unique ventilation system that was subject
to easy compensation, so much so that Brown and Williamson’s competitors sued to stop
the cigarette’s low-tar claim (FTC v. Brown and Williamson 1985). A campaign for True ®
cigarettes was explicit about reassurance: ‘Considering all I’d heard [presumably about
smoking and health], I decided to either quit or smoke True. I smoke True’ (as cited in
Pollay and Dewhirst 2001). This sort of advertisement allowed smokers to conclude that
some cigarettes were a reasonable alternative to quitting, and indeed many smokers were
lulled into a false sense of security by Lights (National Cancer Institute 2001).
A secondary effect of ventilation is that it makes the smoke actually taste ‘lighter’.
That is, even though smokers are very likely not getting less tar and nicotine per cigarette,
each puff tastes lighter than a puff of equivalent yield on a regular cigarette
(Kozlowski and O’Connor 2002). In national surveys, smokers note that Lights do taste
lighter (e.g. Kozlowski et al. 1998b), and industry studies note that adding ventilation
can significantly reduces smokers’ ratings of ‘irritation’, ‘impact’, and increase ratings of
‘mildness’ (Anderson 1979; Hirji 1980; Philip Morris 1989).
To sell lower-tar cigarettes to a public used to higher-tar brands, manufacturers had
to convince the public that the new cigarettes would offer the same satisfaction or great
taste that their old cigarettes did, but still be less dangerous. However, the advertisements
also had to deal with issues of lighter taste and satisfaction. Consider a 1972
Vantage ® advertisement:
Anyone who’s old enough to smoke is old enough to make up his own mind.
By now, as an adult, you must have read and heard all that’s been written and said for and
against cigarettes. And come to your own conclusions … if you like to smoke and have decided
to continue, we’d like to tell you a few facts about a cigarette you might like to continue with …
Vantage gives you real flavor like any high ‘tar’ and nicotine cigarette you ever smoked, without
the high ‘tar’ and nicotine. And since it is the high ‘tar’ and nicotine that many critics seem most
opposed to, even they should have some kind words for Vantage. We don’t want to mislead you.
Vantage is not the lowest ‘tar’ and nicotine cigarette. But, it is the lowest ‘tar and nicotine cigarette
you’ll enjoy smoking. It has only 12 milligrams ‘tar’ and 0.9 mg nicotine. With anything
lower, you’d have to work so hard getting taste through the filter that you’d end up going back to
your old brand…
(R. J. Reynolds 1972)
This advertisement promises that the cigarette will: (1) deliver less tar and nicotine
(implicitly healthier); and, at the same time, (2) still deliver good taste. This doubly
reassures the smoker that he can continue to smoke, with reduced health risk but without
losing the taste and pleasure he enjoys. It implies that health advocates who say tar