T1 9 0 ovacco Advertising 0 C>N PœIvisory Omncu 683 CD ',0 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Introduction - Advertising is III around us and, 2s 2 result, some people find it difficult to look beyond the iM2gCS and rationally explore the role of advertising. Calls for the banning of tobacco advertising are misguided and ifl-2dvised. They are made with 2 fervour which iS not 2CCOMp2nied by an arternpr to consider the objective conclusion of research and experience which has been 2CCUMU12ted throughout the world over the years. In "Tobacco Advertising", the Tobacco Ad6sory Council looks at the issues surrounding the adverti . ng of rob2cco producrs. The stance of the tobacco indusay is clearly set out, along with 2 wide ran ge of public Comments from people who are Well- P12ced to comment on this issue. 'ne public2don demonstrates that the views of the tobacco industry on what its 2dvertising does and does not do are valid. "I disapprove of whatyou say, but I will defend to the death your riFght to say it. VOLTAXIE 0 & 'C'- jo', C, 1 . , 11 1 01% 'c , ( 'tL ;J. -~ . Z) CD --Ij BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 j'_ LIC The role of advertising Advertising is the driving force Of 2 free markm since it is effective communication which gives the consumer choice. Without advertising markets freeze and innovation, research and development are stifled. Advertising does not have the power to make consumers buy products that they do not want - and tobacco advertising is no differenr No effect on total consumpti . on In 2 mature market, served by established competitive products, brand advertising affects market shares and does nor influence total consumption. The battle of the brands 3 = The role of advertising is to invite brand choice by established smokers, both by attempting to confirm existing loyalties to the advertised brand and by attempting to attract smokers from other brands. Non-smokers are not encouraged to start 4 = Tobacco advertising does not encourage non-smokers to start. Indeed, there is no 'generic' tob2ccoadvertisin g and the industry does not promote smoking as such. The children "is= e " 5 = No tobacco advertising is directed at children. Whilst children are aware ofmany advertised products which they do not buy, there is no persuasive evidence to suggest it is a factor in causing anybody - adult or child - to start smoking. Letting the consumer know 6 Advertising helps consumers Make an informed change. Research evidence clearly ShOWS 2 grC2t many countries with a ban on cigarette advertising having a much higher proportion ofstnokers who smoke non-filter and high-tar brands than countries where product advertising is allowed. Regulation by Voluntary 4gr~ements 7 Advertising in the Press and on posters is regulated by 2 Voluntary Agreement between the industry and the UK Government, under which the industry exercises stringent limitations. This Agreement is strictly adhered to, and it works. Free speech and censorship 8 Advertising is 2 legitimate marketing roof used to promote the brands of legitimate products, including tobacco. Censorship ofcommercial free speech deprives the consumer of freedom to choose. Also, ifrob2CCO advertising is banned, what would be next' Conclusion 9 Before legislation to impose a ban on 2dveriising could ever be justified it would be necessary to establish that advertising had a proven effect on overall consumption. It does not. (ZD t-D C) -,c Co C__ BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 I I 0 0 01,1 CD CD ',0 Co "0 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 The role of advertising Advertising is tha driving t9afroo maket, since kin *sactiva ccuumurucation which gries tile consumer choice. With= adverds4V maziceft from and innovation. ressuch and development are stifled. AdTardsusq does not hxm the power to make consumers buy products that they do 7he word advertising comes not want - and tobacco, advertising in no display or exposure. It is a from the Latin advogtere - leg~timate marketing tool meaning "to turn towards". or to draw somoono's attention used to promote this brands oflegitimaw products, including to somediing. It is used to describe commercial publicity tobacco. in newspapera, television, post*= and other maedia. AdIrertiming does not have the power to make t. So. advertising is communication addressed u) tlLe consumers buy products that they do not want - again. 3mblic (or sonts of it). with the purpose of infint-in q tho" tob- advertising is no different. 1fo whom it is addressed and where payment in made for its "Advertising can be defined as & cation of "Advertising prmides an efficient mechanism for the information." tz aj smission of information between buyers and sellers, without which 2 market economy simply cannot function "In a market comprising, for example, three soap or perrol effeccively." companies with equal technological and managerial skills, a company which ce2ses to advertise is likely to find its markets "Advercising is the driving force of a free market. Without slipping away to its compedrom It is this which explains the effective communication consumer choice does not exist." PTCVZ]CnCe of2dvertising in markets such as petrol where it is obvious that overall consumption is unlikely TO be affected by "Companies who wish to take advaricage of the Single brand advertising." Alarker and sell their products should not be impeded from using creative communication skills to reach their potential "Research has made clear that the market systems of the free customem To deny consumci-s advertising that is legal, world are dependent for their effectiveness upon the existence of decant. honest and truthful is denying the basic consumer competition, and that the effectiven = of competition in Mass right to be informed." markets largely depends on the freedom to advertise." TMW A Fm-lew LWff 7b~arlAA.,ndieg = &be EC Avshw. Midwl.7 Boarce: The AAwvn A~ Data: jw~ IRS10 Doe: IL990 "The market systerns of the free world are dependent for their effectiveness upon the existence of competition between "The purpose ofmodern advertising is to permit efficient manufacturers for markets. Research studi es have shown in choice mcchartisms that could not be Made in its absence. recent years that denying product information to consurners The efficiency of the market depends on the five How of (which effectively limits compercition) can advemely affect the commercial information." functioning of the market system to a very considerable extent. Awbw. Pmf~ Bun N-k~ Ve, YP* thhwn~y #j Low Further evidence comes from those economics, mainly TWO. Jbp-.f- Id~v t. ti, C-S,=,fth, WkM Adw~ f in rotalitari2n countries, where advertising is prohibited. Such Ad~ economics are notorious for the absence of choice, poor quality It Aw.#ga,* 1~y 29 and the general low-ividabiliry ofconsumer goods." Due: je.~ 1.989 AmLlar. Mb;,17Wn- T I Itue. Ad~g d cq~ crnwwkvs~ 1.1 "Advertising is a critical component of the market distribution SM I 73,A&~&i~JA~ chain. as it provides vital information to consumers about products IWC Y~w IM and services which am legally available in the m2rkerpl2ce-" Azthw. "There is only one thing worse than misle2ding advertising A~- and that is a rule saying that there should be no advertising %'Ala: Add- . tb, R.&J- '90 Fi- Aa-a-g at all.Advertising is ofinunense value to consumers." C7\ cwtf~, M.- Auzhor. DoWd T i (je-di 3~ 3~: 'C-Affx,,'1=, 7!~ DMI.: Daw-4-1990 Date:sq~/Omi~ 1987 1-D (Z) %10 C) BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 "Actually, tobacco ads do nothing more or less than product " there is no evidence to show that advertising is capable of advertising for everything else under the sun. Ail product beinguseclasagr t rnanipulatorofconsumcrs' desires and C2 advertising suggests that the item is "good" and "2=ptable" and tastes. But there is a lot of evidence to show that it is extremely that people should purchase and use ir- No advertising is unlikely that advertising plays a role of any significa "in c rice designed to convince viewers that use of the product will make shaping the broad patterns ofconsumers' expenditure-" them MiSCr2ble failures. How manV advertisements could anyone AuLlAor. Mi,&.1.7 Wi~ cire witich sends the signal that the only person who would date Tft14K AA.C. &-il -d M-. a user would be someone wearing a paper bag over his or her 8~: 7*4k AA~jg A-- head'" Due: 1914 Amhw. 8~ WLr- WIM. A 8- . Si.?~ C4,i-X- T~6 Rg2d- -fb, "In mature product categories, or those with a long history in F- . the Market place, advertising has consistently been found to LSd B-!,,r-~ - W-i -g- Z.1d F-- influence market share rather than consumption. (Ehrenburg, Dese: 11 M.-.~ 1.919 1982~ Similar conclusions "First, it is clear that the evidence available suggests have been drawn in studies of "Our opinion based on the very strongly chat many of the criticisms Of advertising the alcohol, food, clothing, literature review is that the and motor vehicle industries. effect of advertising on made by politicians, academics and others over the past Pelts (1971) did not find primary donand or on the thirty years are almost certainly based upon false 26crtising to influence 21joc2rion of consurn cr premises. In pQrticular it is clear from the c%ridence that primary demand for been spending act= industries is advertising, far from being an all powerful evil influence Simiil:ir;~y, Bourgeois and severely limited by the other that violates the consumers freedom of choice, is in 6cz, Barnes (1979) report that economic and SOC121 forces as stated by David Tench ofthe Consumers Association, neither print nor broadcast affecting the size of the 'ofimmense value to consumers". advertising expenditures were market. In the face of n egacive Second, it is clear that all the available evidence sienific2ittly related to suggests very strongly that advertising is a very efficient - forces, advertising can alcoholic beverage probably do relatively little to meEhod of disserninating product information. In the consumption in Canada. Kyle counteract the decline of a examples quoted, word of mouth communication of (1982), reaching a sh-rdl2r market. In the presence of product or price qualities is shown to be a WgWY conclusion in 2 study of food, inefficient method ofcommunicacion. strong growth trends, Tliird. it is clear that the available evidence clothing, alcohol, and motor advertising may accelerate -he suggests that in different circumstances, at the brand vehicles, dismissed as a "myth" growth r2re, but it remains to level, advertising may or may not succeed in helping to the view that advertising be shown that it is a significant sell one particular producr- Success is dependanc on increases market size." Eicttir in determining the many factors ranging from the qu2lizies of the brand, Autbar J)r Rkb-i wm~i ultimate size of an industry or dwough to the qU21iries ofall comperitive brands.19 Pmfe-fm-4-g- CA&P market." q'B.~=. FA,~ Sm. TWO: AA- ar~ ~ M~= rile: 71,,IA~g C-tvwrjr. Tice: Szst.~ Af- 1h, Si. &ai- - b, E-k So~: 71. AA--g A-- C~ff M HIAkh .d 41 Ef,- i Desc 1984 C- 8~- Y--a-f-Ad-g E%&V md C~ Due: 19.90 S=rvo: USR-fRft-"~-l Data; r M.,Y 1990 ".-U restrictions on rruthM advertising should be viewed with deep suspicion-And the proposed ban on 2dverrisineoftobac.-o "A roz2l ban would virtually freeze present market share products represents the most sweeping restriction on truthfu! positons of companies and hinder competition between these speech possible. Adve-13ising bans have repe2tedly been found to corn-panies, It would mean that cigarettes become -.irrU2[)V just 2 impede competition, and where bans have been remo,,ed. corrvnodiry~ sold on price differences alone. Consumer choice consumers have beriefited. Thev Wdom, if Lver, hilfil the wouid thus eFcc-ively be ended - and there are some significant purposes advanced by those who favour their introduction. dinferenceS at present between brands, apart from such factors as A=14r. D. 0&- -d W F ie-.,-; --s or 'Id n E-size'cigirertes in d so or. - " TW*: Tb- V-- F-1 *C. Str~dy " siv z-r Aubor. D--d 0.~W Sienna* 'A- A-t-g' TtLI.: E-ndd d-g ri th. -~v g-~v . -k, Date- j-7 19r 5~rve: F--~ T- ON Date: SA~d 1980 CD C) C) "D 110 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 No effect on total consumption In a matture market. served by estabUshad competi- products, brand advertising affects market shares and does not influence total consumption. Co-mantators have noted In Eastern Europe situations in countries. par- where there Ivits tradition- ticularly Scandinavian and East Europoax, where tobacco ally been virtually no advertising, a greater percent- advertising and sponsorship are prohibited and cigarette age ofthe population smoke (and demand continues to consumption has increased. One example is the Soviet rise) than in Western European countries where adver- Union where cigarette sutoking has increa"d by nearly titing is permitted. 25% since 1970. After the introduction of a ban on tobacco Yet. within the UK. where both advertising and advertising in both Italy and Portugal, cigarette con- sponsorship we allorwed witl= a voluntary agreeminu surrLption rose. framework, consumption has declined - by 22% in the past decade alone. "Indect-4 adve--;Sinx appears to have sui-prisingly little effect on "Cigwecte advertising is nor 2 particularly important innuence on the total consumption of both cig:izenes and alcohol." per c2piti cigarette consumpa . On accordingly, 2dver~sing bans Anabor: 8 0,04- & 8 Sr-pa would nor cause any permanent reductions in consump6on. In iact~ rXA: E-.[A*--g in the countries I exarnined. per c2pjt2 consumption did nor decline 11- : Hal, bwkn -,d W-nm 2.dX even a little as a result of the cigarette advertising baits. Due: 19:1 y L H-6". rAls. Tb, Efa f Cit-, A A-g R.M M Cit-- C-A.0 "The effec- o- media advertising for cirarenes (is) statistically &Cox=; P-di"V f b, 3~d Wild Cm?l- - 51-kg -d H-~kb. insignificant. regardless of the definition of the advertising DHEW NiWi.- (.Wh? -77-1411 variable and of the time period chosen No evidence was found Daw 1975' of a significant association between toW UK cigareine sales and the level oftnedia advenising " "Tlhere is little persuasive empirical research available on the eflects of television advercising. or its ban, on cipmrre sales or "No evidence has been found.ofa siznificant association on recruitment to the ranks of smoking. Bans on television between the -oral level of media 2riverrising and total cigarerte advertising for cigarettes in several countries, includingthe United sales." Kingdom. Dennurk. Ireland, New Zealand and Italy. seem to A=!L=: MW* C-s-g 0-~p have had almost no effiect on per capica cig2rerre consumption." rxA.: 71, B- Td 0Mm,4A-,i-g -i Ttd Author US S,7- G-.J Cig-ncr Cm&-#~ . & VK =4. Souva: 'We" C~g Gms~p : DHEWNkk-- (PUS; 73LS'0066 Dose: 0-k, 1979 Dow 11 J-7 1979 49 "-. them seems to be no evidence that tond cigarette "No support is found for the proposirion th2r advertising has a advertising has in effect on total cigarette dernaind." positive causal effect on aggregate consumption in the two AcLhaz: Ltwr Wjb- countries (Britain and Germany)." TIXA: AA-& -di.- -d i-df- g- Author. M4! AA-g Ep,-- .d,4a-X- C-- . 8- -i WIN Daw 19$6 source:M-ge,,d-dD--L--vJr(4)p219.:_'7 "All the 2v:;-:able data points to one conclusion, and one two; 19J4 2.1 conclusion o.-iy. Imposing 2 ban in cigarette advertising - "Our position h2s been for some time th2t 2 total ban On irrespeanve oi the media forms to which it applies and tOb2CC0 advertising does not achieve the kind of benefits in espective of -he time when it comes into fome - is not an that arc often claimed for it- effective way of slowing down the nse in cigarette consumption, Four countries in the European Community have still lm a meins of produang a decline in consurnption. proposed 2 total ban and all four have seen an increase in 01% Author: R B-& tobacco consumption." 'MIA: A~f -i C~j-ttxt Smoig - A Ay6o~d Sn,~, Author. so==: 3'M H" H.- t1wiUVRg Sao : Tb, S.a- 11- loft ".- )444-1001 C) -4) _-D BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 i "71im have been several important studies attempting to "A bigger reduction in smoking has occurred in Britain investigate the relazionship between advertising and sales (than in Norway). This demonstrates that it is not the case Despite the considerable attention the subject has received the that a ban (on cig2rerte advertising) -ould stop smoking." effect of advertising on sales is unproven and inconclusive." Agabor. CAwrt. K~tb (E)WAfmonr eHaakb) Aa&hcc-. D C;gir. Tlil&: Exvaf- ii~ &1mu is Lb, Haarfc~ - cb, Two: AA~j &p-d- Jy I.&- -fd-s. itakk Becres: J*&frW=V1A110VMd-fAA~g Soczaa; Ho-d B6d Pwi.-~7 Rarri Due: 1W Date: 6 D.- I PZ2 "To the extent that the-e is an "I Feei it is necessITY to pour answer to the problem of "Per capita cigarette consumption ti .. ds some cold water on the whether, in the aggregam confidence in the measure- advertising causes sales. the C~Mry 1975 1967 % ChAnire fi-n 1971 Manz used for estim2tingin answer see= to be no. sales efFect of an advertising ban cause advertisint. And business Netherlands 1748 1031 -41.05 1 think it is quite impossible in practice ensures that Ireland 2331 1599 -31.94 che strict scientific sense to be so." quantifv the effec: of an LK 2359 1669 -29.26 A=har. M Soi.- CAr dV 2563 2043 -20.28 advertisi nir ban Tills: Aawnirosx, M~e 0-.Al, New Zealmd Zols 1620 .19.72 Azihor KBj~= P~ USA 2811 2353 -1 6JO Tma. Lrd~ .d Pamd Dognm 8AW E&AAr 1W Relgitan-LAo: 2031 1745 .14.12 Aai,- DNS@: 1.984 Finland 1714 isss .9.2ir socxce: 54 W"id cou~ M Australia 2301 2099 -11." S-kipa Haack VIP) r "in the recent debate 0-r: Norwy 1391 1$04 -4.90' Do%*: 19$3 Pirli2mant) on smok~iz and Denourk 3707 164, -J.Sl health, I pointed out &a. - "Eve-v country in the world Gennany 1997 1930 -3.34 nowhere in the World *'IS the Fraoce 1609 1693 S.24 that has tried to reduce banning or cigareac porruo 1350 1449 .7.39' smoiing by restricting advertising reduced smoicing, Jsi, 1601 1730 .8.01 iciveniscm ents has been rather the contrary." unsuccessful." Author M 3~ UP Notes. Asabw. Zwnahosaw dw lulo. A;.6f-v W~ (1) All oaks showi in the rabic xre cipm-ore cimmropdon in sticks pcr~ wlkrolorai 3V &oarcv;~ Th" FWA_ ck~ coors escept for Norpwy where the units used an comounpricas of Boazaa: C_.~_94 Due: 117by 19so Doit: M."i 1981 awnuisaured cigarettes and RYO irt grvaurnes per coota. This is duc "Evidence from other ro the ifnponancc of RY0 in the Nor-egim cigurerre rnarker. "It is extremeiv difficult to countries suggests that (2) 'Denorcs adverdsing ban. isolate staxisriQlv or (3) 1973 dots not available for freiancl. 1978 dan subwthuted. banning tobacco producr scientifically the impact of any adverd sing h= not It is interesting to note that robacco consumption has particular ficccir. It would also discouraged smoking." generally risen in recent years in Eastern Europe (where be difficult, if nor impossible there is little or no advertising) and has generally fillen in to se, up experimental Western Europe (where tobacco advertising is aflowed~. siru2tions which would Mike fiocrow Wab-gww US C-.-- it possible to adequately P-i-9 Off- "Those countries which have exticrienced the most rapid analyze this issue scientific Dole: -J-U- d . C-.-. evidence Made sviflable to us fills in tobacco consumption have not been the countries suggests chit the impact of which have banned advertising, a conclusion which ho as. advertising on the overall whatever data source is used." situation is at mor. of "Even though the law to stop Anther. Mib-lj W.-m relatively little significance." cobacco advertising On Aw~ow. Cbp-%, S- PbD Norway) has & MC2311TIV".11 TW*: Th-t L-oxm -.fE- content. we cannot see tnar it Dais: 1990 A-t_ - cig- has had 2 fund2MCnt_-: --Te= AA*,r_; Srd.1 upon the sale or use oi:obacco. Boaz*@. Acuior: KOG-&XCG~ Date. 1999 TXX: S-i., .4 A=.Aki 7-6 Sig -%7- 50VICS: Tidds- DNS: 199.; CD BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 I I "If, however, in industry has reached m2curity or even decline "After 25 years, the surgeon general his not been able to for a variety of exogenous reason, advertising cannot buck that provide the evidence that establishes a causal factor between fundamental trend." advertising and tobacco consumption. Author. This comes as no surprise to us in the advertising b,~ cz~ industry~ We have testified repeatedly before congressional arwnmcng -,d ~p committees that in countries where tobICCO advertising has bum B~.ilk.7--i#Addio~ $4Q,, IM-1261 banned, there has been no reduction in tobacco consumption." Date: 19S.9 Ila. Xto A"y-, d Scu,rce: Ad-1.4g, "There is no evidence from countries where tobacco advertising Date: 16jAftvY)9$9 has been banned, that the ban has been accompanied Sy any significant reduction itt overall smoking. per capiti consumption, "No statistically significant evidence could be found which or the incidence ofsmoking. The nurker trends apparent prior to suggests either that total advertising has a positive effect on total the introduction of a ban have largely continued unchanged in the Cigarette demand or that the electronic media ban on cigarette Years following it." advertising had a negative effect on the demand function for Author cigarettes. " Tutu- Tb- AA-",ig R- ~ C.-Tim - 16 C-, Acab= L W]"_ oourco. hu-momdAA~jAc- TILI& AA~g Ep-di- ,,d A&Mg- D,-.dfw Gg-mrr 0 Date: 19J6 Awr-iiA Baum; I here are coun-mries where c;zire=cs have neve- been Due: 1$186 adverused -'or many decades (eg. 6e USSR) but where cigarette constzmption keeps increasing. In others (eg, Canada, the United "Though there is no ban on tobacco product advertising in Kingdom and the United States). cons=ption is declining the US, cigarette sales am declining there in sharp contrast despite the absence of tobacco advenising bans, while some ban to Norway and Portugal where cigarette sales have counnies (eg, Fm]2nd, It2ly and Sing2pore) have witnessed increased since they introduced an advercising ban." continued increases m cigarette const-rnption after a ban was Aottar Bv~- CAn* Mepek~ E~ , or- P~-u introduced. In other words, the historical and international Twe, Ti.- Ad, _d (Z experiences do not reveal any relationship between socres: F-1 T~1 cigarette advertising and consumption. Due: ZJF Mq t"I Author. P--yi-17 B-id-~- TUW; 71- um --g ~fi- wLawmi P krome aj~ "Tle statistics =ablish that adult per capita consumption in ~g Ad ~ these (S=din2viin) countries began declining before kuros: &Vvb7-tfAdd=~146r, v, 12554261 advertising controls were imposed and (except in the case of Dole. 019 Sweden) sirnniv continued to decline afterwards. "Tobacco advertising has been virtually non-existent in the MA: 7-4 i. Ti- C_ , - w S- C_ 19TO - 191f Soviet Union and casmrn Europe- yet US depa. trnent of am P~,A~qr 34gb je~ Q~M. % A40,61am and DPVg agriculture statistics show wtal ciprerm consumption in Dr-4- pY21-527 those countries rose by 17 per cent between 1975 and 1989 Due, Avg- IMS Consumpcion has declined in some wesc European countries with restricted advcrtising, such as the LTK and "Merely because advertising expenditures are large; or because Netherlands, but it has risen in others. Cigarette satles in advertising targets p2fVCU]ar consumer categories, is not basis for Norway am now SS per cent higner than they -ere in 1975 concluding that it intended to, or his the effect of, increasing when an advertising ban was introduced. In Portugal, they aggregate Ccmancl in a mature market. " have increased 12.6 per cent since a 1991 ban." Author. P-h- S W-4 Th~ "- 54.1 Author; Milo Rmn- r_-, 0; Tzc-.y mravard w th, US HwefRqm~c Coeveaw MI.: Cig- C- source; F.-dd n.- P19 2-1 Dow 20M_ 1991 "The Adver.-ising Federation (ZAIX) has now confirmed the uselessness of total or partial advertising restrictions for cig2renes. Its international s=tistics show that neither bans on TV advertising nor total exciusion of cizareme advertisine from the media would hive 21tcred anything at 211 in the consumption of cigarettes. " TiLa, A-g -d Cig- S-g. hyi- f- C- C71S X.crom; ZAW CD Due: 1941., - 1_3 CD -,0 1.0 JZ:11 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 c4amoey Yˆsts soecw Tob~w A~enue c~M Ykarz seud" Tobacoe Allerage @bd commprien decrum Md consumpricin demmm Te.r ban granwaduit grams P~ ye¯r ban F-wwoduit grants P- ecfirreed Fra- To From TO P- C-Pira enfi d F- Tc Fmm To P- capi- Toed ba‹a 0. rQb~ P~M for hc¯Jth ressens Tab~ p~cdffl in mour Iceland W. 1 7z 86 2761 2711 3.1 Aw~i~t 70 86 3292 2309 61.5 Finiand 1978 79 86 2073 2012 7.6 Auwi. 70 86 2496 2614 -7.4 Nor~y 1975 7s 86 2107 19*7 16.4 Beigium 70 79 3525 3429 10.7 Group &Mqur 9.02 can.di 70 96 4148 3305 SLI Denmark 70 es 30es 772 20.9 Ad as tisis g ~r penr‚ned for poNtical ressons FRG, W Gemuy 70 86 1075 2779 18.S Fra=c 70 75 2351 2396 -49.0 Ajb.:%i. 80 Bd IZS4 1183 11.8 lialy 70 82 1794 2327 -44.4 Bulg.fi. 80 86 2330 ZZO' 8.0 IMI d 70 66 3239 M8 48.2 00 86 26U, 2374 39.7 NthW,-d~ 70 86 4M 3264 49.2 F-t Ge"-~ 80 86 Z401 2408 -0.8 Si=rimd 70 86 4499 2996 93.9 H=R.ry 90 86 3420 3246 29.0 Uni-i Kinrci 70 86 337", 2417 60.0 0 PoiLl‚ go 86 3529 3558 -4.8 United Scac— 70 86 4)00 3275 64.1 Rm=i. se 86 202" 7 2071 -7.3 Grxrp &~ersye ZP.14 S.~i,. Urior. 90 86 .1106 U-9 Yue0—.~i. go 66 3269 3:0., Tobe= in aJI media G-sp .-jre 1 "9 Gre= 70 86 2572 3777 -75J Tiobacoe P1000cicm in faw media J-Pan 70 86 2824 3334 -31.9 pomgai 70 8Z 134) 2038 -57.9 Beigi=. go 66 3435 3439 4.7 5P~ 70 66 2294 2885 -16.9 France 76 86 2328 2381 -5.5 Turicev 70 86 2064 2020 2s Itair 83 86 2306 2291 S.0 G" …~er%Se -39.86 N* Z ;Ud 70 86 3114 '303 50.7 P~g.1 83 86 2067 1963 34.7 si-pp- 70 86 2265 Z"J 0.3 S-tdm 70 86 1970 1893 4.8 Grmip s"raye 12.75 'ne Toxic Su6srinces Board in May 1989 collected information countries where there is some sort of control of advertising and regarding the effectiveness of sponsorship bans which was later sponsorship: where there was a "total ban on tobacco promotion found to be in error, and misinterpreted what information it did for health reasons" the innual fall in consumption was about 9S a have regarding any possible relationship. 71ese faulty data and head, whfle among those countries where there was 'tobacco inappropri2re stacistical summaries were collected together in promotion in most media," the annual fill in tobacco the Toxic Substances Board's report Health or Tobacco in consumption was about three times this, it 29S a head. Table 7.S.1c. So the trend is for increasing strength ofrestriction to 'nis table has been looked 2c a number oftimes bv be associated with smaller drops in consumption. The st, ot ger statisticians in New Zealind, Aus=;Jia and Canada., at the very the restriction, the sm2ller the annual fall in consumption in least. and the conclusions ofthe Health or Tobacco report have grams a head. " in general been laid open to severe doubt. Axahor. P,- PA.Ui- Ch- Sp Cannal&ow. L94 Akiaa,4 The revised version ofT2b[e 7.5.1c published here Z-4-d shows consumption figures as agreed on by Dr Laugesen of the MIA: Tib~dw.,6dhflma He2lth Department and supplied by him to Dr Harris. smacc 71,,V- Z ;.~ H-4 Mhe table displays the average decrease per head per Date: 20 Mtv 1991 hear in grarns, rather than as 2 percentage change. This measure of the fall in consumption is more appropriam because it is purportedly the amount oftobacco smoked which is important in health planning terms. 1-here is a trend apparent in the attached table for CI% CD U11 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 The battle of the brands The role of advertising is to invite brand choice by established smokers, both by attempting to confirm existing loyalties to the advertised brand and by a !q t In the past live years, for tattempting to attract smokers from other brands. one year. Also, amokers instance, within a highly often have a repertoiTe of COMPetitilre market place. one UX company has brands - even if their main brand did not cluinge. oth- increased its market share by over ton percentage ers smoked might. Points at the expense of its competitors. That is what There is no 'generic' tobacco advertising: the brand switching, competition and the fro* marketplace industry does not promote smolcing as such. It is indi- is all aboutl vidual brands which are advertised. Studies have shown up to 10% of sinckers have, smaked their most often brand regularly for only up to "Tobacco advertising. and the way it is practised today, is g=cd "In established markets when one brand succeeds it usually does towards smokers. It is, to 2 large degree, complex advertising so a, th e expense of a nother brand. It is often the cue that . intended to be understood by people for whom 6c product successful new brand which breaks through into a market has advertised has some salience. This makes it conceivable that some new competitive advantage over older brands. The advertising moves brand shares, but unUkely tha.-it contributes advantage may be trivial (a new perrumed washing up liquid) or to smoking initiation." substaritiad (biological washing powder) bur in either case Azaban. K;.w G G~ advertising allows the consumer to bear rapidly of the new product and decide whether to make 2 triai purchase. Advertising speeds up the dissemination ofinfortnation about new brands Due: A.Vni 1,090 and therefore 2crs as a spur to competitive behaviour in consum er markets. 4'71ere is little evidence that advertising results in But crucially it is unlikely that all campaigns collectively additional smoking. As with many products, (cigmrte) can be successful. Brand advertising is prirnariiy competitive in advertising mzin~ shifts consumers among brainds." nature. In a new or rapidly expanding market it is conceivable, Tula: &M-Nic Re?"t oftbe P"A"M 19. 6 although unlikely, that all brands can be successful but the SOMM: W-*Mgw% US C~ Awag OLTM comm-ative nature ofbr2nd advertising means that in a st2ble or Dole: T,~itwd &o C-gwz jj"-7 19:-, declininz market, for every winner there must be 2 IOSen" Atahc= DRWHgA.IDAlo,~mG-ComkgcM.7W-% " There is extensive statistical evidence from a variety of VKAA-ti-i-SA~ studies done in both cigarette and other markets which~suggests Th1w Adt~g A"-aw aid CoacknMr in sbe strongfy that advertising is most effective at doing that which it is 'H,.Ab Tiima ' A~?enj*m be 7,.* S.,hzo- B~d -fNm designed to do - promoting individual brands. There is no 7.w-.d evidence to show the total advertising expenditure in a mature Alaurce: Tb.- 1mmrtf1Vm 7~&~ competitive market -will also expand the total market for that Due: Arwwry 1990 produm" Antbar- Mi-i-17 W~ "Cigamirtes are a 'mature" consumer product. They have Mw Act"timl And Cigev:w Commgf- been around for decades. People are universailly aware of Seam: Ti, Aj~g A-ma- their existence, and a significant number ofaduics use the Due; 1984 product worldwide. Cig-aretreadvcirrising. like advertising for other 'mature" consumer products, does not produce 3.1 "Advertising's prime role is to StiMUi2te brand switching, and, as long-run increased consumption, but is principally effective 2 result, strerigthen competition. There are no campaigns in triflucticing market share among competing brands." encouraging people to 'smoke more c-qarenes', only campaigns Avibar. D, Rib-d WMae-ti, P-1~.f W~*emg, CPAgr f saying'smoke our cigarettes not theurs*." &,~-; F,6~ S~ L;,.-m7 Me. T4~ .d Ad~g: Fiw Ar-Aj~ Cm-&,.o TWw Sw- i,.i- we Si-C~w- HAijb*4:~t 0\ Seam: E~ C~- - F-r Ma C~ D.10. 191! acoarce: US H~f If R,.V" P11 Date: 1_M_ 1990 ~0 CN BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 I "Other parts of this repor- suggest that such cigarette brand "Cigarette advertising primardy aftects the market share of awareness is picked up From firnify, friends and other people in individual brands rather than aggregate (toW) countries where cigarette advertising is not allowed The high consumption." cigarette brand awareness. even in countries with no advertising AWbor. Ak by ~d Td would appear to add weig-hr to the tobacco indusrry's argument Two: AAftisag kS%kwv'Ef*a Up- Dm.~df- Ggx"wr that the purpose of cigarv-e advertising is to induce brand 5~: J-~ to'AA-1 KA.- I Tf4) adoption or switching, rather thin just brand awareness. Brand Do*; 1,9:6 awareness is only the iniriii step in the process of brand adoption or switching, and ic can be generated through means other than "Evidence is emerging from a number ofsources showing that advertising - for example, by observing other people or trying advertising plays no pan in moulding broad patterns ofconsumen' their cigarettes." expenditure. Advertising can AWhar. P"~-17R.A"y. convey ift(Orln2d0n about TUW. J?n_i4, Smii.1 hKii.- -d "The overwhelming weight of research concludes that product qualities much more Aj~-iskg 0 16-0-1r, cigwvrre bmnd advertising does not influence "primary efficiendy than word of mouth R~vm)pJ4 demand" for cigarerres by converting non-smokers into Comm= . cation, but is only &Dcacc smokers. by encouraging current smokers to increatse really effective at the level 2, A~ consumption, or by discouraging current smokers From wt~ich it is designed to worL- Don: Mank 1919 quining. Instead, the imp= of cig2rerce adverrising is char of the brand." found in "secondary demand", by influencing the A=hw. In ocher words, brand particular brand th2r 2 smoker chooses. In other words, Tins: Adwn~g, 8,~ awareness ofcig2rmnes was the primary influence of cigarette advericising is its effect M-6. quire high in all the coun.---s on market share of particular brands. The vast m2iority saurm: 71'A=.,MMJA~u~ surveyed, irrespective of ofresearch supports the finding that advertising has not Dts: 19j, whether advertising was been found to cause an increase in the aggregate allowed or not. This was also demand for cigarertm That is, advertising influences the "T'hey (ad bans) usually true for non-tobacco produ= particular bmnd that a consumer chooses without backfire. In tobacco's case, and even those which the affecting ovemll demand for cigarettes. they would help Firms with young do not use (for exar-Pie, Acul=. entrenched brands, making kettles, pet foods and Bw~. FAri& Sw. 6.nw=7 new entries (by, eg. lower-tar detergents)." rAl $~ hqi1-b1 S.A-C~ M HtAkh .4 Abf cigarettes) far harder." Awbar G,;. S~", Chad," ~ A-,b E- C-=. - F-V -d C-, Actlaw. FU-.ki L;U; L_&~ IM &==*: US H-fRTT~l TUL*: Ad~-g L;Li-Siq, TWO, Thr Effia fAd~g . Dale: 17 M- 1990 Boazze: -116F~;16(7672)pl) j--k S-kAg 34-- 1 1 Dale: 1541SPw~1990 Scum, Dws. 1900 "When tobacco companies display cigarette brand names on the fascias or blinds oishops, they are merely competing for 2 " the major action of cirarette advertising now seems to marker share. " be to shift brand preferences, to after market share for a Amber MR.^,nB.&bMP particular brand." Soaz=: Hg-; Wffidd P.,Aa.,"7 Rwd AW1W. usswz"15-1 D.UW 19 A.~d P9.01 MUS. S_kg..dK_.b S.Unw. WaWPMUZ~._N6MRS)7xf0666 Due- rpl-~ "As note-. such advertisin.- :s not intended to, and does nor- persuade non-smoice-3 to sr-oke. Instead it promotes inter- brand competition for persons who have decided (for whatever 3-1 reasons) to become smokers." A=bw. JR-dk- 7-Ala: ??, D~ i~, Cq-., At-, :i, H-Ai S~, ^db, Do*: W'. (Z) CD 1-0 11.0 __J BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Non-smokers are not encouraged to start Tobacco advertising does not encourage non-amok- ors to start. Indeed, there is no 'generic' tobacco advertising and the industry does not promote smoking U such. As already demonstrated show advertising causes in this booklet advertising anyone, Lncluding chil- does not affect overall demand. All it can do in lot drov, either to start smoking or to smoke more. people know that a particular brand exists. People This is not unique to tobacco. Advertising for are either interested in the particular product cate- soap or petrol is not likely to make people wash more gory. or they aren't. often or drive further and faster. So. everybody makes up their own minds about whether to smoke or not. Advertising will not &Be= this decision and there is no convincing evidence to 0 "The eff=ts of e:dsring bans on tobacco advertising are "The evidence to date adduced at numerous Congressional equivocal. Studies which have investigated these effects are hearings. and indeed the analysis in the 1989 Surgeon Generals mostly questionable, and there is no persuasive evidence that Report on Smoking, is lirgetly unpersuasive regarding the thesis that advertising bans reduce smoking initi2tion." 3d; are what make people start smoking or persuade them to continue. These ads hardly have such mesmerizing effect that 2nv "in the process of smoking initiation, advertising is, of a] I factors viewer becomes entranced and then moves zombie-iike toward the investigated, the least important. Smoking initiation rypiCAV nearest cigarette machine- Uterally millions ofAmeriC2f%S 01`211 2gC5 occurs under the influence of peers and parents, possibly successfully ignore the billboard and newsoaper call of Kool, Rim mediated by certain personality factors, in a phase of Vininia Shms, and MarlbOrG CVCM d2V of their lives." socialization where perceptual defences against advertising have Actbar. Bd," W L , been developed. Sleeper effects due to advertising seen in early Tuls:* A B i~ Sh 0.4br. 71, U- Rgk4a- f th, childhood are unlikely. P- f7-."- AA.-g Asshar KZ~w G G"~ am : WaA.M8t_ZdgdF.MdW_ TLU&-. Uund Data: Y1 M.14 1915 LY-T~AA"=mg- 'Wrogether, the factors 2ccounting for smoking initi2don Digs; APil t990 are highly consistent internationally, and were found to be largely unrelated to the presence or absence of 2dvercising "Cigarette advernsing and sales promotion do not influence -hi~cf; was dice2ted by a variety ofgovernment controls." 2 person~ decision to become a smoker, as that decision is Anthar irifluenced primarily by the beliefs held by persons with TILE. huxz~ .d Ad~g whom in individuai has direct, personal contact, such as $attrce: CRUfw h~ww&1ARLwamS Amemms parents. close rel2tiVeS, and peers." Dws: , 1.919 "Research which investigates the process whcrtby people "I've neverseen a genuinestudy ofritesubieafthe effect of decide to become smokers focuses on, among other things, tobacco advertising). Most of the discussion I hear - even the the it-nitudes people develop toward smoking early in life serious discussion - is about as profound as someone saying, 'IfI before they try their First cigareme and on their actual -ere 2 teenage black girl, that ad would make C SM10kc.' I just m et:ierience,-ith smobrig. These have been found to be Frid it altogether unpersuasive I've been very sceprical that miable predictors oiwhethcr 2 person will or will not advertising is important in either getting people to smoke or b,--ome a smoker: The research reveals that advertising has kc.-?ing people from smok-ing. It's primarily brand competition. . 4.1 a negligible impact on that decision process. Anthw. A=U=. S-Ag Bb-- _d pd;~ - ?.#Ii Sdh- a- Fl.~ S~ =*: S_i, _d M~ TUJ&: Sjawww kfm the S-6,-Cm-La:r, - H,.kb -d ji, Boomm: *R,-*, Usmag- &v~ C~rw m EnrrV ~d C~ Dws: F- 1991 sour=: US H-rRi__8 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 "There was g=cral rejection of the idea that advertising of "Tle Committee acknowledges also that the evidence of a tobacco products is'powerful'or'persuasive'in the decision direct c2usd relationship between advertising and the to initiate or maintain smoking behaviour." mking-up of smoking is, at best equivocal." A=bm,. S.W W."i 71116: 'Z6 Iff'= -f~ -A~g - d.1- -mg "After receiving evidence from people eminent in relevant ~iaim -.d -.iix ~- - fields ofrescarch, the Corrunirrec is forced to the conclusion X.- , Sp-" R-- 7h, that no compelling evidence his been presented that advert- -fTb~ A~g' ising causes people, and in particular young people, to begin Do*. 1990 smoking. The strongest case presented to the Committee Qlaunsuca: 'G'-? d~ vzi Ab" *-Wkdg?.b1' ?-a suggests that a mix of personal and social factors acting together causes young people to experiment with smoking." AuLbar. Hm GAi7 K*A~ (0~) "it is more accur-Are to observe that cigarette smoking among TIU= Ap~ fS~d-j C~w - Lg&kxi . RA~ w d. women led tobacco companies to advertise to the 'fem2le market' T."- aw 1"0. W'~ A-d- pwh~t than to Suggest that advertising Created the marker in the first DUC MVI-k" 1990 place." "Advertising presents a difficult logical paradox to those who Us: AA-nmg, 71, L;,.~ P~ Its Ni- h~ believe there are differences between markets for legal products A~ Siy In and markets for ideas. 7%crcisnovalidirytothenodonthic D429: IY$6 consumers can properly evaluate proposed national policies when selecting officeholders, but ire somehow unable to choose Obvious4-, the Psy'chosocial -2=ors that influence the initiation between cans; of be2ns or to decide whether to smoke ofsmoking ire varied and compiex." cigarettes." A=hw. VS G~ Awi= Tule. S-kng -4 R- A.4- L;,-,:, a - . DREWP"~.- -,P-TO066 T=&- R~ ~ Og-v. Pw D-g- P~wdm Dwe. 117-m.71979~ Soar=. fta.&i.pka. Tii- Date: F-d- 27 Af-i 1990 0 4-1 ON. CD CD ,0 ~10 N10 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Tb e cb ildre n "issu e " No tobacco advardsing is directed at chiltiren. Whast chil- It is aniationally and repeat- as aware of ==I advertised products which they do . Cb&tmn are sware not buy. there is no persuasive evidence to mgrgest it is aprodlicts oday argtaodloy anti-mmoking factor in causing anybody - adult or child - to start cnoling. of many, a&ertsad products campaignan that advarlis- which they do not buy. ing persuades children to The tob-c indListry start-oldn This im just not so. has consistently held that to smoke cw not is a choice for There is no authcaritattro wridence to show dw the achilts. It has takAn rigcKrout action to ancounige the retail advertising of toba products bas any real significance trade to publicise the law and discourage the sals of v4sere chactran are concerned. infact thersis &mass ofevi- cigarettes to undar-16s. The inchistrThas opemisdaM.5 dance to the contrary. million campaign. lasting three-and-a-half years. to encour- Children obviously see toba advartisemento'how- ag*rS=D*MtOdi"UTPrOMiDOntWlZ'Aing:lotlCM. ever, ther also "a advertisements for a whole range of 7hare are also wall unclarsumd point-of-sale safeguards. it Products and services aimed at an adL%U audience. Research isillegmitooelltounde 16sinth*UX reveab the snaJar influerwas on smoking ininawirt oze poor Mally, according to official figures publishodbT the Preanue. parental azarnple and basic cconasky Governnient's own Office of Population Censuses and WhilrtsmdieffimlicwsdmchgdmnuaTrocaU&dvw- Surreys, smoking arnongst secondary odwal children has ftsenunus few many types ofproduv3 these rooollecdons do signific:zntly d axed zLnm the mid-1980's - from 13% to not necessarily inauence them to want tio Putrehase these 8%. I "The literature makes clear that pear influence, especially, from "Smoking among children and adolescents is heavily linked to peers ofthe same sex. is the pre-eminent factor in the onset of the smoking behaviour ofpirents. smoking experiment2tion and the mainrenance ofsmokint." Author TWA: A S~ie-rvw &m~ - A C"ArxjrfrrAUJ~ HrAlz~ "In the studies reviewed no indication can be found that sonrm Fv% E.,p- C~V~ - 7.~-. Ny AWid advertising has-a significant effect on the initiation of'smoking" We: 7-11 N"-i- 1.999 ... "The main aL,=ts influencing smoking among adolescents are rbe parents and older siblings during during the preparatory and "Responses from the teenagers themsely" suggest that experimentation stages and peers during the experimentation peer pressure to smoke may be one of the major influences. and reguJar smoking stages." There is also some evidence that the smoking parent AaMm- WF-d-" becomes a model for the child. If both parents smoke there MUL M. effl-f-ir-g - -d tb, is a greater likelihood that the child will begin smoking than if only one pamnr smokes or if neither parenr smokeL But even if one parent smokes, this may influence the child to -f7.i~ -44~g' smoke more than if neither parent smokes. Interestingly, if Dow 1"o an older sibling and both parents smoke the child is about four times more likely to smoke rJuin if them were no "In all cases it is apparent that tobacco advertising does not smokers in the family, sigracantly iniluence the smoking iriciation process as far Th'c influence of the mass media in the initiation of as childm-n and Young people are concerned. Instead. the smoking is somewhat more difficult to establish. Smokers decision to start smoking involves mostly a combination of are depicted in films and television. as well as in cigarette personal. family and social factors." advertising which tends to portray them in interesting ad Autbar G;- S-6 exciting environments, suggesting that attractive, desirable Tula: wz~ & 7i~ stol S,.k~g; people tend to smoke. This would logicaDy be expected to fiowm: 1---IAA-gA-- influence children and teenagers much as the media and Date- IVZ7 advertising affect the behaviour of adults. Yet, the r'el2tionship between exposure to the mass media and the "It is unrealistic to fear that posters and penmeter adverzising at initiation of smoking is difficult to isolate from the other sports grounds wiN excite children!s interest in cigirerres. concurrent influences to which the child is exposed. In f2cr, 'Interperson2l" relationships are the bie influence on children's 2 Variety ofpsychosocial influences may interact to and teen2gers'articudes to smoking - reactions to parents, influence some children to begin smoking." teachers, neichbours. friends, svveethezns and personalities AuLtor Vss-z- C~d on qv. Titia: S-ig-dHes4b AULhW- G Tb.-.m sewcm: DPFW (PH.~) 7940066 rAld. .16f- a- W- 114- CA F- S-r.& DIU*: it J-7 ly., 9 sourm: Tiv Bk44fM C> Due- : N- M; BATCo document for Legal Services: Health Canada 19 October 1999 " Available behaviour-al theories and evidence suggest that "The influence of the media has also received a lot of advertising plays a negligible role in smoking initiation or research attention. Although the media's rule in reinforcing m2intenance, compared to other factors, such as firniiy lifestyle. current popular beliefs and lifesrvlcs is accepted, no peers, and pemnalirv charaacrisrics. conclusive evidence has been pr~duced to indicate that mass media can actually get "There was general consensus "The three CRU reports which I have introduced and young people to start that advertising was a relatively smolting.?l remote factor associated with edited have successively covered six. 10 and 16 countries. AWbor .7 O-C~ & M D,.4 the onset ofsmoldng" 'The They all demonstrate more or less the same thing, namely, T=a- 7b, S-kmg Hhu that advertising plays a negligible role, ifany. in the majority view was that the sawco: Hrazk E.M-- 8-4 effects ofadverrising on initiation of smoking by the young. compared with that of Dab* b-r4wd initiation ire so remote as to personal and social factors, and irrespective of the presence Data. PM be unimportant." or absence of strict restrictions on tobacco advertising. It is Anuor. W414 doubtful that further surveys conducted in comparable "The most fbmeful sarongs would significantly affect these findings." determinants of smoking (by "The 16-country co I rnparison reported here provides young people) are parents, peers and older siblings. If one scrong evidence that advertising plays 2 negligible role in the initiation ofsmoking by the young. Instead. personal parent smokes, the child is Curiosity. AS Well 2S parents, siblings and friends. appear to mice as likely to smoke as one Dat.: 19SAO be the determining factors when children start to smoke, mi-ed in a non-smoLing camawass: irrespective of the extent of tobacco advertising controls houseitold. If both parents or 'G,Vl~p diffwrim and ofthe presence or absence of'such advertising." One parent and in older sibline smoke. the chances "This report establishes that personal curiosity, as well as become four to one. If the family and peer influences, appear to be the deterrmning child~ best friend smokes, "On the basis of the vaj-vin th cre is a 90 percent . 9 factors. irrespective ofwhether the young are exposed to national patterns regarding the probability that the child will cigarette advertising or not, with ad 16 countries mpomng control of tobacco advertising, the similar overwhelming impact ofpcrsonal, social and smo ke too." one could not predict which cultural influences on juvenile smoking initiation." M- 8 L.~ MD, country would have the lowest Dvw- V-dJ=-.f incidence ofjuvenile smoking. "Brand awareness" (among children) of'cigaretres, as well OW Heak~ od H~ conversely, juvenile smoking as that ofother consumer goods studied, was 4quire high in D-Ats- incidence statistics would not all the countries surveyed, irrespective of whether Scarce: Smkg Pprunawn Att: help predict which country has Hump m HR 1:24 by;" cb, advertising W25 allowed or not." the strongest restrictions on Sh-c-i- - tobacco advertising. Clearly, 6, E-~ /,b, H-, factors other thin tobacco "Studies ofadvertising as a porencial influence on young C-- - E-V -d advertising and its regulizory people's smoking have produced only weak evidence for C- advertising having any significant effect. When considered control must have played a key Dasa: MY role in juvenile smoking alongside personal and social factors, the significance of initiation and incidencr- advertising poles. Investigations in countries with controls "From his parents 2 child In all cases, it is on tobacco advertising have largely failed to indic2m any acquires basic arricudes toward apparent that tobacco readily discernible and unambiguous efrects ofnew smoldng. The mom the advertising does not msnicnve legislation on the prevalence of smoking. The parents smoke. the more likely conclusions reached by these studies have been supported significantly influence the the child will smoke; the more by international comparisons across countries with varying smoking inici2tion process as the parents discourage far as children and young degrees ofcontral aver tobacco advertising." people are concerned. Instead. Axlh=. smoking the less likely the TWO: childuill smoke. Friends also the decision to start smoking I play a sign ificint role in the Source: A-.1.44-g A--- involves mostly a combination Dw~ M-r 1989 youngster's decision to try ofpc.-sonal, "ly and social stnoldnz and become a matte.M." smoker.-" A-: Authar. D, Bi-ivat TUW: Vlb.7 A' jh- i;1 I S~ SIA. i -g P 1. - : 1=-LdAd~gA- C- - H,.ib .d:i, F~- .hb, H- C-- ON Del.; Aquff 19116 . F-V .d C- CZ) Du.; 199 J BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 "The lack of clear differences in smoking habits between "Evert when prompted, advertising did not emerge as 2 countries probably reflects the selection ofcountries involved in significant influence (among children) on the decision to try the study in 1983-84.14owever~ sinceNorwav and Firlandare smoking." countries with restrictive legislation (actuallY7z ban) on Augwr G" $.igb advertising oftobacco products, TMe: n, Ef~.f To A and the other two countries "Smoking among Secondary School Children in 1909 AA~g m Cbdd~ (Ausai2 and England) are not, a a*==: anr&by-d-fAdd-~ difFerence ritight have been The latest OPCS survey of teenage smoking in England t4ri)pI27T-1:77, caiected. No such systematic shows that the fall in srnoking among boys noted in the Due: 19$9 diiarences are foun~." previous survey has been sustained, and confirms that Atabar. LEA-ad smoldng has fallen among girls. Howcvcr~ girls are still "A largc number of research Me. He" W&Arw in Skj6d studies, conducted bv somewhat more likely to be smokers than are boys - in 09&- A "0 1988, about 7% of boys and 91,6 ofgirls regularly orzanisitions not connected S-Y smoked at least one cigarette a week. with the tobacco industry have 30=0W R.Irb P~w-. I(il ?17 43 investigited smoking behaviour Due: M! % who smoked at least one cigarette a week among children and teenagers in several countries, including -Children have a high level of 13-?s New Ze2land. Peer pressure, awareness and interest in familv influences, curiosirv and 2dveriising their 2WWVn&SS a number of lesser influences of2tivercising is primarily 1904 13 13 13 (which do not include determined by style and 1966 7 12 10 advem:sing) are the key factors content rather than by the persUading young people to product advertised 1989 7 9 8 take up sino king. No firm data The results of the survey, which has carried out in has been uncovered to suggest "Since children show high October 1989 among secondary school children in the that ciz2rerte 2avertising levels ofinterest and fist to fifth forms, are published' by OPCS today, induces young people to cake awareness for products and Monday 24july.13' up smoLing, or to resurne fields in which they have no ?1": 'Sakix -g -,Ydvef,6 adr- . F5mglemd smoldng after a period of time potential consumer inrc,est~ it t3ols by Ed- C."."~ RMSO'.01. 00 -4 ISEN 0 11 his alipsed. On the contrary, follows that high levels of srudy after study has indicated advercising alone do not 6912677. that , not onh- are children and sour=: Or- OfPO.A.~ CMA~ 6- -99- - P~ Nft- demonstrate advertising teenagers fully aware ofthe persuasion. D"W Z4 7*~, 1 qtq tobacco and ~ealth controvers34 but also that they are C2p2bIC Of advertising recall and popularity cannot be taken by recognising cigarette adverrisernencs for what they are." themselves, as evidence ofadvertising effectiveness or of Titte; Jkdm~ S-r. R~- Wz~, 7-i, S~x S-rd Rpet urtintentionall advenising influence." Boom: Tule. OA&- -d AA~j Apan S-y- M" Ropm - Date: 1.9$9 Iii- I RR.-I "Studies which specifically address adverti'sing as a potential Doe: 19r, factor in the process of smoking initiation have foun d that young people are both critical and distrustful of its messkge. This "The fact is that there is insufficient psychological evidence m distrust, combined with the negative scercory . pe of the smoker, support. the categorical statement that cigarette advertising is 2 provides strong evidence that advertising is rather ineffective in sikmiAcant factor in inducing youngsters to smoke. On the influencing one's attitude about smoking. Rather, attitudes result conrrary. a great deal of the available evidence points to the from 2 COMPICX 2rmy of interpersonal factors, and it is these conciusion that, of the factors studied, advertisiniz is one of the factors that ire of primary influence in determining who uill least sipificint reported." become smokers." A=bw DISIhI- Keze, A=Q== 1), Rkbd Whf~, C.;Aq-f T111m: Cij-w L.,AAGq -dAd~.g F,6~ S~ 6,~ SOMM: S.- . US C-g~ H~ Q- en h~ -d Title: S.- A~,~ th, Si,-c-, - H,,db ani &&, F-ig- C- E--- C- - E--&, -d C~ DC%: 1969 30~: VSH-,.[Pq--s Doe: I -IM_ 090 ON CD C) rIIj BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 "At the sure of predisposirion-creation the influence of "Many diff~rcnc f2CTOTS T112V influence smoking initiation by advertising can be determined to be nil, especially as children juveniles. Individual factors that are most important are firr~ily then cannot yet read. The deciding factor for them is the living and peers. Studies fail to demonsn2ce that 2dvcrcising has any example ofpzrents and neighbours. not any poster of direct effect on smoking initiation, though this is not surprising adverzisamenc." as tobacco advertising is 3 Fairly low-involvement activity for all AnzMr. B-iko,.k R~Pm but smokers or poop] c who for some reason = predisposed to ft - - : 14.~ & PN.Vmbt smoking. Any effects advertising may have are likely to be only TWO. M.,A~.f7i~ps-kg indirect~ and relate to the development ofschanati and artin;dcs Due. 1971 about smoking. These are likely to be minimal in relation to f=riily and pear influences and will be very difficult to measure. "Childr= am exposed to 3 wide variety of advercisements, Aza.Ucw. WF,,d - R i and they can recall advertising of products of remote TWW T3-ff-fM-it-g C-~- vs:b, M~ooo *f interest to them. However. knowledge of advertised products and services does nor necessarily imply a tendency 500 Spwe~ kpoc 'T~e Im.own to consume such products and services.'~ Aalhw. G., Smib Duo: 19910 Tula: Advffwmg md Ckarm source; H-g K-g 6--w.7-rRdMmb,~ `17here ire sign-'-,nc unanswered questions about the ways in Data: SP_i~ 191f which children interpret advertising and also about the effects of such adve-risemenz. Tobacco advertising must overcome a high "Awareness ofciprerte advertising is rather general and not threshold of interest and comprehension, and this suggests chat very salient for most children. Cigarette advertising is virtually advertising will have little influence on children or young never mentioned among fivourice advertisements. Recall levels people." are lower than for products advertised on talev~ision." So. W-d I TUJM-. CU4~ &,dAAvnvm1 Rq- - A Sorwy Main kpon - saizvo: ;i_ I DWW 090 Source: XRL Armard c4zrartamw C-.o di.- -i Li- ond DO*: 19r- ~i~* cigarette ads are perceived bV teCr12gM IS hV itical and There is insufficient psychological e~idcnce _. that pocn are listed as "least liked" while antismoking ads are perceived as cigar-erte advertising is a significant factor in inducing young *straightforward" and are liked." people to smoke A great deal of evidence points to the Authar us SWJ_ (;,-,a conclusion that advertising is one of the least significant T11W. S-4-S .i N'.&b fiaccon inducing teenagers to smoke." a-wco; ZWEWP-,,Wi-N (PHS)79-f0066 Azzhar. ZEL^ia Dalo. tlj.~,, 1979 7%4: Tb, V Cq~ Ad B~.- F.4;- "_Tle highest proportions of 7-15 year old children who have Due: A-- 19-77 never smoked - above 80 per cent in all cases - were found in countries which have relatively few restrictions on tobacco " acivemsing was hardly mentioned as a potential reason for advertising: Argentina. Hong Kong, Japan, Kenya and the starting to smoke by children who had tried a ciearecte. In Philippines Conversely, the highest proportions of 7-15 year relation to personal, familial and socio-culcural ~cton, olds that are regular or occasional smokers were found in advertising was found to be insignificantly related to smoking Norway (where there is I tobacco advertisint ban) and in initiation." Australia, Canada and Sweden (where there ire major Atabor. G" S--ugk. Ckdd-' R,*_-C6 V%iL L_A~ LW restrictions on. tobacco advertising). rids: 710~ zjin [Ad~s - Y~.;, S-iowr B,b-i,- Autba: P,1~f~7.7 B&U,_:m X*Q : N-0.7- fAd-g r-79 rile: 7vwoi4 Smkivg 1-imi. and Ad~g C416 C_-7 S-jy) Dale: 19or 30=W; ChWw'R--h L;~,; L~ D.10: M-i. t9.9 ON C:) BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Letting the consumer know Advertising helps consumers nuam an infoxated. change. I Reseiarch evidence c3eaxly shows a great Many countriss with a ban an cagarette, advertising having a much higher proportion of smokers who smoke nort-filter and higit-tax It can be established tl%at a I brands dum countries when product advertising is allowed. Research evidence cigarette advertising ban --- - clearly shows many coun- would inhibit product development. For, without advards- tries with a ban in cigarette advertising having a much high- ing there is no point in prod= development an rnamatat- at proportion of smokers who smoks non-filtatr and high tar turers would be unable to advise their cummars of now brands than countrisewhiars product advartixinq in allowed. Product advancermulL The comparison between West Germany and East In the UIC with adverustizig allowed thinis has been a Germany prior to urLificatian (when them was virtually no significant move towards lower-tar brands and the virmal advertising) is a good Muswation -with an average tar con- extinction of the non-111ter cigarette. tow of 13=g per ciWette in the Weat compared with 22mg in the Fut. I "One critical aspect is the direct ciarion of advertising with "Advertising is the vehicle for the consumer in his or hern-rht the introduction of new products and product qualities. Such to know. It cannot be withheld from selected legally non-fr2udulent adve-minc has be= the basis for introduction manufactured and sold products~ or a form of censorship results. and sales ofncw developments in cigarettes, such as filtered The consumer always benefits. It's necessary fbr cigarettes, low-tir and low-nicotine cigarettes and, most recently, manuf2ccurcrs to be able to 2dv=ise their products freely so that "Wtm-lighz" cigarettes. ~; ithour advertising, the introduction of they may bring the latest developments to public attention.- these products would not be possible." Aidb*r. P &- Andwin. Xbm 3 &t-4 L,&Aw E-~ S-id-, ?=@: M_f~.d_f_ Vad AW-- Lh-.y now=: C~S" P31 cis~ Pa. D-g- P-,~- Dw. 24 Aj.-V 197Ar Micias: Tn~wv Do": Fii.7 23 M-6 1"o "Our experience with advercising for professional and other industries demonstrates that advertising is necessiq for "A cigarette advertising ban would deprive consumers of product development and innovation. If a firm cannot important product information. inform consumers about the characteristics of its producm Research evidence cle2riy shows that countries that have ir has little incentive to adapt its products to suit customer imposed a ban on cigarette advertising have a much higher preferences bexter." proportion of smokers who smoke non-filter and high-tar brands Autbar. H-D-101~ than countries where product advertising is allowed." TMW Prpd-AdAdd~v 8~: Ad-on A~i-, It is obvious from the data that an advertising ban slows D416; Sqv-~- 13197 down the rare of conversion of smokers from plain to filtered cigarettes The proportion of filtered cigarettes sold in the Mere is a) predominance of the filter tipped type of countries banning advertising is significantly lower than in cigarette in most countries when advertising is allowed. The countries where advertising is still allowed. market share of filter cigarettes in those countries is between 8S to 90 per cent In Eastern Europe, however, it is well bdow 50 "The second main result of derrying consumers product percent. Moreover, advertising his helped to supporr consumer information on the types of cig2rene available, is to slow down demand for lighter brands as shown, for instance, by the the rate of co~version of smokers from hich-rar to low-tar development of the German cigarette market. Within twenty products There can be no doubt that chances of the years the contents of condensate and nicotine in the overall Magnitude shown in countries where 2dvertiSing is allowed Germ2n Cigarette market was reduced by more than could not have occurred %ithin such a short time-Sp2n Without 50 per cent." 6-1 advertising suppom There can therefore be little doubt that a Auftor E.-.P,- A ~ efAd~j Ageaiw; ban on tobacco advertising would have consequences which are TWO; M-~. . Cig-w Adwv~g generally agreed to be unCesirabie." 50"Ve: FAAA : M6.17 9*1-- Date: m yi- 19-1 Tula: Adsw"mg..d Cij-a2 Conno-or- So== Th,.4A~gA-im UK ON Dam 1994 (=> BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 1 -7 "Without advertising, the producer cannot address the 'Boddewyn (1983) and Waterson (1984) concluded that every consumer, and he will think twice before invesfmg in any country in the world that has tried to reduce smoking by product innovation." restricting tobacco advertising has failed to do so Evidence r,fl 71. strongly suggests chit the absence of advertising can significantly Somas. S&o~wj &a? MAU Amwd~ repress the development of less dangerous and more advanced DOW 24A.Sm IP79 products, such as lower-tar and reduced-nicocine cigarettes. As John E Calfee notes, companies will not build 2 better mousetrap -nese new (and-advertising) proposals are not a direct if they're not allowed to tell anyone about it " regulation of tobacco use. Nor are they based on consumer Mahar:. S-, protection by requiring disclosure of product infimrnation. In ESA fact, they achieve the opposite result ofdisclosurc by limiting TMIAC " &~S Cig~ Ad, D~ t RA- S-.&.l rather than expanding information. Bans on advertising mean Soaroo: Po4k,% Aww-fa that the surgeon generaN warning and tar and nicotine levels DIUM ;r~ 190 would not be seen as frequent~-. Earlier FTC bans on AL- advertising car and nicotine levels (now repealed) resulted in Autbor. 7 E CLY6 higher zver2ge levels oftar and nicotine being consumed because r4W Tk G;vx #fC4armAAwv=j ?An consumers were denied tha t information." Daw- Rg.4W.W N-0~ 1.9:6 Authoc- "We should bear in mind that in those countries where IWO; C-k - T."M 1"ny lxo~d cigarette publicity is not permitted and. theref6re, the soman umbi. S~ (LM4) smoker is not motivated, over 50 per cenr of the market is Due: Z~D-,k, IPZJ made up ofcigarettrs without filt., andwithagrearcr content of nicotine and cir. On the ocher hamd, in countries such as Venezuela, the smoker is suffinciendy informed dwough publicity, and filter cigarettes represent between SS and 90 percent of the total market. Foryouirin&nnation, in Venezuela it is 99 per cent." A=Uwr. P Rhi- scum: Aft.Wti- 0 CA. hu~ ca~4- - C.W.U~s M S-ki.g U.;k C-4 V- no. 2 0.14ff 1990 0 6.1 c7% C) BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Regulation by voluntary agreement Advertisizq in the, press and on posters is regulated by a Voluntary Agreement between the industry and dw UK Voluntary Agreements znu. Government. imel" which the industry ezercises atrzaa- COmzzuttee U made up of Istinglobaccoadvardainghm 96MUniftadcm7hisAgresuLaWixxftictlyacUmradto, representatives from the been negotiated with anditworks. industry and the Cover- Governments otboth political - I "ment and chaired by an Parties mine* 1971. 7A*o* Agrestuentip "tow strict gialdaUnes independent Chairman, who reports .. ually to the auhavrdwmftrdTcmnudmt=dpm=totcbacmpzo&cts- Secretary of State for Healtb- Mae Agreements reciagnise that the tabs i"Aus- The independent chairman of the Com:nitto* bas MY is able to zu-1-st its products whilst making sure that reported on the offectiveriess of the voluntary approacb. &Uzzmrketingaztdpromotioztisconftctii,dinarmpor&oi- an have Government Ministers in statements to the House ble of Common$. voluntary Agrooments undergo contuatacus acruti- Simitur systerns *fV*Iunftry Agreements amst with ITT by the Conunittee, for Monitoring ftreemaztts an in the European Community. in Germ=y, Holland and Tbbecxio Advertising and Sponsorship (COMATAS). The Denmark. "Where eEeCdVC Self-MZUL12tion is the common Practice, "Letusexaminetheieco. of the different approaches to pressures for more re=crions are Jew prevalent. Ile 1AA urges tobacco 2civer-tising in the Community. I do not think that it leaders and members around the world to take action to is merely coincidence that the two Community countries encourage and promote scif-regularion." that have achieved the biggest reduction in cigaratte Azabw. consumption over the period between 1975 and 1987 am so== two of the counrries that tackle the problem with voluntary A- agreements. Over those 12 years, the United IGngdom, Dake: R~-L.71M Mo experienced a 29 per cent reduction; the Natheriands, which also operates a voluntary agreemem experienced 2 "I should, in all fairness, repeat the poinr that I have made reduction of 41 per ccnr- in my previous fore-ords, that I am wholly satisfied that the That is the. eco. d ofvoluntary agreements. Industry do aU they can to comply with the terms of the However, not one of the four countries of the Community Agreements." which have imposed or proposed a ban on adverdsing or Andar Sir Pm, L~w consumption. ecoi ad a fall in consumption. Over the s=e Soon= 71*dk-p~-frb,C-~f-M-u~gAg"~v- peTiod consumption increased by 7 per cent in Portugal, 5 7.,6m AAw=ag 6, S.o.--.i ip per cent in France, 8 per cent in Italy and I I per cent in Data: Af,~, 1990 Spain. Track records do not support the asserrion of those Who SUj5j;eSL that the more heavy-handed legalistic approsch "The Report (of the Committee for Monitoring Agreements on is a more effective way of securing our health policy Tobacco Advertising) shows that in gen eraI the system of objective& voluntary agrearrients and sports sponsorship are worldrig and that the tobacco companies are honouring their commitments." "I also recall that I made it very clear that I believe that the Audi= right: way to control tobacco advertising and promotion is Samim- through further development of the successful system of Date: $hf-b Off volunt2r-y agreements. Although con plex. the system is comprehensive in its coverage and has always been "I am pleased to announce that the Health Departments honoured by the industry." and the industry have reached agreement in principle on a AuLber. revised voluntary agreem ant for the next three years on the soann: advertising and promotion of tobacco products." Date: J31 Ap-d 1991 7-1 Azd~. W"- W-Ur- S,~ -fSwf~ HmAb xe=m. U.-4 .~ P-iik,-7 R-d Date- 11.4org 1"I 0-\ CD CD C7\ BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 "Many of the problems associated with the implementation of "The evidence shows that a total ban is ineffective, and the fact 12- ar~ not found with voluntary agreements and this means that that such a ban is imposed or proposed only in coun tries where such agreements have a number of positive artrac6ons for policy- cigarette production is effectively a state monopoly must raise makers. They are informal and hence easy to amend in situations questions about the bona fides of the basis on which their where movemcnt~ adaptation, change and adjustment is desired Governments support a legalistic ban on advertising." or anticipated." Anthm SupbmD~UW.Pwiiawma7L;t4~St~y4fS~ f-H,.kk "The most scrilting feature of the self-regulacory tobacco Bonnw advertising system is the progressive nature of its core Dole: 21 Nm,.kr 1990 agmetnents pushed on, it would seern. largely by civil servants rather than by politiciarm Each agreement is more complex and " but I believe that we have something in this country that is more deWled than its predecessor. Each tightens existing extremely valuable - a dialogue and in 2gmement with the contmis amd introduces new oncs~ thus underlining the tobacco indusny, which has shown itself able to respond to adaptability of self-regulition as a policy instrument and the ease changed circumstances. Ile moment we introduce& rigid with which it can be amended, unUke a law which once passed, legislative framework, the tobacco industry, like any other cannot be easily or cheaply changed. Moreover, this batterv of industry faced with legislation, will operate closely and exactly controls has been assembled in a non-confirontational way which within the parameters of the legislation." has bought industry co-operation and compliance as well as Aciban. PmrGAYRhMP providing inclusrri~ with time co diversify." 3~: Doc 2t N~.k- 1990 "Better a self-regulatory agreement which works thin a more ambitious law which does not. Better to have knowledge of the many detailed aspects of the self-regulatory tobacco advertising system, and a realistic view of how it should be deveioDed than to indulge in rhetorical calls for more laws." AWhW. PWO T"6' Mae. L&Id Comni, -d ;44mzw7Ag~ &=raw P.-aitVftb. 23-th A w-d S)." -06. F-9- -S-61~ Ll~ Audw"- PP- DOW- 1991 9 M 0--% CD CD CD BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Free speecb and censorsbip Advertising is a legitimate ma dug total used to pzc~- mote the brand- oflegitimate procluca, includingtobac- cc. Cianscrahip of commercial free speech depriTes the The CommWcW competi- consumer of1kaodom. to choose. Alm, iftiabac adver- Any censorship of fica of today's m a t-plos tisinaishanned whatwauldbe next? this commercial free is the strongest possible I speech wwAld depriTe the incOzatfire for manu!acturers to dirvelop products to meet consumer othis orberfresdomto choose from artarray Changingdamands, thereby gaminghigher sales Aer the& cid'. ence products. brands and samces. Such a sys- CWZbrILndS against other bnn-4 byadvertisingth-W tam is usually the 1-11max3c of a totalitarian at communist Indeed. it is a functionofs. free market economy to ame. ach?wd" to cormunars those products and tervicas wWch Tba proposed removal of free speech and the =ro- 8-legaZyaudkeelyavagablo.M=ufacturenaftobac- ducUou of censorship for the tobacco industry vrould coproducgsweadvsrdaingtoprcomotatbeirbrsmdsto eatLbliahtboincmtwexryingofpromde=-wbAtwcvuld smalc8n. as other m;P anies wait to Communicatewith benext? their customms. ... Dow-, AS PUbliShC-5 Of 2 M2g2ZinC in the public sector, have "Thinking of consumers as fi>ols, and therefore setting out the wisdom or indeed the right to serve as guardians of our to primect them, can be a dangerous step towards dictating rcadership~ freedom to read somconc~ advertisement and form how everyone should live their livcs." their own judgement' It appears to us that the problems and Awa~. P J A, ;V.% Dv~ G-d W,,9 Fd-fofd-~ d=gas of censorship clearly outweigh any potential benefit that a - : AA6r==A-eiaimfNmZAfddAA-ivm might be gained by a detailed review and control of Date; squmkr 19" advertisement for our adult and educated iudience-An advertisement does not force anyone to buy a product. The peculiar character ofcommercial free speech is that it AUMM Am~P04"WWAwd~M~ affects: the lives of ordinary people in a democracy far more than s_ PIJ"W 71"Y political free speech. Given the importance ofindividual I)SW AUPWIPS1 economic decisions and their role in a demoemdc sociad order, it C- A&--i-gP-U7Akp-df-Ug- might be argued that we ought to reverse the traditional distinction and argue that commercial speech is more valuable in "(Following a tobacco ad ban) others would jump on the many contexts than political spceich. bmdw2gon- vegetarians, slow-car drivcrs~ haters of anti- American activities - all would want certain advertisements What the paternalist wishes to do is to revive stite-imposed banned. The essence of pluralism is that free choices should be rationality, not with respect to religious belief, but with respect allowed wherever possible, as long as they do not interfere to health. Realth moralism, as we might call i; prodaims that directly with other people~ lives there is but one rarional-bealth-moral way to five on6 life, and AxQww. E&w~d inducements to divergent behaviour, eg, tobacco advcrtiscmcnts~ TMW AA g Lkd-Si~p are not to be permitted. The question can thus legitirnareJy be SOU1011. 71c Faftvmn ;16p 1i 7jX asked why, having abandoned one form of sr2re-cnforced Dale. 15-21 rationality, the rationality of certain forms ofreligious belief and practice, we should accept, as consistent with autonomy, the "A&Crtising and marketing freedoms, in particular, are imposition of another form ofstate-enforced r2tionalizy~ h e2lth being hard hit by regulators who have become, in their rush moralism", to complete the Single European Market in time, easy prey to critics who claim that advertising is wastefal. "The great compliment of democracy to human dignity is that manipulative or just plain cvfl. These proposed restrictions through it we entrust to ourselves, not to a govcrrmcnt~ however cut across several product categories Arom tobacco and well-intentioned, the task of ordering - and indeed perhaps alcohol through credit cards. and other financial services. If misordering - our lives." allo-ed to become law, they will set a serious precedent for AW1wr. .74. Wk a domino affecr into other product categories and across 7WW G~ M pw,.d&. -4 d.E,- _Mndig, of regions into other parts of the world." k-1 =k~ &A~g AuLbor 14 V&k Di--Q-1.fb, h.--dtd~g 3.azm: -f-4d---r Sp-d R~ '7W, h,~i- AA~ f7.&-Ad-S' 01% THW: Add~ w tb, RAI.- '90 Fra la~x-d AA~g DWW Mo C) Im"na-1 AA~g Ami-~ .1z) n_i- 1000) 1Z3 CZ) co BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 I I "If a product is allowed to be sold, and if buyers are capable "TItis legislation strikes at the roots of the free-press system of making a free choice with adequate ir~tion about .- It is all too easy for sincere legislators to say that the the consequences. then it should be allowed to be community should be protected from'bad'things by legislation advertised." without giving too much thought to the cam with which another Author. E&ffiAl set of legislators may hold a totally different view of what is'bad' Mk: Adwnov% Ue&, Sil, We believe that censorship, however well intentioned, is a far MOMM: 71t Ea-o; 316.,j7672) jp I I more dangerous practice within a community that voluntary D". 1$ 21 sqw &,~ 1900 smoking which can be given up through the exercise of reasonable willpower." "71e Swiss parliament and the Goverruncrit recornmended the Author Edaouf people of this country to reject the postulated ban on advertising. TWX AA-ifill I&"= Our people followed this advice and I consider this to be a wise Somme. Th. C-6- 7-s decision. Once again the Swiss people have declared themselves IMIM 9 sq.-k, I PSI as being in fzvour of self-responsibility and freedom for the individual and at the same time in favour of the right of the To choose whether we smoke is part of a great right - people to seek and obtain information through the'adverdsing the greatest rcaUy - the right to govern our own lives and media. They have therefore, in accordance with their tradition, not to have others govern thern for us - spoken out against state interference in those matters where such All societies whose leaders have tried to make the interference is neither effective nor 2ppropriate." ciditans good by compulsion luave conic to grief, and the grief Author. has almost invariably been that Oftht CitiWELS, nor the J=ders." Prenim ofxke SvnrAAwcaimgA~ Author. &r~d Ldvig TUW: Swin Ag-n AA-C 3- - Tk- P-im TWA: E_ W A. Ligb-S UV . W-1 Source: 7.Mr-J?m~dho-i-d Searce: 71, T- Date; Aprd 1979 Data: 20J 71984 "Tomorrow in Europe, some products could lose their "I do nor think one should be so carried away by onels freedom of commercial speech. enthusiasm that one ends up adopting a nursemaid attitude- We Tomorrow in Europe, people could lose their should legislate in such a way as to avoid distortions of freedom of choice. competition, but not, in my view, to such an extent as to interfere Because tomorrow in Strasbourg members of the with the individual's personal fir-cedom and I take the view that European Parfiament could vote to ban all types of tobacco the individual must continue to be able to buy the product he advertising. But what about the day after tomorrow? wants where and when he wants." I believe that if ies legal to sell a product it should Author. A* X-i X54-1 be legal to adverrise it. TW_- C___r Arm- And that a total ban an advertising such products is a Sam?=* Dfh.WfEw.~W_ PR,4&w,% somi.WX direct assault on the fi7cedom of expression - &eq time DMW 11 M-& 1.982 something else is fbrbidden it is another wound against libem." Amillaw. "For personal and individual freedom to exist in a sociccy~ Boarow government Cannot regulate or suppress the free e=h2nge of IM": Afjft* IM opinion between free people, be it news, literature, editorial cornmentary or cigarette advertising." "Cersorship is not in consumers' interest and is a violation of a Author. fundamental constitutional right, regardless of one~ views on Axi- Uk~uy smoking." TM*. Rw~ - Cig~ Pw D-1,- P.-im Author R0h-.7S-fA,0--fL"-dE~C4- : PbA.4ipki. Trg- U-37 Dale. A,~ 23 MJ,4 1990 TWO; CoRnsir m Tok~v MALw7 111.C~ so-ce: C.4-ii. S~ (Usf) "Everyone has the right to freedom of expression - this 8.1 Ddo: 2YDarw4w19$* right siaall inciude freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by "Those who won ld cheerfully watch the cause of tobacco pu6lic authority and regardless of frontiers." advertising go down with all hands should ask themselves. how Tiuc ArMe 10(f) 73- brr-~-- C~ - H~ Rigiv long will it be beform my interest or my indulgence artr2cis the well meaning but ruthless attention of the EC nanny-stare?" Anther. PAdyb%m 0\ lukt: Cig-w$- ffo=ou; 71, Nii, Tikpmb Dow F,4,~v 17, MY 1991 Z) CD CD \0 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 I believe cigarette companies have the right under our First "After examining the basic moral and constitutional values, one Amendment guarantees offree speech to advcrtise their products is forced to conclude that the tobacco industry is on the side of and that .- (any) publication that wishes to do so, should have the principle in its opposition to (those who seek to ban tobacco, fight to accept these advertisements." advertising). It is obvious that banning or restricting commercial Ausbw. M JNY4 speech about tobacco products ignores basic rights and liberties T111m: Cig~ A& in sk La&e H~j%w~d and opens the door to further coarcive control ofspeach." 30mvic 7UV- P-*_ D-91-7 D_ W & 719w R M~- Newspapers naturally have a strong interest in V3110, PIZ-57 I TVIK 5b0.ddCJ~=AAWVMWM DaW. YYW~r 1904 propowJs coming from Brussels to restrict advertising & B.-W, on food, tobe , pitarmaccuricalls and alcohol. So, also Soarcis: PuMitAffirr Qv~iy W 2, "Returning, however~ to the have their readem In declaring our interest in this IV, 4 EC, its proposed ban on duea% we are entitled to point out what the Dow. Cailr ]PSir tobacco advertising offends consequences of this plan might be for them. The not only inchvidual fireedom restriction would reduce the newspapers' revenue "I believe that as long as an but also logic." appreciably, *nc reader would be called upon to make advertisement is fair and good most of such a loss. The cost of newspapers would truthful;- as long as the "Toba= adves is an rise. Such a process could only, in the longer run, consumer is free to pay easy tu p for the first reduce the number of people willing to buy newspapers. attention to it or ignore it; and wholesale ban on an activity At that~ those with strong prejudices ag-ainst all free to buy, or to consider, or which was previously legal, advertising for tobacoo and alcohol - joined by those to rej= the produc: though subject to controls. also opposed to the advertising of certain foods and advertised; then there is little in fact, ies a twin urget. medicines - will raise rwo cheem ground for hirther restriction since neither the tobacco If one of the aims of the European Communiry of commemial free speech. industry in particular nor is a firee and pluralistic press, then subetantially to Awbar PA&IdIM~,f7Wkw advertising in general are reduce a source ofits revenue is a step in the opposite A; on. much liked (to put it mildly) ?VIAN F_." _d C.-d by people whose politics A brxmd defence to be made about advertising in cmmv~iw readily accord with such newspapers is that it is visible to all the readers. It is an Baurw. Adkwdeummi a Lbr 3&b bum" open source of revenue. Without it,'newsp2pers which FM7 a-d--k Fe*- A%cM= Ii. M y wanted to remain reasonably priced would be driven &Rmcc Ma*emg U'.k to-Ards other sources circvcnue- Them are a great Dole: 24 may 19" number of newspapers IiJkc that in the worid tod2y, Dww 26 My 1913 many ofthem secredy subsidised by poLitic=l partim "Them is something very Alternatively, in a highly competitive industr-y~ they "If there is a case for disturbing about the notion would drop out of business and, in so doing, reduce harming tobacco that government in a consumer choice and media dives. ty in Europe- advcrrising~ the same case democracy has a magisterial We are entitled to, ask how this proposal is can be made for preventing function. It becomes even supposed to relate to the ECs main purposes. As Sir advertisements for whisky, more disturbing when Leon Brittan has recently pointed out, the advance of brandy~ gin and rum. The government: pushes its the single market is intended to promote greater trouble with banning things teachings evermore competition and economic fireedom, and this is is that once the prxxmss has aggressively as people don endangered by Bruneles tendency to poke its nose into begun, it is difficult to stop. take to it in the opinion of the matters quite outside th2t 2im. The proposal to restrict Miar is why we should I te2chers'. A democmcv pre- media advertising enters this growing category of prefer it not to start." supposes that = cmz=c~s are proposals coming from the EC which appear designed r4a* La W r~ responsible adults; therefore, not so much.to fulfil the grand design as w satisfy the sft~: h.4-4- - S-47 when chat sane government bees in somebody's bonnet." Date: 19~M,71591 cng2ges in activities that treat T141w ly. _~." ~ (- 9-1, citizens as recalcitrant Seam: 71, D.L4 TNr,~vb 8.2 children, thev have a right to Dow 4.~._ 1991 be offended. ;1 1 - Aad%ar. Drp_LB&r~ 'C~b..*- S-kiq P,.-- F,&-- Aa 1.091. 974 US cmg~ R- C-~, - E-V.,w C_ CD Date: M-6 1#921 CD BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 "One further important consequence of a tobacco advertising "It is this passion for managing human beings, rather than ban is chat such a ban would almost inevitably lead to a build- allowing them to manage for themselves. that strikes at the up ofpressure to ban advertising on a wide range of'other roots of freedom Freedom, in essence is the right to, products thought to be potentially damaging to consumers. If choose - including the right to make choices that others tobacco advertising is banned, an extension ofthc same disapprove of." dubious logic might lead to a ban on, say, car advertising Awbw. EovN#J1atA~Pkdwpkw 71te logical conclusion of a cigarette advertising ban TWO.. sq;" a, would therefore be the ending of the freedom to promote Imle: 1979 products accounting for a very lairge proportion of consumers' expenditure and "Without tobacco consequently a massive "The end result of advertising. ests criorts - on tobacco advertiscnents there would be reduction in the or any other legal product - can only be to Wnit choice-, fewer magazines, fewer pages effectiveness of our marker to block the five flow ofinformacion; to emasculate in newspapas, and, system. competition, cancelling its benefits-, to penalise the consequently, a small 4.- A cigarette advertising advertising media by starving them of revenue; to reduction in freedom of ban would be both futile and inhibit commercial investment and employment-, to speech and expression." damaging to the interests of jeopardise present investment, and to place powers of so==. LM W.W - 1.kpaidm M consumcm in aMition to censorship in the hands of pressure groups who, lacking 5.111.7 seriously Wringing the right any electoral mandate, have no right to wicld them." Data: JJPM~ 1991 ofumufAcrurm to infrinn the public about legal "Consumer protection laws and the machinery fbr their " "ti-smoking groups may products, and the right of enforcement, which provide 2 sensible protect nofthe one day propose a total ban on consumers to full public against filse or misleading advertising claims, are cigarette production and information about freely clearly appropriate. No responsible industry would object consumprion. If this ever available products." to them. occurs, the results may be J6dh-- M;6-17 W- But when manufacturers of perfectly legal disasrrous~ since history has TWO: Ad~zieg Pd Gr~. products am banned from advertising in cercain media - shown thic is is virtually C-t- or even firom advertising at all - a completely difficrent impossible to legislate soanm Tk AA~g Awdaip. situation arises. It is the stas of* process ofrestriction personal preference (eg, Dise: ?.- 1914 on the free flow of competitive commercial inicrtnacion; prohibition in the United a form of crnsorship which strikes at the very basis of a Stares earlier this cenruzy)." "Tle opinion which it is free economic society." Autbar Losw Wpbxm atTempted to suppress by Axithan Jk-dAA-ikgA=~ IkXam. A."06-dy-'-d-f authority may possibly be Ttue: 71k-eidAA~r. Ad-6*1 true. nose who desire to Soorce ] -1AA~SAe-- Dole: 19ts suppress it, of course- deny Dods: 1983 its truth; but they are not "You cannot have a true infallible. They have no political democracy if you authoriry to decide the question for all mankind and exclude allow the view char people ire too stupid to make choices about every ocher person from the means ofjudging." what to believe or who to Mow or will be influenced by a Aga= la" sown Mw particular fbnn of corrimmcial speech." 0 TWM: Eady an UkM plq~_ a_ X-1-1 N_ YW* U-iy 'A_ Data: 19c, ?W&- Rrp~.fm A46M 0 Mk CMrMf&k WWU Fedow" of AA-=M "Censorship in any form is contrary to the basic freedom of Samseet. A-1- 1~ 29 individuals to think. Ifyou start having one kind ofcansorship, Dow ya" 1989 where do vou stov? Aw.hw. 8.1 Due: 01% CD CD CD BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 Conclusion Bojere Uq1slation to intpose a ban on advartixing could , ever Im jusaad, it would be noossearT to "Ablith that --garatts consumption; war fteventingtoba adrartis- advertising had a P=v= effact on overall coninunption. ingwculdinew conwaii it do" not. do" the evidence "abli'll, establishing their bmnds. that actTextimingr I&ads peo- Without the opportunity for . I pis to start -Uizia UK inamdacturars to promote particular brands tobs The decision to buy and -0" t0b- is entirely would bo bought larpIT an price. individual and. in this Atuad-6 onlT brand choics rather It is no coincidence thAt it is the countries Of ItLIT. than the total 3narkot is aftctad by proverid" m=kwo Fkarics. Pornagal and Spain which ham or we introducing receiving brand ialkizination via advertising. tobacco advertising bans. For bans axe a manns of reduc- 7he end result of an advertising ban - on tobacco Or mgth*CC=4m==h=pr=pallybdwnadond=npanum my othwiegal product -can only bo to lizzit chodos' to "10-d' and. in doing so, protecang the stat"wised talm monop- tbah,"acwo(Lif=matio=tow=scdatoooz*otition;tci Glies in their home rawksts. inhibit coni inardal invesmaanl~ and to met a wacrying precap- JL lugs body of Frofassiow roosarch has shown that dont fin ather categories of Wociucts and tervicm there is no pmvun con:%action. b*tween advertising and total F__ "In many product climes with heavy competitive advertising, "Evidence from other countries suggests that banning tobacco total consumption is rising little if at all; in some it is filling product advertising his not discouraged smoking." Ile key question is whether people continue to buy something Taw F~_ F- after they or their fiiends and neighbours hive used it. By and Soartm. US Gm~w-w Aiscint Offix large one cannoc go on selling something which people do not Dw. Tnw-=d w 19V like after they have had it.... The usual reason why people buy things is that they want them." "Cigamrce advertising influences market share by A=M- Pof-a r encouraging brand switching. Opponents ofcigarette TWW R,~._ A__g -db, C_ advertising argue that switch rates among smokers do not 9-1 I~A-g justify advertising expenditures. However, 2crual, as Dow sq~ 19:2 opposed to self reported, switching data was recmtly reported for the UK. and showed cigar-erte brand swivching "Merely because advertising expenditures are large, or because between companies at 30%. This figure is similar to that advertising targets particular consumer categories, is no basis for found for mularine, toothpaste and soup - also mature concluding that it intended to, or has the effect of increasing product caregories. Switching between brands. irrespective aggregate demand in a 'mature' market." of company, is probably over So% and reinforces the validity A.0ar. S W-4 PftA-JM-* & 71. Vl&m- S&.1 of a brand sham not market expansion, =3 Soar= T-.6,USR-fFpw~ (Ehrenberg. 1982). It is also irnportasit to note that D"- yff~ 1.919, cigarette companics not only use advertising to get consumers to switch to their brands. bur also to make sum "Before the GovcT=cnr could support a pollicy of outright their present customers do not switch to other brands." banning of cigarette ach-erdsing, the merits of doing so Aulb-. & Xj&-d W M-Psis, A i~- @fM-k-% C*US, f would need to be confirmed beyond a doubL The Industry SW& uft~ suggests advertising is predominantly concerned with T%W Swam= kfwv sit Sak-Cp~ w Hidd aid Lbe promoting 6rAnds. There is little direct evidence one way or Ewrmww C.~. ~ E-V ~d C~ the other about this 2nd, if a ban had only a minimal effect sovzm: USH~.fRP~_ on total consumption, it would doubtless be regarded as an Due: 17 M" 1990 unnecessary restriction on the liberty of the individual. Moreover, a ban would detract from that part of the "While cigarette 2dverrising is apparently quite effective in Governmenes strategy which encourages smokers, who inducing brand loy2lty, it seems to h:,-e little impact on whether cannot or will no give up smoking, to smoke cigarc esin people in fact smoke." the relatively less harmful lower-tar groups, and it would AuLbar. J%dg, Kigbc remove an important vehicle for the health warning which, by agreement, is now appearing for the first time in Dats: 1971 advertisements." SGUIM VA j. P,~*- (C4-d 7047) C:) Due. Dtani- 19-7 BATCo document for Legal Services: Health Canada 19 October 1999 "No empirical research has been able to show that "Consumers everywhere require such information to help them aggregate brand advertising leads to greater total tobacco judge between one offer and another. It is their guarantee of consumption. Nor has anything been found to suggest that genuine freedom of choice." Advertising entices non-smokers, young people in Author. particular, into becoming smokers. It Wows, therefore, rAla-. Tol- -dAAwumZ-. Fi. AX-wwAS*AP C~ip that there can be no evidence showing that a ban on 80woe; advertising would result in reduced tobacco consumption Date; ]PSI and fewer new smokers." Autiaw. X W,&.;~Z "If users of tobacco were being misinformed by false of TIAW. See - AA-wing - W'&w 73,mi misleading advertising, them would be a case for supervision to P.-div - rb, 3'd Mi." C-f~ . $ king od Kiefib' ensure'truth in adverdsing~ 71= is no evidence of this, N_ YV* however, and in fact Due: 1975 mechanisms to deal with such "Ile pattern of tobacco Netherlands -40 froblerns are already in effect Irdand -32 in most developed countries consumption is con=dv Bans or further restrictions on changing in most Free-lViarkcr UK -27 tobacco advertising would not CAnN6 .29 Economics, both in cc= of seern justincd. the movement from one Ne~ zeelarid -11 Author:. S CLAZ4"&iU. product to another (eg- from USA -24 L~-~ &.7 h2nd-rolled cigarecres to Belgiwrvl~boua-j -16 11;_'~_ manufactured ones, or vice 1 -10 TSGA. Denmark -7 versa) and within a product Als"Wi, RA- a S-kmg category (eg: from higher-tar Weer Germany souroe. Pdig S Lm to lower-tir filter cigarctro). ti~ Pdiy soka hunoto Such changes within overall 77he fia= are that in many countries permitting tobacco L-SWI tobacco consumption result advertising. cigarette consumption has decreased. The Dadw YMN 'y 1984 from manv influences such as accompanying table shows percentage changes in income, price, social customs consumption between 1975 and 1989 in countries that "The Committee's and preicrerices, but one ofthe permit cigarette advertising. conclusion is th2t anv major ones has undoubtedly In Portugal, Italy and Iceland which have banned decision to ban all forms of been advertising. One of the advertising, cigarette consumption has increased in the tobacco advertising, rules ofadvertising has becri to &wne period despite the ban. Only in Finland and including sports keep smokers informed of new Norway has cigarette consumption decreased. sponsorship is purely a product developments. Advertising does not stimulate or maintain cip- political decision. It ' is not Without advertising, it is rerre consumption levels. Research evidence shows that based upon imfurablc unUely that such changes in the influence of advertising expenditure on large consu- empirical evidence - " the pactarti of tobacco mer markets is negfigible, other than at brand level." A-. H- C-7 X141 0-) consumption would have Audmic F-k JUVM C"-,% 71, N-- P.M.6 RM" 'fSma., C.~ occured at 21L or as quicidy." Ao~ - LqVA~ in Rdai 0 6f Author P'-fy &dk*r ?Me: F~J 7.i- (L~) 7.~.M Diu 0 Me: Tu.- A&-w-g a.- eed 5, : TA. T_'' A.Vwkea P-iee~ C.M.~W_ i. 16 C-i'l Date: I$ M_ 1991 1 Dow N_ 1990 Smam- hw%.adAAwng A-a- "Advertising bans may, ofcourse, have completely different Deg*: 19m objectives. T'hey may be 2 means~ for example, ofprorecring a' national tobacco monopoly from international competition. A "Total prohibition ofall tobacco advertising would entail the ban for such. a purpose, unsupported by education programmes, elimination ofan essential component ofcompe rition. One of cannot be expected to affect tobacco consumption." the obj ectives of the Member States of th e Commun iry is to Mile: CAP.Ui.S tb, 3,-kmg Ep.L- kp~.fcb, ;hU HAkk promote competition, not to restrict it." ft-ibE.?,n C~ - Smmiig C~W %'Ile: Pzi i ETL7CF - zb, P~.*-& ofbe C~ sm -. ciftndz~ C~irwr Rda- 0 C Uy Ldo.- Dam 197.9 M- C-9 Li- -q--Yw Eel- fr-i- E-pen Trek Ui. Cvni , 9-4 9~,h ON Dole: I)A.vr,71979 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 I I "Depsay DWIbom. Honourable President, I an nor a smoker and I ant convinced that no advertising wh2tsoever could induce me - smoke, the same as I an convinced that an absence of adivertising would not induce anyone to smoke lea ... I consider that while advertising does not serve to increase, or decrease the vice, abolishing it would damage very strong inrerem Freti:6= But it least it would protcct the national producr." Somme. HMU, 6" smim p M Date: JfApif 1962 "If a product is legally available then we should be able to advertise it." Awhac AmMpmook Di"awfPskfitAffAm; Ile A&"=xkg AMC-i- &WAraw Mp*nij Wk Doss: 24 Moy 1991 0 a,% CD C) BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 9 01% :::D CD Ln BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999 The Tobacco Advisory Council (TAC) is the trade association just as smoking has become a more controversial and of companies nurtufacturing tobacco products in the UK emotive issue in recent years, the TAC sees its role in terms Its members - BAT Gallaher, Imperial Tobacco and ofinjecting a sense ofbalance and proportion into the debate Rothmans (M Ltd - are among the counrrv~ most to counter the exaggerated claims and hyperbole on the anti- successful comparties. smoking lobby. One of the TACs main functions is working with the This ensures that those people who have an opir~on on Government on a number ofsmoking related issues. 'nese smoking hive to hand all the relevant information before making include Voluntary Agmement negotiations on tobacco up their minds. advertising and sponsorship, as well as on-going lobbying to ensure the induscry!s views are represented on tobacco For further information please contact: u=tion and European Community legisl2tion. The TAC also plays an important role in informing the Tobacco Advisory Council, media and the general public about tobacco issues that not ordy Glen House, Stag Place affect is member companies but also the 17, million adult London, SWIE SAG smokers in the TjT_ Tel: 071 828 20el Fix: 071630 9638 r)lk%lc(x) Cr% Adnm om=ii CD Toi$.@ Adumising Pv‚lirbrd 1991 BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 19 October 1999