7. ADVERTISING UNDER THREAT INTRODUCTION The anti -advertising arguments have been repeated so frequently, and with such conviction, over the past decade, that large numbers of civil servants, politicians, and other influential people, appear to have been convinced. T~e oDDosinq arguments, based on market realities, are heard less, and often in the form of defensive statements, rather than of positive assertions. It is very clear to me that at the very least, the tobacco industry has to marshall its defences, but, more importantly, that there is a major educational job to do, and that the most obvious and glaring need is to educate decision-makers and the general public in the area of children and young people(the "Achilles' heel" of the industry), as to how advertising affects them, and how it does not. First of all, I would like to comment on some of the kev directions in which the advertising debate is going, which will help set a context for looking at some actual research findings, and then I want to look at how research f indings can be most effectively applied in the marketplace where it counts, amongst decision makers, legislators and the like, and also among the general public. New Focus on Children When one looks at public issues such as tobacco advertising, it is very striking how anti-advertising and anti-smoking groups push children and young people into the forefront of the controversy. This is a trend which is growing in worldwide proportions,. since groups averse to advertising of tobacco are gaining very considerable currency out of putting children up front. The reasons for this are that children. are seen as one of the most vulnerable groups' in society, and society rushes to protect its vulnerable members when they are seen to be threatened. Tobacco advertising has been positioned as a threat. BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 -2- But 4 s tobacco advertising really a threat to society? At best, when the highly-charged subject of children is introduced, and in the absence of empirical evidence to the Contraray, tobacco advertising is seen, by consumerists, as an apparent threat to society. Now, this is the key to it. Advertising attracts attention and derives its importance mainly from its visibility in the marketplace, and consequently its alleged effects. We know, however, that, although consumerists can attract attention to advertising using its visibility to claim adverse effects, the general public of consumers is not very concerned about advertising at all - it is not a matter of high priority to them. Neither is it of economic consequence in worldwide terms. We know that world advertising expenditures on a per capita basis, and as a pe=centage of GNP are small. If one ooks at the numbers employed in the industry, this can also give a lead as to the importance of advertising. Worldwide estimates run to only U$J, 1/4 million, whereas General Motors in 1984 employed some 746,000 peoples, Philips some 343,000, and Unilever some 267,000. So, advertising represents onl y a small proportion of total industry people worldwide. It is important to the tobacco industry and others, as well as being the major source of revenue for the mass media, but overall, it is of comparatively modest economic significance. So, the considerable amount of attention focussed on advertising at the present time has little to do with its economic impact. However, it has everything to do with ignorance-, and/or a lack of knowledge of how children and young people today cope with advertising. Whv is this so in 1987? The principal reason is that children's research into this area is still a relatively young discipline. Markets worldwide are under-researched, and, as a result, they are under-documented. CRU was the first company to set up in the UK - that was only 14 years ago, and we are the only company genuinely specialising and working internationally on a regular basis on issues relating to children. CN BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 Now, the tobacco industry has a thorough view of how its advertising affects the adult market of consumers and non- consumers, but for obvious reasons of political sensitivities, it is far from being well-informed as to how its advertising affects or does not affect children and young people. The industry is not alone here; other industries, other advertisers, governments, and the great general public, have only the sketchiest understanding as to how advertising affects children, as have the critics. (cf. JWT letter). So, a fundamental lack of knowledge has led to an increased demand for empirical evidence, particularly where issues involving advertising are concerned. Such demands are coming from governments, legislators, the media, and concerned citizens. Now, the main threat to the tobacco advertising case is that, unles the indust--y takes up the gauntlet of providing accurate empirical evidence to siience its critics, then others with vested interests in banning advertising will attempt to 11prove", in the case of children and young people, that advertising is harmful. Invariably, this kind of "research" is not undertaken by experts, but by people who are not qualified to tackle the demanding area of children's research. The main threat to the tobacco advertising case is that, in the absence of credible empirical evidence, incredible "evidence" can find its way into the hands of policy makers, to the eventual detriment of the advertising case. Clearly, politicians and decision-makers, the media, and the general public are not in a strong position to judge the methodological adequacy of research studies involving children and young people - they tend to look only at top-line findings. For them, any research is an improvement on no research, or mere opinion. So, countries which have not examined advertising effects on children in the way in which we have, and continue to do, are at continual risk. ON CD BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 -4- CRU's Findings It is quite clear to me as a researcher specialis-ing with children, that the case against tobacco advertising where children are concerned is largely hypothetical in nature. There is a clear lack of acceptable empirical evidence, so therefore it remains controversial. Summary of the "evidence" It is a feature of this market that the vast,majority of "studies" into juvenile smoking prevalence and - the effects of advertising are unacceptable by virtue of their methodology, rationale and conclusions. There has been insufficient research conducted to redress the balance of a 2letDh gr 4,of inept studies (and we are setting out on a trai~-blazing route to redres's the balance). Furthermore, times and circumstances have changed. I don't think that there is any more room left for the argument which says that the burden of pr;of lies with those who make the criticisms, where the effects of advertising are concerned. The stakes are too high to adopt a laid back, passive position; doing that will simply open the door to inaccurate information being fed to legislators. This will also serve to fuel the prejudices of those who are ignorant of how advertising works, and where it does not work, in relation to children and young people. The Voice of Consumerism We must not lose sight of the fact that consumerist groups are a vocal minority, acting on behalf of consumers, with no madate. The 4A's (USA) believe that consumerists do not really represent the consumer, but are an elitist group who formed their origins at their own initiative. Their general attitude is that the consumer is not well-informed, and is manipulated by advertiser and marketer. They feel that they know better than the consumer what is best for the consum er. Interestingly;,those who know most about advertising practices tend to be r tively modest in their assessment of the power of advertising - they feel that consumers are able to make up their own minds independently, with or without advertising, and that consumers choose to use advertising or not to use it, as they see fit - that advertising cannot manipulate consumers against their will. BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 The evidence does not suggest that consumers are manipulated by advertising, but that they are sophisticated eno'ugh to make w at they consider to be reasonably good choices, without further protections being called for; 'i.e.. consumer dissatisfaction does not match consumerist dissatisfaction with the system. (cf. "Guardian article) Without consumer support, consumerists remain only in a potential position to bring about changes in advertising practice. Consumerists do not have a mandate from consumers, who are ony marginally interested in advertising as such, their priorities focussing on more important issues such as earning a living, their families, etc. Since the leaders of consumer movements have no mandate from large numbers of consumers, they often have modest financial and human resources, although this does not mean to say that they can be ignored. CRU's results represent consumer sense to the layman. They confirm what is being felt intuitively. If the layman's voice can be raised, this serves to isolate the consumerist, and to render his position less credible. Advertising sells cigarettes, critics claim. Cigarettes kill. Therefore, the advertising of cigarettes is, quite literally, killing people, and must be stopped. in addition to the fairly straightforward accusation of laying millions of premature deaths each year at the door of advertising, helAth educators and doctors are increasingly criticising advertisers for moulding the entire lifestyle of the consumer. Such views are no longer held only by the lunatic fringe. Senior and highly-respected health educators, doctors and others frequently make statements which the average brand manager or agency account planner must regard with total amazement; for example, "Advertising is one way in which the choices we make are influenced, so that the concept of free choice is violated". one of the problems faced by the advertising business in rejecting such claims is that the claims are not in any way based on evidence, or on research of any kind. They are simply opinions, and furthermore, the opinions, in the vast majority of cases, of neople with absolutelv no exDerience -of knowledae of the advertising business. BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 -6- Critics of advertising apparently believe that "sales" must follow advertising as surely as night follows day. Yet even the humblest marketing manager knows that the sales of an individual product can continue in steep decline, despite the expenditure of millions of pounds in advertising time and space. Advertising can, if a hundred different conditions are right, bring a product to the notice of consumers; they may, even so, decide to buy a rival product. Virtually every piece of research done on the impact of all tobacco advertising on tobacco sales in a variety of countries suggests that there is no impact at the total market level. In the unlikely event that all this research is flawed, we must also accept that all food advertising and all car advertising, and all other kinds of advertising also increase the sales of the relevant product category. If this is so, advertising must have a substantial impact an total Gross National Product; yet this has never been shown to he so, and if indeed was true, would lead to the faintly absurd notion that one easy way for governments to encourage economic growth would be to subsidise advertising expenditure. "If advertising doesn't "sell" alcohol or cigarettes, why do manufacturers do it, then?"bay the ant-4-advertising lobby. There is a confusion between the ability of advertising to sometimes (if the circumstances are right) sell a product (although usually at the expense of a competitor's product) with the inability of advertising to move mountains. It is, however, a congenital disorder amongst the massed ranks of health educators who invest advertising with almost supernatural powers. The feelings towards advertising of, this extremely tiny section of society (real people are shown time and time again to be quite content with advertising in the UK) do in fact lead them into~;~ ludicrously gross distortions of the facts. " Anti" groups are remarkably -unmoved by the facts. Consumerists continue to expect others to acceot their o2inions, without evidence. PRESENT "CAMPAIGN" LETTERS How to silence a consumerist. Or, as put by one of our clients in the food business, "game, set and match. " ? At the end of the day, the ASH representative had little choice but to switch the argument to something else, in this case, the "ethics of advertising" (something which we have not researched). a,~1 . CD -6- Critics of advertising apparently believe that "sales" must follow advertising as surely as night follows day. Yet even the humblest marketing manager knows that the sales of an individual product can continue in steep decline, despite the expenditure of millions of pounds in advertising time and space. Advertising can, if a hundred different conditions are right, bring a product to the notice of consumers; they may, even so, decide to buy a rival product. Virtually every piece of research done on the impact of all tobacco advertising on tobacco sales in a variety of countries suggests that there is no impact at the total market level. In the unlikely event that all this research is flawed, we must also accept that all food advertising and all car advertising, and all other kinds of advertising also increase the sales of the relevant product category. if this is so, advertising must have a substantial impact on tota , 1 Gross National Product; yet this has never , been shown to he so, and if indeed was true, would lead to the faintly absurd notion that one easy way for governments to encourage economic growth would be to subsidise advertising expenditure. "if advertising doesn't "sell" alcohol or cigarettes, why do manufacturers do it, then?"bay the ant i -advertising lobby. There is a confusion between the abil4tv of advertising to sometimes (if the circumstances are right) sell a product (althouTh usually at the expense of a competitor's product) with the inability of advertising to move mountains. It is, however, a congenital disorder amongst the massed ranks of health educators who invest advertising with almost supernatural powers. The feelings towards advertising of, this extremely tiny section of society (real people are shown time and time again to be qui e content with advertising in the UK) do in fact lead them into,.C~ ludicrously gross distortions of the facts. , Anti" groups are remarkably -unmoved by the facts. Consumerists continue to expect others to accept their opinions, without evidence. PRESENT "CAMPAIGN" LETTERS How to silence a consumerist. Or, as put by one of our clients in the food business, "game, set and match." At the end of the day, the ASH representative had little choice but to switch the argument to something else, in this case, the "ethics of advertising" (something which we have not researched). CI% .ZD a,,, BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 The Case for Joining the Database To protect your own advertising interests, in'cluding the basic freedom of the right to advertise that which is legally available for sale. To strengthen the accumulating international evidence which shows that advertising is insignificant to market entry, and to total market consumption. Essentially, to bring the database to respectable proportions. To resolve the advertising issue nationally, on a co.untry-by- country basis. To obtain the essential pre-requisite for engaging in the vital process of consumer education , and for informing and educating 7 . decision-makers, and the mass media, as to how advertising is irrelevant to the children's issue. The timincr is richt, since a unique opportunity is presented. Given that the database has been started, that there are potentialy 8 countries involved to date, any further countries can only strengthen what has gone before. The authority of a worldwide study is hard to refute, and, with the exception of the ASH fanatic, there has been no criticism of the study aired at all, after the distribution of 20,000 copies. This is significant; after all, the study is at the very least confirming what we have known for years about children - that they are not influenced by advertising as the critics claim. This study will be the only comprehensive study for years to come, and wil have short and long-term effects which will completely re-define the issues involving the alleged effects of advertising on children. It is, in effect, the flagship of our knowledge of children and advertising, because of its scale and internationalism. Timing is right because CRU is about 10 years ahead of the field, and our work has.the effect of making past studies obsolete. we have to expect that our knowledge in 1987 will be shared in 1997, but at that time, we will be a further 10 years ahead; and we will have had the chance to repeat certain studies providing trend evidence over time. 01% CD BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 -8- The attitudes of young people are not only important now, but will become even more so because they are the consumers of the future. N. B. It is disturbing to see that the youth of some nations harbours many negative opinions as well as positive opinions about advertising; cultural differences are great. -ve +ve Italy Austria Netherlands Greece Spain Sweden (McCann Erickson, 1984) The,Road Ahead - Action Consumer education is crucial. Research shouid be an ' intearal part. of this, not only for youth education, but to educate the educators, so as wide a results distribution as possible is required. N.B. The subject of community education would always be the primary responsibiity of -national covernments. Little can be expected of intergovernmental programmes. Consumer education does not lend itself to international co-ordination and harmon-isation. There-fore, each country must be addressed individually, with tailor-made strategies. AUSTRALIAN CASE STUDY ON C:~ BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999 CONCLUSIONS Ile have clear evidence that advertising is not only irrelevant to juvenile smoking initiation, but that it appears to have no influence on total consumption. The evidence, in hard, empirical, fact form, is growing; to this point we have covered 7 countries. Not only is the evidence accumulating, but we have received encouraging confirmation of our findings from none other than the 'World Health Organisation. The scene is being set, therefore, for a major re-orientation of attitudes and knowledge regarding tobacco advertising and young people. The more the data grows, and is put to use, the more tne tide will change. Australia is no exception. However, it is a two-part process. The research is 'the first step; the action which follows the research - how it is used- is absolutely critical. To sum.mar.se Advertising is not, as is still sometimes claimed, "one of the ways in which the choices we make are influenced so that the concept of free choice is violated". Independent research in a variety of areas, much of it the result of large-scale impartial governmental enquiries in the USA and the UK shows advertising in the role of consumer friend, rather than maninulator, and enemy. The absence of advertising leads to less choice, lower levels of innovation, higher prices, and all the other evils for which producer cartels have become famous down the ages. Advertising bans harm the consumer. Advertising can be useful, but only when doing the sort of task fully, to for which it is suited. Advertising, when used skill. publicise a good new brand, can increase a manufacturer's market share, and hence his profits. And it can do it very quickly. On the other hand, large mature markets do not expand rapidly as a rule, and therefore when one producer gains market share, another almost inevitably loses out. I The evidence available suggests very strongly indeed that the total level of advertising plays no part in determining the total size of markets such as drink and tobacco. It is one of many factors involved in the determination of market shares. Glen Smith, Jan, 1987 Chairman, Children's Research Unit, London. BATCo document for Legal Services : Health Canada 22 October 1999