Nicotine marketing is product marketing or use that contains nicotine. Traditionally, the tobacco market is marketing cigarettes, but increasingly marketing other products, such as electric cigarettes. Products are marketed through social media, secret marketing, mass media, and sponsorship (especially sporting events). Spending on nicotine marketing tens of billions per year; in the US alone, spending over US $ 1 million per hour by 2016; in 2003, per capita marketing expenditure was $ 290 per adult smoker, or $ 45 per resident. Nicotine marketing is increasingly regulated; some forms of nicotine advertising are banned in many countries. The World Health Organization recommends a complete ban on tobacco advertising.
Video Nicotine marketing
Effects
The effectiveness of tobacco marketing is widely documented; Tobacco marketing increases consumption. Ads cause new people to become addicted, especially when they're underage. The ads also keep smokers quit. The peak of ads in January, when most people try to stop, although most people smoke in the summer.
The tobbaco industry often claims that advertising is just about "brand preference", encouraging existing smokers to switch to and maintain their brand. However, there is substantial evidence that ads cause people to be, and remain, addicted.
Marketing is also used to challenge nicotine marketing regulations and other tobacco control measures, either directly or indirectly, for example by enhancing the nicotine industry's image and reducing criticism from youth and community groups. The charity and sports sponsorship industry is publicized (with publicity costs up to ten times the cost of actions published), describing the industry as actively sharing the values ​​of the target audience. Marketing is also used to normalize industry ("Just Another Fortune 500 Company", "More Than Tobacco Companies"). Finally, marketing is used to give the impression that the nicotine company is responsible, "Open and Honest". This is done through an emphasis on choice of "anti-teens-smoking" information and campaigns, although the ads have been criticized as counterproductive (causing more smoking) by independent groups.
Magazines, but not newspapers, who earn income from nicotine ads tend to drive less critical stories about nicotine products. Internal documents also show that industry uses its influence with the media to form news coverage, such as the decision not to mandate health warnings on cigarette packets or debate on ad restrictions.
Counter-marketing is also used, mostly by community and government health groups. The addiction and health effects of tobacco use are generally described, as this is the missing theme of pro-tobacco marketing.
Technique of regulation and avoidance
Because it endangers public health, nicotine marketing is increasingly regulated.
Advertising limits typically divert marketing expenses to unrestricted media. Prohibited on television, ads move to print; banned in all conventional media, advertising turns to sponsors; banned as in-store advertising and packaging, ads shifted to undisclosed marketing centers, sponsored online content, viral marketing, and other stealth marketing techniques. Unlike conventional advertising, stealth marketing is not openly linked to the organization behind it. It neutralizes the distrust of tobacco companies, which are widespread among children and young people who provide industries with new addicts.
Another method of avoiding restrictions is to sell less-regulated nicotine products rather than those that make them more regulated. For example, while cigarette TV ads are banned in the United States, similar electronic cigarette TV ads are not.
The most effective media is usually banned first, which means advertisers have to spend more money to create addicts with the same number of people. Comprehensive prohibition can make it impossible to effectively replace other forms of advertising, leading to a decrease in actual consumption. However, skilled use of the allowed media may increase the exposure of advertisements; the exposure of US children to nicotine advertising is increasing by 2018.
Maps Nicotine marketing
Method
Rebellion
Nicotine marketing makes extensive use of reactance, the feeling that someone is being unreasonably controlled. Reactance often motivates rebellion, in behavior or belief, which indicates that control is ineffective, restoring a feeling of freedom.
Ads rarely explicitly tell viewers to use nicotine; this proved unproductive. Instead, they often suggest use as a way to rebel and be free. Mention addiction is avoided.
Reactance can be eliminated by successfully concealing attempts to manipulate or control behavior. Unlike conventional advertising, stealth marketing is not openly linked to the organization behind it. It neutralizes the distrust of tobacco companies, which are widespread among children and young people who provide industries with new addicts. Internet and social media are perfect for stealth and viral marketing, which are also cheap; The nicotine company is now spending tens of millions a year on online marketing. (See Ã, Â Web, below.)
Counter-advertising also shows awareness of reactance; it rarely tells the audience what to do. More generally, he cites statistics about addiction and other health effects. Some anti-smoking ads dramatize the statistics (for example by stacking 1,200 bags in front of New York Philip Morris headquarters, now Altria, to describe the number of people who die every day from smoking); others documenting individual experiences. Providing information generally does not provoke reactance.
Social conformity
Although the product is marketed as individualistic and unconformist, people generally start using it because of peer pressure. Offering cigarettes is one of the biggest risk factors for smoking. Boys with high levels of social conformity are also more likely to start smoking.
Social pressure is deliberately used in marketing, often using stealth marketing techniques to avoid triggering reactance. "Roachers", chosen for good looks, style, charm, and slightly older than the target, were hired to offer product samples. "Hipster" was also recruited secretly from bars and nightclubs to sell cigarettes, and advertisements were placed in alternative media publications with "hip credibility".
Ads also use social isolation threats, implied or explicit (eg "No one likes to give up easily"). Great attention is given to keeping the impression that the brand is popular and growing in popularity, and that people who smoke brands are popular
Marketing seeks to create the desired identity as a user, or user of a particular brand. It aims to associate the use of nicotine with increased social identity (see, for example, the history of tobacco trade in women's and civil rights movements, and the use of Western wealth in developing countries, below). It also seeks to associate the use of nicotine with positive traits such as intelligence, fun, sexiness, socialization, high social status, wealth, health, athleticism, and fun outdoor activities. Many of these associations are quite unreasonable; smoking is generally not considered a smart choice, even by smokers; most smokers feel miserable about smoking, smoking causes impotence, many smokers feel socially suspicious to smoke, and smoking is expensive and unhealthy.
Marketing also uses association with loyalty, which not only retains the brand, but also gives a positive impression not to stop. A successful campaign that plays on loyalty and identity is a "war of the opponents" campaign, in which makeup makeup looks like they have black eyes, with the implications of fighting with smokers from other cigarettes (campaign by a defender of the American Tobacco Company, now owned by British American Tobacco).
Non-addiction and health
References to nicotine addiction are avoided in marketing.
The nicotine industry often markets its products as healthy, safe, and harmless. These marketing messages were initially explicit, but for decades, they became more implicit and indirect. Explicitly claiming something that consumers know as untrue tends to disbelieve and reject messages, so the effectiveness of explicit claims declines as evidence of the dangers of cigarettes becomes more widely known. Explicit claims also have a disadvantage that they remind smokers about the health hazards of the product.
Implicit claims include slogans with health and vitality connotations, such as "Living with pleasure," and images (eg, athletes' pictures, healthy people, healthy children's presence, healthy natural environment, and medical settings).
Nicotine is also advertised as good for "nerves", irritability, and stress. Again, the ad has moved from an explicit claim ("Do not upset you") to an implicit claim ("Slowly Happy"). It is true that nicotine products temporarily relieve nicotine withdrawal symptoms.
To imply that some types of cigarettes are healthier than others, marketing also uses brand descriptors like "light," "light," "natural," "soft," "quiet," "soft" and "smooth". Switch to branded products to show that it's less harmful or addictive ("light," "light," "low tar," "filtered", etc.), In terms of health effects, it does not matter. Menthol cigarettes are also marketed as healthier (implications, using words such as "mild", "natural", "soft", "quiet", "soft", "subtle", and a healthy natural environment image). There is no evidence that menthol cigarettes are healthier, but there is evidence that they are somewhat easier to become addicted and more difficult to quit. Ventilated cigarettes (marketed as "light" etc.) Feel colder, airier, and less coarse, and cigarette machines will provide lower tar and nicotine readings for them. But they do not really reduce human intake or health risks, because humans respond to low resistance to breathe through them by taking larger puffs. They are also designed to be equally addicted, because manufacturers do not want to lose customers.
E-cigarettes are also marketed as a smart alternative to quitting because they do not want to smoke, and make health claims. There is a concern that this is a marketing strategy to delay and prevent quits, by giving users a reason to keep using nicotine.
Some of the often implicit marketing claims made online and by some sales representatives in vape shops are that
- e-cigarettes are harmless, or even beneficial, to users, compared to not smoking
- electronic cigarettes are harmless to others who breathe the same air
- e-cigarettes help smokers quit (weak evidence); they are only, or mostly, used by smokers
The evidence for this claim is weak to negative. Non-smokers are more likely to start vaping if they think that electric cigarettes are not very dangerous or addictive; beliefs about danger and addiction do not affect the probability that smokers will start vaping.
Target
Smokers are not willing: customer retention
Most smokers want to stop and can not. On average, smokers start as teenagers and make more than 30 businesses quit, at a rate of about 1 per year, before breaking nicotine addiction at age 40 or 50 years. Most say they feel addicted, and feel annoyed and disgusted at their inability to quit (in the survey, 71-91% regret has started, more than 80% intend to quit, about 15% plan to quit within the next month). The industry calls this group "concerned smokers" and strives to keep them as customers. Techniques to lower their stop rates include preventing them from wanting to quit and offering them a meaningless product selection that helps them feel in control of their habits. For example, minimizing risk, and encouraging them to proudly smoke as identity, reduces the desire to quit. Suggest that they can reduce their risk by choosing to switch to other products (branded to suggest that it is less dangerous or addictive) can reduce their cognitive dissonance and a sense of lack of control, without offering improved health.
Youth: new customer
Smokers usually start young, often as teenagers. As a result, many cigarette advertisements are meant to target youth, and describe young people smoking and using tobacco as a form of fun and pleasure.
Prior to 2009, many tobacco companies made tobacco packaging with a taste packed often in colorful candies such as wrappers to attract new users, many of whom were younger audiences. However, these scented cigarettes were banned on 22 September 2009 by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Despite this initiative, cigarette flavors are still on the rise as tobacco companies change their products slightly so they are filtered or thin cigarettes, which is not prohibited by law.
The intended audiences of tobacco advertising have changed throughout the year, with some brands specifically targeted to specific demographics. According to Reynolds American Inc., Joe Camel's campaign in the United States was made to advertise the Camel brand to young adult smokers. Plaintiffs and classroom action politicians portray Joe Camel's image as a "cartoon" intended to advertise products to people under the age of valid smoking. Under pressure from various anti-smoking groups, the Federal Trade Commission, and the US Congress, Camel ended the campaign on July 10, 1997.
Vending machines, self-selling single cigarettes, and product displays near the school, alongside sweets and sugary drinks, and at eye level all young people are used worldwide to sell nicotine-containing products. Even large brands are often advertised in ways that violate local regulations. In many countries, such marketing methods are not illegal. Where they are illegal, enforcement is often a problem. For example, Dr. Suresh Kumar Arora, chief control officer in New Delhi, said: "We are wasting our time completing cigarette vendors and distributors They do not know about the law Most illiterate Our team will knock out posters and no time, they will rise again because the perpetrator is actually a big tobacco company - ITC, Philip Morris, Godfrey Phillip.I told them to stop giving posters to their dealers otherwise I will drag them through the courts Since last May, Delhi has been free of tobacco poster, 100% free ". However, he can not keep cell phone vendors from selling illegal cigarettes in addition to school.
Reducing "Harm reduction" ads
Some tobacco companies have sponsored ads that claim to prevent teenagers from smoking. Such ads are not set. However, these ads have been shown, in independent studies, to increase the likelihood that self-reported teenagers will start smoking. They also cause adults to see tobacco companies more responsible and less in need of regulation. Unlike promotional advertising, tobacco companies do not track the effects of the ads themselves. These ads are different from independently produced antismoking ads because they do not mention the health effects of smoking, and smoking is now just an "adult choice", not desirable "if you're a teenager." There is more exposure to industry-sponsored "antismoking" ads than antisocing ads run by public health agencies.
Tobacco companies have also funded "anti-smoking" groups. The organization, funded by Lorillard, enters into an exclusive sponsorship agreement with sports organizations. This means that no other anti-smoking campaigns are allowed to engage with sports organizations. Such sponsors have been criticized by health groups.
Poor and marginalized communities
The tobacco industry focuses their marketing on vulnerable groups, which contribute to the big difference in smoking and health problems. Marketing includes targeted ads, targeted donations, group recruits, and other forms of engagement.
When marketing cigarettes to developing countries, tobacco companies attribute their products to a prosperous Western lifestyle. However, in developed countries, smoking almost disappears among the rich. The smoking rate among the poor Americans is much higher than among the rich, with rates more than 40% for those with a high school equivalency diploma. These differences have been linked to a lack of selective health care and marketing to socio-economic, racial, and sexual minorities. The tobacco industry is targeting young rural men by creating ads with images of cowboys, hunters and race car racers. Adolescents in rural areas tend not to be exposed to anti-tobacco messages in the media. Low-income neighborhoods and the majority of minorities often have more tobacco retailers and more tobacco advertising than other environments.
According to the report on the Use of CDC Tobacco Products among Adults 2015, Indian/Alaskan Americans, non-Hispanic, less educated (education 0-12 years old, no diploma, or Public Development Education), low-income (annual household ) revenue & lt; $ 35,000), Lesbian, gay, or bisexual, who are not insured, and those who are under serious psychological pressure have the highest percentage reported from any use of tobacco products. The tobacco industry has been targeting marginalized groups for years, including African Americans, sexual minorities, and even homeless and mentally ill people.
About 40% of cigarettes sold in the US are smoked by people with mental health problems. Smoking rates in the US military are also high, and more than a third begin smoking after entering the military; spread is also a risk factor. People with disabilities tend to smoke; smoking causes disability, but disability stress may also cause smoking
Tobacco companies support civil rights organizations, and advertise their support on a large scale. They also hire key figures in the civil rights movement. Industrial motives, according to their public statements, to support civil rights; according to independent reviews of internal tobacco industry documents, they "to increase the use of African-American tobacco, to use African Americans as a front-line force to defend industrial policy positions, and to mitigate tobacco control efforts". Industry defenses are advanced with the help of vulnerable groups including our "elitist and racist criticism". Some organizations now reject nicotine funding as a matter of policy.
In 1995, the SCUM Project, which targets sexual and racial minorities and homeless people in San Francisco, is planned by R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (a subsidiary of British American Tobacco).
Tobacco companies are often progressive in their hiring policies, employing women and blacks when this is controversial. They also donate some of their profits to organizations that help people in need.
History
Nicotine marketing continues to develop new techniques in response to historical circumstances, social and technological change, and regulation. Avoidance has also changed, both in messages and decency, for decades, often in response to pro nicotine marketing.
Pre-1800
Coughing, throat irritation, and shortness of breath caused by smoking are obvious, and tobacco is criticized for being unhealthy long before the discovery of clinical studies. In 1604 A Counterblaste to Tobacco, James VI of Scotland and I of England described smoking as "A cothome lothsome to the eye, hateful to the Nose, harmefull to braine, dangerous to Lungs, and to the foul-smelling black smell, most unlike the terrible Stigian smoke of unfounded holes, "and urged its people not to use tobacco. In the 1600s, many countries forbade its use. Pope Urban VIII issued a papal ox 1624 condemning tobacco and making its use in sacred places punishable by excommunication; Pope Benedict XIII lifted the ban a hundred years later.
1800-1880
The first known nicotine advertisement in the United States was for tobacco and tobacco products and was placed in the New York daily newspaper in 1789. At that time, the American tobacco market was local. Consumers will generally ask for quality tobacco, not a brand name, until after the 1840s.
Many European tobacco restrictions were lifted during the 1848 Revolution.
Cigarettes were first made in Seville, from bits of cigarette. British troops took the habit during the Crimean War (1853-1856). The American Civil War of the early 1860s also led to increased demand for tobacco from American troops, and in areas not growing tobacco.
Public health measures on chewing tobacco (spitting, especially apart from spitoon, spreading diseases like flu and tuberculosis) increase cigarette consumption.
After the development of color lithography in the late 1870s, the collectible image series was printed onto a cigarette card, previously used only to solidify the packaging.
In 1913, cigarette brands were nationally advertised for the first time in the US. RJ Reynolds advertises it is lighter than a competitor's cigarette.
Mass production and simplicity, 1880-1914
Pre-rolled cigarettes, like cigars, were initially expensive, since a skilled cigarette roller could only produce about four cigarettes per minute on an average cigarette-making machine developed in the 1880s, replacing a hand roll. One starting machine can roll 120,000 stems in 10 hours, or 200 minutes. Mass production revolutionized the tobacco industry. Cigarette companies began to take into account the production of millions of cigarettes per day.
Higher production and cheaper cigarettes give companies an incentive to increase consumption. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, magazines contained advertisements of various brands of cigarettes, tobacco, and pipe tobacco. Demand for cigarettes increased exponentially, ~ doubling every five years in Canada and the US (until demand began to increase more rapidly, ~ threefold during the four years of World War I).
The anti-tobacco movement
In the late 1800s, the movement of simplicity was deeply involved in anti-tobacco campaigns, and in particular with the prevention of youths smoking. They argue that smoking is addictive, unhealthy, the growth of children is inhibited, and, in women, is dangerous during pregnancy.
In 1890, 26 American states had banned sales to minors. Over the next decade, further restrictions are set, including a ban on sales; these measures are widely avoided, for example by selling expensive lighters and distributing cigarettes to them, so there is a further ban on giving a free sample of cigarettes.
After women won a vote in the early 1900s, groups of simplicity managed to campaign for the Adult Smoking Act across Australia. At the moment, most adults there smoke pipe, and cigarettes are only used by teenagers.
1914-1950
World War I
Free or subsidized branded cigarettes were distributed to troops during World War I. Cigarette demand in North America, which has doubled every five years, began to rise more rapidly, threefold during the four-year war.
In the face of an imminent death, the dangers of cigarette health are becoming less of a concern, and there is public support for pushing cigarettes to the forefront. Billions of cigarettes are distributed to soldiers in Europe by national governments, YMCA, Salvation Army, and Red Cross. Private people also donate money to deliver cigarettes forward, even from jurisdictions where cigarette sales are illegal. Not giving cigarettes to soldiers is considered unpatriotic.
Interwar
By the time the war is over, a generation has grown, and most adults smoke, making anti-smoking campaigns much more difficult. Returning soldiers continue to smoke, making smoking more socially acceptable. The Temperance group began to concentrate their efforts on alcohol. In 1927, the American states had revoked all of their anti-smoking laws, except those who were under age.
Modern advertising was created with the innovative techniques used in tobacco advertising beginning in the 1920s.
Advertising in the interwar period mainly consists of full pages, color magazines and newspaper ads. Many companies create slogans for their brands and use celebrity endorsements from famous men and women. Some ads contain fictitious doctors who convince customers that their particular brand is good for health.
Smoking is also widely seen in movies, probably due to paid product placement. (See Ã,§ Movies, below.)
In 1924, menthol cigarettes were discovered, but were initially unpopular, remaining at a few percent market share until marketing in the fifties.
In the 1920s, tobacco companies continued to target women, aiming to increase the number of smokers. Initially, given the threat of smoking ban from unions, marketing was subtle; indirectly and deniably suggest that women smoke. Testimonials from smoking female celebrities are used. Ads are designed to "prey on women's insecurities about weight and diet", encouraging smoking as a healthy alternative to eating sweets.
Campaigns use traditional associations that smoke is not feasible for women to benefit. They marketed cigarettes as "Freedom Torches", and made drug dependence-inducing a symbol of women's independence. The rate of lung cancer in women increases sharply.
In 1929 Edward Bernays, commissioned by the American Tobacco Company to get more women smoking, decided to employ women to smoke "torch freedom" as they walked the Easter Sunday Parade in New York. He was very careful when choosing women to line up because "while they should be handsome, they should not look too model-y" and he hired his own photographer to make sure that good photographs were taken and then published around the world.
In 1929, Sturmabteilung, the paramilitary wing of the Nazi Party, founded a tobacco company as a way to raise funds and make itself less financially dependent on party leadership. SA members are expected to smoke only the SA brand. There is evidence that coercion is used to promote the sale of these cigarettes. Through this scheme, typical SA units receive hundreds of Reichsmarks each month. The brand also promotes political ideas, with a set of cigarette cards showing the army's uniforms.
Medical issues
The skyrocketing rate of European lung cancer attracted the attention of doctors in their twenties and thirties. Lung cancer has become a very rare disease. Before 1900, there were only 140 cases documented worldwide. Then, suddenly, lung cancer is the leading cause of death in many countries (status retained to date).
Initially, suspicion occurred on causes including asphalt roads, car discharges, the 1918 flu pandemic, racial mixing, and the use of chemical weapons in World War I. However, in 1929, a statistical analysis linking lung cancer with smoking was published by Fritz Lickint from Dresden. He conducted a retrospective cohort study that showed that those with lung cancer, disproportionately, smokers. He also found that men suffer from lung cancer at several times the level of women, and that, in countries where more women smoke, the difference is much smaller. In 1932, a study in Poland came to the same conclusion, suggesting that the geographical and sex patterns of lung cancer deaths of Poland fit with smoking, but no other suggested causes, such as industry or cars (rare in Poland at the time).
The medical community was criticized for its slow response to these findings. A 1932 paper links the slow response to smoking common among doctors, as well as the general population. Some activists of simplicity continue to attack tobacco because it is expensive, addictive, and leads to petty theft. In their thirties, they also began publicizing medical findings. There is a popular awareness about the dangers of smoking (see the accompanying quotation).
World War II
Despite these findings, free and subsidized branded cigarettes were again distributed to Allied forces during World War II.
Cigarettes are included in the American troop rations, as many cigarette companies deliver cigarettes for free. Cigarette sales hit a high point all the time at the moment, as tobacco companies were not only able to make the soldiers addicted, but special brands also found a new loyal group of customers when soldiers who smoked their cigarettes returned from the war.
The Nazis came to oppose our tobacco with the excuse of "racial hygiene". Well-funded Tobacco Tobacco Research Institute was established. Some of those who worked with him were involved in mass killings and unethical medical experiments, and committed suicide at the end of the war, including Karl Astel, head of the institute. Other institutions and organizations direct anti-smoking campaigns in the general public and doctors. The campaign includes pamphlets, reprints of articles and academic books, and smoking bans in many public places. An industrial-funded counter-organization, Tabacologia medicinalis , closed by Leonardo Conti.
Tobacco companies continue to exploit associations with the Nazis to combat anti-tobacco measures. Modern Germany has some of the worst tobacco control policies in Europe, and more Germans smoke and die from it.
1945-70
In the late 1940s, scientific evidence that tobacco is harmful to health.
However, until the 1970s, most tobacco commercials were legal in the United States and most European countries. In the 1940s and 50s, tobacco was a major radio sponsor; in the 1950s and 60s, they became dominantly involved in television. In the United States, in the 1950s and 1960s, cigarette brands often sponsored television shows - especially Telling the Truth and I Got a Secret . Jingle brands are usually used in radio and television. Large tobacco companies will advertise their brands on popular TV shows like The Flintstones and The Beverly Hillbillies, watched by many children and teenagers. In 1964, after facing a lot of pressure from the public, the Cigarette Ad Code was created by Tobacco companies, which prohibit advertisements aimed at young people.
Ads continue to use celebrities and famous athletes. Popular comedian, Bob Hope, is used to advertise tobacco companies. African-American Ebony magazine often uses athletes to advertise major cigarette brands.
In the 1950s, manufacturers began adding filter tips on cigarettes to remove some of the tar and nicotine when they smoked. Cigarette brands "safer," "less powerful" are also introduced. Light cigarettes became so popular that, in 2004, half of American smokers preferred regular cigarettes to them, according to the Federal Government's National Cancer Institute (NCI), light cigarettes do not benefit smokers.
The racial marketing strategy changed during the fifties, with more attention given to the segmentation of the racial market. The civil rights movement led to the emergence of African-American publications, such as Ebony . It helps tobacco companies to target separate marketing messages based on race. Tobacco companies support civil rights organizations, and advertise their support on a large scale. Industrial motives, according to their public statements, to support civil rights; according to independent reviews of internal tobacco industry documents, they "to increase the use of African-American tobacco, to use African Americans as a front-line force to defend industrial policy positions, and to mitigate tobacco control efforts". There is internal resistance to tobacco sponsorship, and some organizations are now rejecting nicotine funding as a matter of policy.
Racial-specific ads aggravate a small (a few percent) difference in racial differences in the preferences of menthol cigarettes to large (tens of percent). Menthol cigarettes are somewhat more addictive, and it has been argued that the special marketing of races for more addictive products is social injustice.
Although it was illegal at the time, tobacco marketers gave free samples of cigarettes to black children in the US. Similar practice continues in some parts of the world; a 2016 study found more than 12% of South African students had been given free cigarettes by representatives of tobacco companies, to a lesser extent in five other disadvantaged countries. Worldwide, 1 in 10 children have been offered free cigarettes by tobacco company representatives, according to a 200-2007 survey.
In 1954, the tobacco company ran the "A Frank Declaration." The ad was the first in a disinformation campaign, denied reports that smoking can cause lung cancer and have other harmful health effects. This is also called "research in recent years", although strong statistical evidence of a link between smoking and lung cancer was first published 25 years earlier.
Prior to 1964, many tobacco companies advertised their brands claiming that their products had no serious health risks. Some examples will be "Play it safe with Philip Morris" and "More doctors smoke Camels". Such claims are made both to increase the sales of their products and to combat increasing public knowledge about the negative health effects of smoking. An industrial document of 1953 claimed that a survey brand selected by a physician was conducted at a physician entering the conference, and asked (among the many questions of camoflage) what brand they possessed; marketers had previously placed their camel wrap in the doctors' hotel rooms before the doctors arrived, which might bias the result.
In 1964, Smoking and Health: Report of the Advisory Committee for United States General Surgeon was published. It is based on more than 7000 scientific articles linking tobacco use with cancer and other diseases. This report leads to laws that require warning labels on tobacco products and tobacco advertising restrictions. When this comes into effect, tobacco marketing becomes more subtle (for example, Joe Camel's campaign results in increased awareness and smoking absorption among children). However, the restriction did have an effect on adult stopping rates, with its use declining to the point that in 2004, nearly half of all Americans who had smoked had quit smoking.
Post-ad restrictions; 1970 and then
The period after the restriction of nicotine ads brought on is marked by a shrewd circumvention of increasingly stringent regulations. The industry continues to debate medical research: deny, for example, that nicotine is addictive, while deliberately vomiting their cigarettes with additional nicotine to make them more addictive.
Advertising limits typically redirect advertising spending to unrestricted media. Prohibited on television, ads move to print; banned in all conventional media, advertising turns to sponsors; banned as in-store advertising and packaging, ads shifted to undisclosed marketing centers, sponsored online content, viral marketing, and other stealth marketing techniques.
Another method of avoiding restrictions is to sell less-regulated nicotine products rather than those that make them more regulated. For example, while cigarette TV ads are banned in the United States, similar electronic cigarette TV ads are not.
The most effective media is usually banned first, which means advertisers have to spend more money to create addicts with the same number of people. Comprehensive prohibition can make it impossible to effectively replace other forms of advertising, leading to a decrease in actual consumption. However, skilled use of the allowed media may increase the exposure of advertisements; the exposure of US children to nicotine advertising is increasing by 2018.
In the US, sponsorships and sporting events and events became important in the 1970s and 80s, due to a ban on TV and radio advertising. Sponsors benefit from placing their ads on sports events, naming events after themselves, and recruiting political support from sports agents. In the 1980s and 1990s, these sponsors were banned in the US and many other countries. Spending has shifted to advertising and sales point promotion allowances (if legal), direct mail advertising, and Internet advertising. Stealth marketing is also becoming more common, in part to offset the distrust of the tobacco industry.
One large Indian company gives an annual bravery award on its own behalf; some recipients refused or returned them.
Nicotine use is often featured in movies. While academics have long speculated that there is a paid product placement, it is not until an internal industry document is released, so there is strong evidence of such practices. The documents show that in the 1980s and 1990s, cigarettes were re-displayed for sponsor transactions <= six digits (US $). More money is paid to star actors to be shown using nicotine. Although these sponsors are now banned in some countries, it is not clear whether the prohibition is effective, since such agreements are generally not published or investigated.
Smokers in movies are generally healthier, more successful, and have more racial rights than actual smokers. Health effects, including cough and addiction, are shown or mentioned in only a few percent of cases, and are unlikely to be mentioned in movies targeted at younger audiences.
In the nineties, internet access expanded in many countries; the web is the main medium for nicotine advertising.
Both Google and Microsoft have policies that prohibit the promotion of tobacco products on their advertising networks. However, some tobacco retailers can avoid this policy by creating landing pages that promote tobacco accessories like cigars and cigar lighters. On Facebook, content that is not paid, created and sponsored by tobacco companies, is widely used to advertise nicotine-containing products, with product photos, "buy now" buttons and lack of age restrictions that conflict with ineffective Facebook policies enacted.
In 1998, the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement was reached between the four largest tobacco companies of the United States (Philip Morris Inc., R. J. Reynolds, Brown & Williamson and Lorillard.
In 2011, the US Food and Drug Administration wrote a major review of menthol cigarettes, which were somewhat more addictive but not healthier, then proposed that they should be banned, partly on the grounds that racially-specific marketing for more addictive products is racist. Tavernise, Sabrina (2016-09-13). "Black Health Expert Renewing Against Menthol Cigarettes". The New York Times . Retrieved 2018-05-24 .
E-cigarette
Advertising of tobacco products on TV and radio is prohibited in many countries, but, in some jurisdictions, the same restrictions do not apply to e-cigarette advertisements. Cigarette and radio cigarette advertisements in some countries may indirectly advertise traditional cigarette smokers, as there is evidence to suggest that "seeing electric cigarette advertisements can trigger thinking about smoking and signaling for smoking". The 2014 review said, "Electric cigarette companies have grown rapidly using aggressive marketing messages similar to those used to promote cigarettes in the 1950s and 1960s." In the US, six major e-cigarette businesses spend $ 59.3 million to promote e-cigarettes by 2013.
E-cigarettes are marketed as a complement or alternative that is cheaper, more fun, and more convenient for smoking. E-cigarettes are harmless, or even profitable, for the user is a marketing claim. Unsupported safety claims and unsubstantiated smoking are general marketing claims intended for smokers.
E-cigarettes and nicotine are regularly promoted as safe and useful in the media and on brand websites. It is marketed that electric cigarettes only emit "water vapor". E-cigarette steam contains potentially harmful chemicals such as nicotine, carbonyl, heavy metals, and volatile organic compounds, in addition to particulates.
There is no evidence that cigarette brands sell electric cigarettes as part of a plan to stop traditional cigarettes.
E-cigarettes are highly promoted, mostly over the internet, as a healthy alternative to smoking in the US. Easier age verification on company websites allows users to access and be exposed to marketing for electric cigarettes. E-cigarettes are marketed to young people using cartoon characters and candy flavors. E-cigarettes are also widely marketed in social media, where age restrictions are often not applied.
Many aspects of electronic cigarette advertising are familiar; such as advertisements from the 1800s and 1900s, they show people who do not represent healthy, well-dressed, and unrepresentative people. They may describe users as more popular and social (the ads depicted here really confirm that breaking nicotine addiction will cause you to be disliked). They tend to imply that users of their products behave maturely, make free choices, rebel against coercive authority, and express their identity as part of their group, their individuality and their independence.
Celebrity endorsements are also used to encourage the use of electric cigarettes. A US national television ad campaign starring Steven Dorff blew the "thick smoke" of what the ad described as "steam, not tobacco smoke," advising smokers with the message "We're all adults here, it's time to take our freedom back. " The ads, in the context of banning long-time cigarette advertisements on TV, were criticized by organizations such as the Tobacco-Free Campaign for Tobacco Kids as a debilitating anti-tobacco effort. Cynthia Hallett of America for Non-Smokers' Rights describes a US advertising campaign as an attempt to "reassert the norm that smoking is okay, that smoking is glamorous and acceptable". University of Pennsylvania University of Communication professor Joseph Cappella stated that the near-ocean advertising arrangement is intended to show a clean air connection with nicotine products.
By 2016, electric cigarette companies are struggling not to have the health and safety of their products being evaluated by the US Food and Drug Administration, on the grounds that all existing products must be mastered.
Economy
Since tobacco companies continue to spend money on marketing until it ceases to be profitable, marginal changes in marketing usually have no measurable effect, but the total amount of marketing has a strong effect.
Econometric studies have been conducted into endogenities and other aspects of the ban.
Budget
Tobacco companies have huge budgets for their advertising campaigns. The Federal Trade Commission claims that cigarette producers spent $ 8.24 billion on advertising and promotion in 1999, the highest number ever at the time. The FTC later claimed that in 2005, tobacco companies spent $ 13.11 billion on advertising and promotion, down from $ 15.12 billion in 2003, but almost double what was spent in 1998. Increases, despite restrictions on advertising in most countries, is an exciting endeavor for younger audiences, including multi-purchase offers and gifts such as hats and lighters, along with more traditional magazine stores and advertisements.
ACNielsen marketing consultant announced that, during the period September 2001 to August 2002, tobacco companies advertising in the UK spent £ 25 million, excluding sponsors and indirect advertising, were detailed as follows:
- Ã, Â £ 11 million for press ads
- Ã, Â £ 13.2 million on billboards
- Ã, Â £ 714,550 on radio ads
- Ã, Â £ 106,253 on direct mail ads
Figures from around that time also estimate that the company spends Ã, Â £ 8m per year sponsoring sporting events and teams (excluding Formula One) and further Ã, Â £ 70m in Formula One in the UK.
Ã, Â £ 25 million spent in the UK amounted to about US $ 0.60 per person in 2002. 15.12 billion spent in the United States in 2003 amounted to over $ 45 for every person in the United States, over $ 36 million per day, and more than $ 290 for every US adult smoker.
Gallery
See also
- Plain tobacco packaging
- Packages of cigarettes in Australia
- Tobacco and African American Marketing
- Tobacco packing warning messages
- Freedom Torch
- Smoking ban
- WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
- Philip Morris v. Uruguay
- Circuit in Spa-Francorchamps
- Jeff Wigand - former executive and whistleblower of tobacco companies
- Advertise to children
- Use of tobacco in sports
References
- References
External links
- Example of Tobacco Advertising
- Laws and laws
- Anti-smoking organization
- Miscellaneous
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments