|
News ’Log |
|
|
Not a true “Blog”, this page is an accumulation of news clippings and postings that may be of interest to anyone following tobacco issues in the news. The difference between this page and news posted elsewhere on this site is the lack of strict organization into local, state and national categories, or of posting stories on their own page. This is a scroll-only page, with newer postings added at the top. Your comments are welcome. |
|
NASCAR
teams smoking less thanks to QUIT Crew Four years ago, you couldn't go 10 feet in the NASCAR garage area without seeing someone smoking a cigarette, fiddling with the pack or searching for a lighter. Now, you can go 10 miles. At least that's the way it seems. Since Winston left as the series sponsor at the end of the 2003 season, it's something you hardly see anymore. Of course, now everyone has a cell phone instead. Part of the reason for this is that Winston no longer brought bales and boxes of cigarettes to the track. The other reason is programs like the QUIT Crew, from official NASCAR sponsor Nicorette. Beginning in 2005, Nicorette came aboard as an official sponsor and developed associate sponsorships with Chip Ganassi Racing with Felix Sabates, Petty Enterprises, Hendrick Motorsports, Richard Childress Racing, Joe Gibbs Racing and more. How ironic is it that a company that would have been shown the gates under Winston sponsorship is now enjoying not only a solid business platform with NASCAR, but is actively helping the community as a whole? "Honestly, when we entered the sport, I don't think we knew at what level we'd be accepted," said Steve Kapur, senior promotion manager for Nicorette. "We have tried to be respectful and there to help when people are ready to quit. We haven't elbowed our way in or pushed our way in. What's happening, and we experience this in the exhibit area every weekend, is that people are approaching us and asking for help. Overall, people are more interested in healthy lifestyles, and these are products that are consistent with what they're looking for." Kapur oversees a program that not only brings answers to hundreds of thousands of fans every year, but has generated quite a following inside the garage area as well. Read the rest of this article at NASCAR.com CLICK HERE» Ad Limits Seen as Way to Curb Youth Smoking and Drinking - From: " GLOBALink" <hq@globalink.org> New York
Times May 22, 2007 Price-cutting and other marketing strategies widely used by the tobacco and alcoholic beverage industries are highly effective in encouraging children and teenagers to smoke and drink, according to two new studies. In one study, researchers showed that point-of-sale advertising and other marketing significantly increase the likelihood that junior and senior high school students will try smoking or become habitual smokers. Another has found that exposure to alcohol advertising among sixth graders strongly predicts alcohol use a year later. That advertising liquor and tobacco increases their sales may not be a revelation. But both studies suggested that fairly simple public policy changes might significantly reduce underage smoking and drinking. In the first study, published in the May issue of The Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, researchers used a nationwide survey of more than 26,000 students in 8th, 10th and 12th grades from 1999 to 2003. The study period immediately followed the landmark 1998 settlement in which the tobacco companies agreed to pay the states billions of dollars to resolve smoking-related health claims and to restrict advertising and promotion directed at young people. The scientists found that point-of-sale advertising is associated with getting children to try smoking, but has little effect in encouraging habitual tobacco use. However, cigarette promotions, especially those that involve price reductions, may tempt teenagers who have already experimented with tobacco to become regular smokers. Bill Phelps, a spokesman for Philip Morris USA, said the company carefully regulated in-store promotions to make sure they were aimed at adults. “We have a contract with retailers that governs how our products are displayed at retail and assures that they are merchandised in a responsible way,” Mr. Phelps said. “Retailers who participate have to sell their cigarettes in a non-self-service manner. They must also train their store personnel to card customers. Retailers must also display youth smoking prevention materials that we provide.” The study’s authors estimated that if stores had no advertising, there would be a decrease of 11 percent in children who try smoking. If promotions were eliminated, there would be a decrease of 13 percent in the number who become habitual smokers. The researchers concluded that the industry’s emphasis on marketing was offsetting the benefits of the restrictions imposed by the 1998 agreement. They also said their findings provided evidence that price increases and restrictions on price-based promotions would aid public health. “Increases in cigarette taxes are effective,” said Frank J. Chaloupka, an economics professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and one of the study’s authors. “And we have other research that shows that strong smoke-free policies are helpful in changing social norms and keeping kids from smoking.” A second study, published online April 13 in The Journal of Adolescent Health, suggested alcohol advertising was also effective among teenagers. Scientists surveyed 1,786 sixth graders in South Dakota, measuring their exposure to alcohol marketing. After controlling for sex, race, parental education, school grades and more than a dozen other variables, the researchers found that exposure to advertising in sixth grade strongly predicted drinking in seventh grade. The most consistent predictor of drinking was ownership of a hat, poster, or T-shirt that advertised alcohol, they said, and the one-fifth of sixth graders who owned such items were almost twice as likely to take up drinking as those who did not. Jeff Becker, president of the Beer Institute, an industry lobby, criticized the study as “the latest in a long line of studies that try to make advertising the scapegoat for underage adults and adolescents who drink illegally.” He added, “But it adds nothing new to the debate about the most effective way to prevent illegal underage drinking, which is clearly restricting youth access to alcohol, not censoring advertising.” Web Links The Impact of Retail Cigarette Marketing Practices on Youth Smoking
Uptake (The Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine) [NIMI 11-5-07]
http://archpedi.ama-assn.org/...
http://member.globalink.org/...
Early Adolescent Exposure to Alcohol Advertising and its Relationship
to Underage Drinking (Journal of Adolescent Health) http://www.jahonline.org/...
Arts & Entertainment Celluloid cigarettes - From: " GLOBALink" <hq@globalink.org> Christian Science Monitor, May 18, 2007
NEWSFLASH: The Motion Picture Association of America, the Hollywood ratings watchdog, has leaped into the cigarette smoking fray. Just 41 years after the federal government mandated that warnings be put on cigarette packages, the MPAA has taken the courageous step of realizing that smoking may be possibly, somewhat unhealthy. When a movie comes in for a rating and actors light up on screen, the MPAA is taking the draconian measure of ... "taking that into account." Pretty tough language from Hollywood's top Chihuahua. But they went further than that. MPAA chief executive Dan Glickman indicated that "no parent wants their child to take up the habit," a statement he made possibly, or possibly not, after returning from the road to Damascus. What's not known is that the rough-and-tumble self-regulating industry is considering even more changes. I know, hard to believe that there is more to do – after taking smoking into account, one might expect a 10- or 20-year hiatus. But according to sources so moral that they were almost willing to go on the record, here's what may be coming next: Kids' movies that have smoking in them will get a special rating – G+. "The 'plus' warning is a negative," says a source close to the MPAA, "no matter what you might associate with, say, a report card or its use anywhere else." He adds that the tobacco industry generously helped come up with the new label. Although teen films that feature smoking will earn the tougher rating, exceptions can be made if the smokers are not actually children. The issue reportedly arose in the re-remake of "Charlotte's Web," where the script called for Charlotte to light up while contemplating what she is going to write in her web. "First, Charlotte is clearly not a minor," says the almost-on-the-record source. "Second, writers often smoke while thinking. Then, too, Charlotte is a morally ambivalent character: It's not as though the script is calling for a stogie in Wilbur's lips." Profanity ratings are also up for reconsideration. Use of "nappy-headed," for instance, may be considered improper for the under-10 crowd. MPAA is, however, considering a one-time waiver for the upcoming holiday release, "Treasury of Don Imus's Christmas Stories." The "N" word is also facing restriction in children's movies, unless the male lead is a rapper. This will allow a G-rating for Ice Cube's summer release, "Can We Say It Yet?" But fear not family-fare fans: Some things will not change. Nudity and any whiff of sexuality will earn an immediate R, unless being used to sell clothes, music, or products by Britney Spears. Nor will any amount of national obesity affect on-screen close-ups of Doublewhoppers with extra cheese. A children's adaptation of the documentary exposé "Super Size Me" is proceeding as planned. "We've already signed Eddie Murphy," says a disgruntled studio assistant who asked not to be named on the advice of his publicity agent. "Fat is phat." Above all, gunplay, assault weaponry, and murders will not be limited on the big screen in any way. "We can't deny preschoolers their Second Amendment rights," says the source. "Besides, we have to be able to compete with TV." The official did stress that all changes are merely under consideration. "But one thing we can say for sure," he adds. "The [possible partial] ban on smoking in kids' films is proof, once again, that self-regulation truly works!" - Frank Kosa is a documentary filmmaker in Santa Monica, Calif. Hooked smoking ads 'broke rules' - From: " GLOBALink" <hq@globalink.org> BBC News Wednesday, 16 May 2007 Hundreds complained the image was frightening and distressing [Advert image cutline] Government posters and TV adverts showing smokers being pierced through the mouth with a fish hook broke industry rules, a watchdog has ruled. The posters, TV commercials and press adverts, aimed at highlighting the dangers of being "hooked" on cigarettes, provoked 774 complaints. The Advertising Standards Authority said the posters were likely to "frighten and distress children". The Department of Health said the campaign had been "highly effective". The adverts first appeared in the New Year in an attempt to shock smokers into quitting ahead of the bans on public smoking coming into force across the UK. But the five-week campaign sparked hundreds of complaints from people who found the images offensive, frightening and distressing, particularly to children. 'Untargeted and realistic' The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) said the posters showed the faces of addicted smokers who looked "distressed and in pain". It found that although the posters were not displayed near schools, they could still be easily viewed by children. The ASA argued they were "untargeted, and realistically and graphically showed the piercing of the cheek with a hook" and were "likely to frighten and distress children". It also found the TV commercials breached advertising rules by being broadcast when older children could be watching. However, complaints about the adverts on the internet, in magazines and in the press were not upheld by the watchdog. The Department of Health said an anti-smoking helpline and website had been contacted more than 820,000 times during the Get Unhooked campaign. The campaign was developed with health professionals and smokers and had not meant to cause distress, a spokesman said. He added that he believed the adverts had achieved the right balance between raising awareness of the dangers of smoking and its addictive nature, with the need to do so responsibly and in line with industry codes. The campaign generated the highest number of complaints received by the ASA since a KFC advert in June 2005 which featured people singing with their mouths full. That notched up a record 1,671 complaints. Clips of the advert Wednesday May 16, 2007 Mark Sweney MediaGuardian.co.uk Anti-smoking ads: complainants objected to images of people with hooks in their faces used in the poster and TV campaign [Advert image cutline] An anti-smoking TV campaign for the Department of Health that featured a man being dragged to a shop by a fish hook piercing his cheek has been banned by the advertising watchdog. The ad, which aims to highlight how hooked smokers are on feeding their addiction, drew 774 complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority. The series of DoH TV ads, developed by Miles Calcraft Briginshaw Duffy, attracted well in excess of 200 more complaints than the most controversial ad of last year for the Gay Police Association. Follow-up ads showed smokers beating their addiction with a voiceover outlining the range of ways the NHS can help people kick the habit. Most complainants objected that the images of people with hooks in their faces used in the poster and TV campaign were offensive, frightening and distressing - particularly to children. The TV ads were cleared by the Broadcast Advertising Clearance Centre with an ex-kids restriction, meaning they were not allowed to be shown in or around programmes made for or specifically targeted at children. The DoH said the ads were designed to "confront smokers with the controlling nature of their addiction", adding that it did not believe they would cause serious offence. The ASA decided that although the posters contained shocking images they had the worthwhile purpose of discouraging smoking. However, the ASA noted that the ads appeared in places where they could easily be seen by children and breached the advertising code for causing fear and distress to children. Likewise, the ASA ruled that the TV ads were likely to be seen by older children and considered that the BACC's ex-kids restriction was insufficient and that the ads breached the code. Anti-smoking ads on TV were supported by four poster ads, national press and magazine ads, and a range of online advertising. The print ads received far fewer complaints and the internet advertising received only a handful. The poster ads were not placed near schools and the digital advertising was placed on websites children were not likely to visit. The ASA cleared the internet, press and magazine ads because they were carefully targeted and unlikely to be seen by children. Watch the Department of Health ad Note: Click story link below to access the advert video, different from the one offered with the BBC News report. Also: ANTI-CIGS ADVERTS 'SCARING OUR KIDS' - Daily Record http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/... Smoking ads 'frightened children' says watchdog - Morning Advertiser http://www.morningadvertiser.co.uk/... ASA Adjudication: http://www.asa.org.uk/...
|
|
Web master TC Health Department Health Promotion Program Tompkins County Home Page T-Free: Tobacco Free Tompkins is funded by a grant to the Health Promotion Program at the Tompkins County Health Department |
