It symbolized being physically attractive. If you smoked, you could have any girl you want.
Remember Joe Camel? In the late 1980s to the late 1990s, the muscular, smooth-looking camel with sun glasses was portrayed to be laid-back and feeling good about life. The funny thing though, was that more children recognized him more than they could Mickey Mouse and Fred Flintstone.
But now things have completely changed. You don't see many cigarette ads. What you see are anti-smoking ads. We learn so much more today about how smoking is bad for you, than how cool it is to do it.
In addition, smoking bans have become policies in workplaces, restaurants, and other public places. According to a Gallup poll, only about 21 percent of Americans are regular smokers, down from 41 percent in 1944. More Americans are reading the warning labels, and recognizing how bad tobacco is for their bodies.
Smoking just isn't cool anymore.
So my question is: Between the 1970s- 1990s, why wasn't there such a push for anti-smoking ads then as there are now? Are pro-smoking ads today still effective in influencing people to smoke like they used to be?
40 comments:
I think people are only now starting to realize the real danger of smoking and this is why we are seeing an increase in anti-smoking law and advertisements. The statistics you quoted are proof of an underlying truth of the immense influence of advertising on consumer spending. The pro-smoking ads of today are not nearly as effective as they used to be- cause people are now exposed to the other side of the coin, the life-threatening consequences of 1st hand and second hand smoke.
lollerskatez ... "Blow in her face and she'll follow you anywhere"? OK, that just seems ridiculous, but I'm guessing that must have actually appealed to someone, some time ago. The Joe Chemo advert is rather funny too. I don't really see a lot of smoking adverts, except in magazines really. But the anti-smoking adverts are everywhere. I think, while anti-smoking adverts do discourage people from smoking, they still put the idea of smoking into people's heads where it might not have been before. I mean, one in five Americans is still a regular smoker. That's a whole lot of people. I wonder if smoking were banned from advertising altogether - both conventional and anti-smoking adverts - from all media, would even fewer people smoke than do now? I think so.
Who are the ones producing and forking out the money to make the anti-smoking ads? The tabacco companies! The reason they do so now isn't becasue they have had a change of heart, it's becasue Congress makes them do it! There for the reason to why they didn't make them in the 70's, 80's and early 90's is becasue they didn't have to. As for are pro-smoking ads today effective. Honestly I haven't even seen a pro-smoking ad. I think the most effective adversiting is peer pressure from those around you who smoke for social reasons.
The shift came because finally the truth about smoking came to light. The tobacco companies were expert and advertising. They were able to market a deadly, destructive product and make people want to buy it. People didn't know the truth. Look at this video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdPPL5TRU8U
The members of big tobacco lied in front on congress that their product was not addictive. Now that the truth is out people are seeing tobacco for what it really is.
What I find most interesting about this conversation is the fact that there is so much more anti-smoking ads, but the number of people who smoke-especially young adults-is mind blowing in relation to the awareness that's out there. Walk down any street in Manhattan and it will shock you to see so many young people smoking-and I'm not talking low income smokers-I'm talking middle to upper class young adults. There's some disconnect between the anti-smoking messaging and what's really happening. Or is the despair of the future and the stress of today so strong that it causes people to smoke in order to cope
The reason there was a decrease in pro-smoking ads is because they were actually banned from being on TV on January 1, 1971. There are occasionally ads seen in magazines, but for the most part, cigarettes are selling themselves through their current users.
With increasing focus today on being "green" and saving the environment, it is apparent that smoking ads wouldn't have much affect. Especially with the knowledge of the health risks of smoking, it's hard to imagine someone wanting to start smoking just because they saw a "cool" camel doing it.
Cigarettes only have to catch a users attention once, because after that the nicotine keeps them coming back, not the advertising.
wow i like brett's comment. i never knew that it was the tobacco companies that were funding that stuff.
bottom line what is accepted culturally changes, based on medical advances, economic and social trends, whatever. consider also all of the ads now that compare thier own brand to a specific other brand (tylenol v. advil) when it used to be considered dirty to do that to a competitor. they would instead just say. the "other brand"
I remember seeing quite a bit of Anti-smoking ads in the 90s, although I'm not certain about the numbers.
We are seeing fewer and fewer cigarette ads since they are now illegal in most contexts (can't show them on TV, for example).
In the 90s, we got a lot of anti-cigarette ad legislation, mostly limiting their ability to appeal to children and teenagers. Joe Camel was banned for being a cartoon, many Marlbaro bilboards were banned from locations near school buildings.
After limiting the ads, the tobacco companies really just saved the money, and made a killing since they didn't have to advertise as much to keep up with their competitors.
I don't know if that makes them less effective. "Peer pressure" fits in very well with the current advertising ideal of selling a lifestyle that includes the product than selling the product itself.
And if some kids are convincing others to smoke, those ones had to be convinced first. There has to be a source somewhere, right?
I remember seeing an ad (maybe in the text?) that looked like 1950s pop art with a guy saying "Mind if I smoke?" and the girl saying back "Care if I die?" I think the medical advances have greatly changed the way people view the whole smoking situation. What was once idolized in pop culture (i.e. Grease) is now somewhat shunned. There definitely are more anti smoking ads than smoking ads out there now. I agree with Brett. I don't think the smoking companies have had a change of heart...they're just now legally obligated to inform their market of the harmful effects their product has. You'll notice tho, that even though the companies are required to put a Surgeon General's warning on the package, they tend to pick the "least bad" effect possible to exploit. If they didn't have to put a warning on there they wouldn't
Why are there more anti-smoking ads now than in the '70s - '90s? Brett hit it spot on. Tobacco companies are compelled to run these ads by law. They aren't stupid though. Tobacco companies are careful to be just conspicuous enough about the fact that they are behind these ads to help them achieve some degree civil respect.
As for the second question, it's already been pointed out that tobacco ads were banned from television in the early '70s, but [un]lucky for us, tobacco companies have found even more effective ways to peddle their scum. Most notable, perhaps, is product placement, especially in movies and TV shows. One study reported by BBC pointed out that the use of actors to promote cigarette brands increased 10-fold in the '90s. As long as Brad and Angelina keep smoking in their films, smoking won't lose all its coolness. -- Michael Williams
I think people who were adults during the 1970s - 1990s had grown up in a world of smoking. It was cool to smoke back then because glamorous people smoked, and the ads they grew up reading and watching showed them all the "wonderful" that smoking had to offer. But once they reached adulthood, more information was made available to them about the health risks and dangers of smoking and as they became more educated, so did the younger generations.
We are more aware of the full of effects of smoking. The "Truth" advertisements come with catching songs or slogans filled with sarcasm. I think that kind of humor is appreciated among the kids of this generation, thus the desire to smoke has decreased.
like others have said, i think there's more of a push because we're more aware of the affects of smoking. however, i don't think pro-smoking ads are very effective anymore. i think people who start smoking now are usually younger and do it to fit in with their friends, or else they just make a conscious decision to start. i don't think many, or any, people now look at a pro-smoking ad and think "i think i'll pick up smoking today!" well, at least i hope not...
I feel like anti-smoke ads weren't a big deal until recently because our nation has become super health-conscious as of late. Not that being health-conscious means much because we're still pretty unhealthy, but it's all good. Also, I think we just got sick of ads geared towards youth like these ones. I mean, who else but an impressionable kid is going to believe smoking will make you sexy? OK maybe people in hick towns...
Well, back then it was a fad. Just as fads are now, it comes and goes. The reason why it has gone out of style is most likely because of the serious health issue that goes along with the trend. However, I've noticed that health has never stoped a trend in the past. Just look at tanning, that causes cancer too. Maybe in a couple years we will see anti tanning ads all over billboards.
Smoking has become less and less popular the past 40 years because science can now prove with out a doubt that smoking does kill by promoting such diseases as cancer. Before we had no clue what we were doing to our self's. Now when someone picks up a cigarette they know that they are slowing killing themselves. I believe the only reason people start smoking today is to be rebellious. I think tobacco companies now do not advertise on purpose because they give smoking an underground feel. And most all tobacco advertising is meet with strong resistance.
During that time period I think they simply didn't know enough about the dangers of smoking to create ads that warned them. The surgeons general warning was hardly noticed or taken into consideration. Smoking was the cool/social thing to do, but the effects it would have later just weren't known. We now have all these campaigns because we know the effects, we know that smoking kills so why not prevent something. Take your life into your own hands and control the parts of your life and health that you can. Sure there are still the chain smokers out there that say they may not care, which is fine, but when the time comes for consequences they cannot say they "didn't know."
The public has slowly come to realize the dangers of smoking and through time the advertising world has changed from pro smoking to non smoking. The increase in non smoking ads is due to the increased knowledge that has been gained in regard to the danger of smoking. Today is seems like non smoking ads outnumber smoking ads, and pro smoking ads are placed where smokers will see them. I believe that smoking ads are still effective but only to their specific audience. I also think that non smoking ads balance the picture, instead of back in the day when there were only ads promoting smoking.
Going along with what Mitch said, I also agree that America is transforming into a more health conscious nation. (We can see that that at fast food restaurants with healthier options, smaller portions, etc.)
The image of smoking has transformed into something that was once cool, into a disgusting, ugly, habit. I believe advertising has reflected this. Just for fun, google "smoking ad" and the majority of images that appear are in fact anti-smoking ads.
I wonder if advertisers, companies and the government have become more aware of their social responsibility in educating consumers on the dangers of smoking. To me, the increase in social responsibility has not only brought about a greater push for anti-smoking campaigns, but also pro-charity, more anti-drug, pro-exercise, and other types of socially conscious advertising.
I agree with Mitch that recently there has been a big push in America to be more health conscious. Not only has there been a big influx in anti-smoking ads but we also have the push for anti-drug campaigns, organic foods, and being environmentally friendly. I really feel like all of this is connected.
So many good points have been made, so I will sound redundant! Basically the banning of pro-smoking advertisements on TV in the 70's was the first move that had long, far-reaching consequences. The tobacco industries rode their power and influence and did anything possible to buy off politicians, lie under oath, and hide the truth. As more and more cases of cancer were linked back to it, a slow backlash grew. I think the 90's was a time in America where the consumers began to be more protected - The consumer's rights were ignored for too long - fast food companies began to be criticized as obesity rates climbed and anti-smoking, anti-drug campaigns became popular. Remember that anti-drug campaign with the girl frying an egg? It was a general increase in awareness of harmful activities aimed primarily at teens and kids. That ad premiered when I was young, and I still remember it. With more and more counter-messages, it has caused a noticeable decrease in overall smoking. Thus, more people are concerned with their health - which has caused people to be introspective and smarter with their bodies.
I'm not a great historian or anthropologist or whatever the correct term is, but I think that through the '70s to the '90s people may have known that it wasn't good for you, but they just didn't care as much because they weren't seeing the effects of it quite yet.
I also think that advertising has found some more interesting and proven tactics to be more effective and that they're getting more funding in the PSA area.
Because advertisings, film makers, politicians and virually everybody who was anybody in pop culture was in some way or another on the payroll of tobacco companies in the seventies and eighties.
I still think that smoking is being portrayed as "cool" to impressionable teens and weak-minded fools. Many movies still feature scenes where the antagonist does the traditional "lighting up of the cigarette", that's apparently so necessary for characterization. Kids see it and associate it with "cool" or "bad-ass" (pardon my french). Plus smoking's strongest advertising method is still maintains its influence: word of mouth.
Pro-smoking ads are not as effective as they used to be because they now have competition, on the opposing side. So people listen to both sides and have the choice to opt out of either one. I think people living between the 1970's - 1990's were more susceptible to cigarette ads because it was a way of life for them. Besides, they didn't have the opportunity, that we have, to see the downside of smoking. It was glorified, so why not? Besides, tobacco laws had not yet been put in place.
I do think that there has been a definite switch in attitude, there is no doubt about that, but I have been noticing something a little different in more recent years. I think that we are starting to see smoking come back as the cool trendy thing to do. It was socially "out" for several years, but now we are starting to see it pop up in all the most glamorous stars' mouths, on all shows on MTV, and in most movies. I'm scared to say that it is becoming trendy again to smoke- that for a while when it was new, all the anti-smoking ads had a major effect, but now they are becoming old news and people are going back to smoking as another trend. Unfortunately these movies with smokers are doing the industry a huge favor.
The advances in science and oncology I think led to this feeling. We've been able to better understand the long term effects of smoking. It partly has to be generational. Our parents started receiving the anti-smoking education and passed in onto us, whereas their parents were the smokers. The education of children has improved greatly to a point where kids more clearly understand the dangers.
Well, there are less smoking ads simply because its the law. No more can you see the marborro cowboy working his mojo on the tv anymore because the government has made it illegal. Also, tabacco is heavily taxed, and with those tax dollars, the government makes anti-smoking ads, which are very effective... i mean have you seen that "smoker's aorta" commerical...? yeah makes me not want to smoke!
It's not like people who smoke don't know that it is bad for them. I guess it is just because people are becoming smarter in general. Although I have seen smoking become somewhat popular again when you see celebrities like Britney Spears and Katherine Heigl smoking. On all the MTV reality shows the people are always smoking. I think that the anti-smoking ads are working now, and they worked back then, but I still think people are going to smoke, but it's great that the percentage has dropped.
Since the time smoking was popular, a lot of research has been done showing that smoking will absolutely kill you. On every package of cigarettes, there is a warning about the harm tobacco will cause. It is no longer cool to smoke in a health conscious American society in which we now live in. It is very interesting to me that the Tobacco companies are the ones who have the anti-smoking ads. But this is because they know the effects smoking has. People are still going to smoke. These ads are not going to stop those who still have it in their minds that smoking is "cool." To the rest of us, it is a nasty habit that will lead to death.
that's a tough question. possibly scientists weren't educated enough about the effects of smoking til recently. and seeing that in the last 20 years, tests have shown that deaths were not only caused by cancer, but by cigarette smoking.
unfortunately, i still think smoking ads have an effect on people today. not only are they persuasive, but cigarettes are still placed in movies and tv to continue infiltrating our lives.
Our culture has shifted away from the glamorous images associated with smoking. Scientific advancements have brought to light the truth about smoking. Anti-smoking ads have become common in society and have replaced the once prevalent pro-smoking ads.
This is an amazing sign of what advertizing can do. I had no idea that smoking was cut in half over the past 60 years. I wonder what else we could use advertisments for to help resolve crime, gangs, abuse, etc. We see those types of commercials too, but what if we were to increase those ads. I would hope we would see a similar change. I don't know why there are so many ads now as opposed to then, but it may be the increase in government regulations, and human lives taken that have promoted the increase.
I don't think pro-smoking ads aren't as effective anymore because people will mostly make up their mind if they want to subject their bodies to it. I think the ads in the 1970s through the 1990s were smart and the marketers behind Joe Camel and the Marlboro man were good in getting more people to smoke but it seems these days, the public is much more health concious. It is interesting though to see so many anti-smoking advertisements like the Truth campaign. I personally enjoy it! Let's bring that 21% down more!
I definitely think that all of the anti-smoking ads are making an impact. Smoking is officially considered to be a bad idea. If nothing else, people who do smoke are much more apologetic about it. This indicates that most smokers consider smoking to be a type of social sin. I should say that some ads, including that one with the dead baby, seem to cross a line. Gross.
I believe people did not realize the harmful effect of smoking when some of these advertisements came out. Now as we're seeing older people who have smoked their whole lives dying from horrible smoking related causes, we as a society as moving away from showing smoking as glamarous. Not only are there hardly any pro-smoking ads to be seen anymore, but smoking is becoming socially unacceptable. I was at Lagoon just the other day and if you have to smoke you are confined to certain areas around the park. Most restaurants do not even allow smoking inside anymore. However, people continue to smoke. Lack of awareness is not the issue. People smoke even though they know they are slowly killing themselves. It is shocking that people will continue to do something they know will eventually result in their deaths. If knowledge is not enough to discourage smoking, I honestly do not know what is.
A lot of people have already pointed this out, but the fact is that smoking advertising changed because of laws. I'm not sure if that many people are aware that many of the anti-smoking campaigns out there are actually produced by the tobacco companies. I find it all a little ironic. I think it's great that they show the negative effects of smoking, but in the end, it makes me wonder if all they are really doing is making people think about smoking in the first place.
Cigarettes back then were new and exciting the cool thing to do! Now they are played out and kids have moved onto newer more intense drugs. Its the cycle of progression, If everyone does it then it suddenly becomes uncool. Plus now a days you get cancer if you use plastic bottles, or at least they say you do. There are so many warnings and causing agents its pretty crazy.
you're telling me that smoking doesn't make you cool today? it sure looks cool in movies and TV. so i guess people are willing to trade their lives for a little bit of acceptance. in today's world, i don't find that hard to believe. to be cool and popular is everything to some people, even if it means immense pain in the future.
Post a Comment