The Morality of Marketing the Marlboro Man by Claire Andre and Manuel Velasquez Images of sleek, young bodies,

taut and tanned, engaged in heroic athletic feats illuminate the page on which the words erformance Counts! loom large" #ut appearing in a small bo$ in the right%hand corner of the page is the &urgeon 'eneral(s warning) &moking Causes *ung Cancer, +eart ,isease, -mphysema, And May Complicate regnancy"! -.ery year /01,111 people die from tobacco%related illnesses" &moking is directly responsible for 203 of all deaths from lung cancer" 4he &urgeon 'eneral has declared smoking the chief a.oidable cause of death in our society" 5ot only are cigarettes one of the most lethal products around, but also one of the most addicti.e" According to a recent report from the &urgeon 'eneral, the nicotine contained in cigarettes is as addicti.e as heroin and cocaine" 6et, this lethal product which contains a .ery powerful addicti.e drug can be legally bought and sold" And, along with soap and margarine, it is promoted through ad.ertisements in the popular media" In 7897, cigarette ads were banned from the 4V screen and radio wa.es, but recent figures show that the tobacco industry continues to spend o.er :; billion e.ery year promoting cigarettes through other means, such as magazines, newspapers and billboards" ,uring the ne$t Congress, legislators will be asked to pass a law that would forbid all cigarette ad.ertising in magazines and newspapers" 4he tobacco industry and its ad.ertisers ha.e attacked the proposal as .iolating fundamental moral rights" ,oes society ha.e a right to ban the ad.ertising of cigarettes< Anti%smoking acti.ists argue that e.eryone has a basic right to freedom of e$pression, but only insofar as no harm comes to others as a result" =hen freedom of e$pression results in harm to others, society is morally obligated to restrict this freedom" Cigarette ad.ertising, one form of free speech, causes gra.e harm" >f twel.e published studies that ha.e e$amined the effect of cigarette ad.ertising, nine ha.e shown that as cigarette ads increase, so too does smoking" And, smoking now accounts for at least /01,111 tobacco%related deaths each year" 4he costs of smoking to society as a whole are also staggering" According to a recent go.ernment report, cigarette smoking is responsible for an estimated :;/ billion in health care costs annually and o.er :/1 billion in lost producti.ity" ?urthermore, cigarettes are the leading cause of residential fires and fire deaths in this nation" &ociety is morally obligated to ban the promotion of a product linked to so much suffering and de.astation and that places such a drain on society(s resources"

4hose opposed to the promotion of cigarettes also argue that society has a duty to protect the right of indi.iduals not to be decei.ed or manipulated" And, according to @oe 4ye, a staunch critic of the tobacco industry, 5o ad.ertising is more decepti.e than that used to sell cigarettes" Images of independence are used to sell a product that creates profound dependence" Images of health and .itality are used to sell a product that causes disease and suffering" Images of life are used to sell a product that causes death"! Critics argue that cigarette ad.ertisements also rely almost e$clusi.ely on psychological manipulation" Alluring images of power, prestige, glamour, success, .itality and se$ appeal are held before the public(s eye, creating a positi.e association between the good life! and smoking" &uch ads bypass conscious reasoning" 4hey unconsciously arouse in a person a powerful desire that is not rationally weighed against one(s own best interests" &ociety(s obligation to ban such decepti.e and manipulati.e practices becomes all the more compelling when such practices are used to prey on minors" And young people are, in fact, the target of the tobacco industry(s ad.ertising campaigns" 4o maintain sales, the tobacco industry must recruit more than ; million people e.ery year to replace those who die and those who quit smoking" &ince 813 of beginning smokers are children or teenagers, this means that the industry must entice at least 0111 youngsters daily to take up smoking" &o it(s to the young that the industry directs its pitch, appealing to their lifestyles and aspirations" Closeups of muscular surfers and slender, se$y women promise the shy teenager popularity and se$ appeal" &hots of hang%gliders, mountain climbers, ski racers and aerobic dancers promise ad.enture or athletic prowess" erhaps the most sinister of the ads is that which reads) If you(re not an adult, don(t smoke"! =hat better way to manipulate an adolescent into smoking< &ociety has a moral duty to ban such brainwashing of unwilling, unsuspecting consumers into taking up a habit that will e.entually kill them, or so critics claim" >pposing restrictions on cigarette ads are those who agree that society has a right to restrict freedom of e$pression when the e$ercise of this freedom causes harm to others" #ut, they argue, while cigarettes themsel.es may be harmful, cigarette ad.ertising is not" ?irst, contrary to the critics( claims, ads for cigarettes do not cause people to smoke, Aust as ads for soap don(t cause people to bathe" eople take up smoking for a .ariety of reasons" ?or teenagers, it(s often peer pressure or imitating adults that factor in as the principal reason" In one fi.e nation study, only 73 of the se.en to fifteen%year%olds inter.iewed mentioned ad.ertising as the most important reason they started smoking" At most, cigarette ads function to persuade people who already smoke to switch brands"

&econd, the charge that cigarette ads intentionally decei.e consumers is unAustified" 4he images portrayed in cigarette ads are realistic ones" 4here are, in fact, skiers, tennis players and aerobic dancers who smoke" ?urthermore, how can cigarette ads be accused of hiding the truth with the &urgeon 'eneral(s warning prominently stamped across each and e.ery ad< 5or can cigarette ads be banned on the grounds that they manipulate consumers" 4he tobacco industry(s ad.ertising ploys are no different from any other industry(s techniques to promote its products" Consumers are well acquainted with the rules of the game in ad.ertising" eople should be e$pected to take care of themsel.es whether they are reading an ad for cigarettes or passing by an enticing display in a department store" 5or can it be said that the industry aims its ads at minors" 4he B" @" Beynolds 4obacco Company has e.en gone as far as running full%page ads in national magazines asserting, =e don(t ad.ertise to children,! along with ads ad.ising young people not to smoke" Cnless it can be factually demonstrated that cigarette ad.ertisements cause direct harm to others, society has no right to impose any further restrictions on ads" 4hose opposed to banning cigarette ads also point out that respect for indi.idual freedom demands that consumer preferences and choices be respected" &ociety has no right to impose its preferences on its members by limiting their e$posure to products that are legally bought and sold" =hile society may act as a critic of consumer choice, it has no right, and certainly no duty, to limit that choice, and banning cigarettes ads would do Aust that" ?inally, tobacco supporters claim that banning cigarette ads would deli.er few benefits, while producing great harm" 4here is no e.idence that banning cigarette ads would stop people from smoking" In fi.e countries where cigarette ads ha.e been banned, per capita consumption of cigarettes has risen, not decreased" =hile tobacco ad.ertising bans would fail to deli.er the benefits its supporters hope for the reduction of smoking! they would, without a doubt, produce great harm" ?irst, banning cigarettes ads would depri.e consumers of .aluable information" &uch ads relay important information on the tar and nicotine content of cigarettes which some smokers use in their decisions to switch brands" &econd, any further encroachment on the freedom to ad.ertise cigarettes would place all freedom of e$pression and freedom of indi.idual choice in serious Aeopardy" If society declares a ban on ads for cigarettes, which may be harmful, but which are legal to purchase and use, what will pre.ent it from banning the promotion of countless other products known to be harmful in some way< =ill ads for butter and cheese be banned because they contain large
/

amounts of cholesterol< &uch practices cannot be tolerated in a society that prides itself on freedom" ,eciding whether society should pass a sentence on selling smoke will require us to choose between an obligation to do all we can to pre.ent harm and suffering, and the .alue we place on freedom of e$pression and freedom of choice" ?or further reading) @" @" #oddewyn &moking Ads ,on(t 'et eople +ooked,! The Wall Street Journal D>ctober ;7, 782EF" Gen Cummins, Selling Smoke: Cigarette Advertising and Public Health D=ashington, ,"C") American ublic +ealth Association, 7829F" ,a.id >wen, 4he Cigarette Companies) +ow 4hey 'et Away =ith Murder, art II,! Washington Monthly, Vol" 79 DMarch 7820F, pp" H2%0H" The Progressive, &moke &ignals, 4oo, Are a ?orm of ?ree &peech,! D&eptember 782EF" Tobacco and Youth e!orter, published by &4A4 D&top 4eenage Addiction to 4obaccoF, ">" #o$ 011/8, alo Alto, CA 8H/1/"