A few decades ago, smoking was big money – the tobacco industry funded whole advertising agencies as well as funding major sporting codes and events. These days, there is still money being spent on advertising – but mostly in anti-smoking campaigns. There’s also the emergence of a new (relatively unregulated) product in e-cigarettes for “vaping”. And let’s not forget how much money smokers contribute to the government’s coffers with every drag.
Reading an article today about a campaign in the US to combat “deceptive” advertising from the tobacco industry (is Facebook only doing Fact Checks on the Orange Man?), I’m reminded that tobacco advertising has not been banned in other countries as it has been in Australia. I’m not in favour of judging history by today’s standards, but, seriously, how crazy were those cigarettes ads of old.
Far from mentioning any potential ill-effects from smoking, it was portrayed as cool, sophisticated, and even “healthy”. Suave men were used to promote smoking. Sexy women were used to promote smoking. Even Santa Claus was putting a positive spin on having a durrie. But the most surprising, perhaps, was having doctors and dentists suggesting cigarettes were actually good for you. Can you imagine running an advertisement like that today?
Not only have we banned cigarette advertising in Australia, we have banned sponsorship as well, which made it tough for football codes and motorsport, for instance, to find alternatives. The next “go-to” product to replace the revenue was alcohol but even that looks like having a limited social lifespan.
Australia took the campaign against smoking to a new level a few years ago when the government passed plain packaging laws, supposedly to stop people wanting to smoke because the “sexy” logos were no longer visible. The “olive green” colour was made standard because it was believed to be the least attractive colour. Mind you, if they were serious, they would just ban smoking outright, in the same way that other drugs are outright banned. Perhaps the tax revenue is a disincentive for taking the problem seriously? After all, at the time they introduced plain packaging laws, the government was raking in more than $10 billion a year in tobacco taxes and the taxes have only continued to climb since then.
But when one door closes, manufacturers (and smart marketers) simply open another door. The industry now produces e-cigarettes for “vaping” and the advertising is very much getting those needing to quit (for health or cost reasons) to switch instead. And again, we see the advertising, which is not banned, pushing the boundaries, such as the ad for Blu e-cigarettes, which featured in Sports Illustrated, focusing on a bikini girl (from pierced belly button down to mid-thigh) with the company logo on a bikini bottom barely big enough to carry a legible logo. The online version of the ad even featured a “zoom” tool for a closer look. Naturally, people were outraged. The anti-smoking lobby is also anti-vaping so we can expect to see vaping advertising banned in the future too.
But just because you can’t make a television ad or run an ad in whatever printed newspapers are left, doesn’t mean you can’t promote the product. Every time you see someone smoking on TV or at the movies, there’s probably a bit of tobacco industry promotion going on in the background. How many people took up smoking after watching Grease back in the 1970s? Anti-smoking campaigns are onto that one (as pointed out in the article) and try to prevent any vision of smoking (dis)gracing our screens.
I am surprised marketers haven’t found another door to open to get around the plain packaging laws. Personally, I would look at branding the individual cigarettes, such as colour/design on the filter or full cigarette in the same way that Coke bottles were a unique part of the brand. Perhaps they do something like that already or perhaps the laws prevent that as well? I don’t know because I haven’t had a cigarette for more than 20 years – a result of a $50 bet that has saved me about $100,000. Yes, there’s also big money there is no smoking.