Passive Smoking: A Publicity Stunt

The risks of second-hand smoking are well-known to almost every individual living in a country which banned smoking in public places. The common belief among members of these societies is that passive smoking directly influences the health of non-smokers, and can potentially cause lung cancer. However, this information, perpetrated by the media and implemented within our societies, is not entirely substantiated by science.

A 1992 study conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concluded that “…exposure to environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) -- commonly known as secondhand smoke -- is responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths each year in nonsmoking adults and impairs the respiratory health of hundreds of thousands of children” (Fact Sheet, 1993). The Respiratory Health Effects Of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer And Other Disorders was one of the first and foremost studies conducted on the effects of passive smoking.

As of 1998, California became the first American state to ban smoking from public places with New York following. A large wave of upheaval arose, with many pro-ban citizens referring to the 1992 study and demanding a smoke-free environment. Other respectable health and science organizations support the claim of the EPA, but use their research as the primary source for their claims, even elevating the number of deaths to almost 50,000 annually. However, it seems that this data is merely a projection based on mortality rate.

Furthermore, the EPA research as well as other pieces of research conducted by the WHO do not hold the conclusive evidence to the risk of second-hand smoke. In a federal lawsuit from 1998, the court claimed that the “EPA’s procedural failure constitutes a violation of the law” and furthermore “…the EPA ‘cherry picked’ it’s data… and deviated from scientific procedure… to ensure a preordained outcome” (Osteen,1998).

Moreover, the World Health Organization issued a press release titled Passive Smoking Does Cause Lung Cancer Do Not Let Them Fool You, based on their research which directly states in its conclusion that “results indicate no association between childhood exposure to ETS and lung cancer risk” but found “weak evidence of a dose-response relationship between risk of lung cancer and exposure to spousal and workplace ETS” (Boffetta,Agudo,Ahrens,1998).

The media seem to be working pro-health as most of the publicity was aimed at the EPA research, and even press releases by the WHO were altered in order to misinform the public. Apart from health trends, however, a smoke-free society does have its advantages for governments, which can save money on provided health care for victims of smoking (related to injuries and other forms of diseases). Furthermore, smoking bans in the workplace increase productivity and thus boost economic growth, not to mention the smoking ban elegantly evades possible lawsuits that could occur if the public would openly argue that smoking in restaurants, for example, is irritating.

In conclusion, one can observe the power of the media and their immediate impact on society. Due to the fact that the negative effects of passive smoking are not entirely science-based, the publicity of these so-called research papers has caused a major legislative as well as economic change in societies all around the world.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Boffetta, P., A. Agudo, and W. Ahrens. Multicenter Case-control Study of Exposure to Environmental Tobacco Smoke and Lung Cancer in Europe. Rep. Lyon, 1998. International Agency for Research on Cancer. Web. 05 May 2011.

Osteen, William L. The United States Federal Court Decision Judge Osteen. Proc. of The Osteen Decision, North Carolina. 1998. The FORCES International Liberty News Network. Web. 05 May 2011.

Respiratory Health Effects Of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer And Other Disorders. Publication. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993. Fact Sheet: Respiratory Health Effects Of Passive Smoking. EPA, 13 Oct. 2010. Web. 5 May 2011. .

Websites About Demerit Goods

Below are three website about various demerit goods. They are educational, they discuss the media and advertising, and they also touch on the aspect of social marketing we talked about in class today. Some are more interactive than others so enjoy!

If you forgot what demerit goods are, click here.

1. Above The Influence
This website is part of a large awareness campaign in the USA. It is fairly interactive and it allows you to research facts about the most commonly abused drugs, read testimonies, ask even ask a doctor. In addition you can play games related to these topics, submit your story and watch their public awareness advertisements. I recommend it because it is well made, it doesn't seem forceful to the reader and it got me clicking around and reading about things.



2. Junkfood Science
A nice blog about junkfood and healthy living. The blog discusses research and articles that the media ignore and even won an award for one of the best medical/health blogs out there. The blog is no longer active but it is still interesting to read about various issues. I recommend it because it seems professional and has a healthy approach to educating the reader rather than trying to change his/her opinion.




3. BADvertising
A fun website dedicated to honest tobacco advertising. You can browse various tobacco and cigarette ads and change them to make them "honest". The website is interesting and encourages you to try to think about various ways these advertisements could be changed so they are no longer deceptive. Some of the ads are a little bit forceful, but I do admire the original approach. I recommend this website because one can compare and contrast the honest vs. the deceptive ads and actually create them him or herself and thus engage in the actual issue without just observing it.


An example of a BADvertising ad.

4. Alcohol Counter-Advertising
This last page is not really a website, but more of an educational article, however I found it interesting. The article is fairly long, but it discusses the effectiveness of alcohol counter-advertising and various models used to measure it. It also touched on the effectiveness of social marketing campaigns we talked about in class today. I recommend it because it is an interesting (though infinite) read and offers some interesting insight.

Thank You For Smoking

This is a trailer to a very clever film about the tobacco industry and I recommend everyone to watch it if you happen to have some time. It shows how cigarettes are marketed and to whom as well as the tactics these companies use in order to get you smoking.

Media Literacy: Smoking on the Screen

I came across a research paper focusing on the amount of smoking on screen and how it impacts young people. The research was conducted at Arizona State University and comes to some very interesting conclusions. Although this research is a little outdated, it proves, nonetheless, that young people can be easily influenced by behavior on the TV screen.

The research shows that "A 1999 Office of National Drug Control Policy study of the 200 most popular video rentals in 1996 and 1997 revealed that 89 percent had smoking in them" and "another study, at Dartmouth Medical School showed this percentage varied between 88 percent and 92 percent in the top 25 box-office films since 1995."

This behavior is a classical example of modeling. What young people see in their role model and film heroes is essentially what they want to do too. This is very similar to advertisers using celebrities to promote products.
Another reason to promote media literacy!

The article can be found here. A PDF file with the entire research paper will download by clicking on complete research evaluation report.

Media Literacy: Alcohol

This media literacy page describes how alcohol advertising works. Since alcohol consumption is significantly larger than with any other demerit good, it is important to see and know how advertisers attempt to influence their target audience. This media literacy page describes 7 alcohol myths that advertisers want the consumer to believe.

The main premise is that "[alcohol] can make you successful, sophisticated, sexy. Without it, your life would be dull, mediocre and ordinary."

The 7 myths are:
1. Drinking is a risk-free activity
2. You cant survive without drinking
3. Problem drinking behaviors are normal
4. Alcohol is a magic potion that can transform you
5. Sports and alcohol go together (remember when we talked about this in class?)
6. If these products were truly dangerous, the media would tell us
7. Alcoholic beverage companies promote moderation in drinking

It is important to understand how and when these myths are used throughout the media campaigns and to be able to not fall for them. Again, advertisers try to sell by telling you that what they are selling will make you in some way "better" and "the primary purpose of the mass media is to deliver audiences to advertisers."
All in all, one cannot blame the media for creating all the evil in the world because advertisers and the media essentially target our own flawed personalities. This is why it is imperative to go beyond the plain visual and understand that the primary purpose of advertising is to sell.

The article also draws on several statistics explaining why alcohol is a large part of our society (in terms of economics) and how much its consumption (as well as it's lack of consumption) costs us.

You can find the entire article here.

Reminder

Just a reminder for all of you if I haven't made myself clear...

The media are very powerful. We all know that. However, we must realize that the media essentially mirror our wants, desires, and fears with the goal of changing our attitudes. We should realize that we should shy away from blaming the product and rather think about what the media is trying to tell us about the product.
Demerit goods are in this sense controversial because they have a higher probability to be "blamed" for the flaws of our current society. However, before you take out your pitchforks and go kill every smoker, gambler, and alcoholic out there in the fight for a healthy society, think about what kind of society you want to live in. Due to the media, the society is currently putting restrictions and limitations on demerit goods, but think about it- do you want to live in a restricted society?

Remember, be open-minded :)

Oh, and one last thing, I'm not trying to promote smoking, drinking, and gambling. I'm just trying to say that there are two sides to everything and as much as we think about these risks, we should take these campaigns with a grain of salt. After all, you are the consumer, make an educated decision :)

Czech Media Monitoring

I was reading the Czech daily DNES today in Starbucks, and stumbled upon something interesting. Though we all know that smoking is negatively portrayed in various forms of media, I did not realize how extensive this negative portrayal actually was. As I was reading the paper, (and it's quite a thin paper if you take away all the crap about sports and business ;)) I counted three articles about the negative effects of smoking, including a massive headline, and one article on the portrayal of Czechs as alcoholics on the internet. The articles claimed that smoking causes microscopic particles to attach to your hair and clothes and thus even if you smoke outside, you bring these particles inside and they come into contact with other people. This then, of course, causes a higher chance of death of your relatives, mainly children (that was basically the gist of the article). The other two articles claimed that a) smoking kills you and b) even China is beginning to adopt smoking bans.

I found this interesting because as a fairly liberal country even in terms of new health trends such as healthy living, environmental-friendly companies and governments and smoke-free public places, the Czech media really seem to be appealing to people to change attitudes. These trends seemed to be of more interest to the west, however, it seems that the Czech Republic (or so the media imply) wants to "hop on the bandwagon".