Anti-smoking commercials have become increasingly popular in the past few years. Campaigns such as Truth, Tobacco-Free and countless others produce anti-smoking ads, commercials and billboards in an attempt to reduce the number of smokers in America. But what do these commercials really do?
Well to start, they lie. These commercials frequently claim that cigarettes are lethal. However, no definite evidence supports such claims. Although there is a statistical correlation between smoking and cancer, correlation does not itself prove causation.
A statistical correlation also exists between warm weather and murder rates, but no one claims that summer turns people into murderers.
The other popular ad “Cigarettes Are Bullies” is entirely inaccurate because it depicts kids on a high school campus going outside to smoke between classes. I am quite certain that smoke breaks are not allowed in public schools in 2014.
These commercials, along with modern media in general, vilify smokers and make them out to be bad people. The purpose of these ads should be to inform people, not stigmatize an entire group of people.
In the past, smokers in movies and television shows were often wealthy, attractive and classy, such as Audrey Hepburn in “Breakfast at Tiffany’s.” Now the people who smoke in movies are ugly, old villains.
Many of these advertisements blame Big Tobacco for the deaths of smokers. This is entirely unfair to Big Tobacco because the company does not force people to smoke.
Big Tobacco is a company just like any other. It creates jobs, fuels the economy, and generates revenue. Big Tobacco is no more responsible for the death rate of smokers than Jack Daniels is for the death rate of drunk drivers.
The false claims in these commercials is unfair to Big Tobacco because the company has no way to present its own case to consumers. Good Housekeeping banned cigarette ads in 1952, and all broadcast advertisements for cigarettes were outlawed in 1971.
Cigarette companies even perpetuate the knowledge that cigarettes could pose potential risk by displaying the Surgeon General’s warning on the side of every pack, which has been mandatory since 1965.
I do not believe that it is fair to run anti-smoking commercials at all. Honestly, sodas are bad for people too and can also have health risks, but no one runs a billion dollar anti-soda organization. The same can be said for fast food restaurants and junk food distributors. However, ads against those places would be much more appropriate since heart disease is the number one killer in America.
Everyone already knows that smoking could lead to potential health problems, so what is the real point for the commercials? I mean, a warning comes conveniently on the side of every pack.
Well, as a smoker, I can assure you that anti-smoking commercials only do one thing. They make smokers want to light up. The campaign designed to make people stop smoking just makes smokers smoke more.
