11.6 Marketing of tobacco in the age of advertising bans

Show / hide chapter menu

As traditional forms of marketing have been closed to the tobacco industry, companies have sought out novel ways of promoting their products. An advertising ban does not mean that tobacco companies will no longer seek to market their products; it means they will continue to market their products through avenues that have not been closed by the ban. Advertising bans may not reduce the total level of advertising expenditure but result in shifting resources to other forms of marketing and promotion.27 When more of the remaining media are eliminated, the options for substitution are also eliminated. Several 'below-the-line' advertising techniques have been identified3, 29, 72:

• event promotions, including dance parties, fashion shows, and music festivals
• point-of-sale marketing
• packaging design
• brand stretching
• internet based marketing and the development of corporate websites
• advertising in international magazines
• text-message promotions
• product placement in movies

11.6.1 Promotional events

In its submission to the 2003 TAP Act review, The Cancer Council Australia highlighted how the tobacco industry uses event based marketing to promote its products to young people: 'Typically, products are sold and displayed in a glamorous or 'cool' setting, such as a nightclub or fashion or music event. The product benefits from the associations created with the event or venue, the people present at the event or venue, and other brands that are being marketed there. The events and venues generally have no restrictions on smoking, creating a perfect environment in which to create the desired associations between smoking and both the other experiences being enjoyed and the positive elements of the surrounding context and environment as a whole. Many of these events, particularly outdoor music events, are not restricted to those over the age of 18, so the youth who are exposed to the marketing are both young adults and much younger teenagers'.37 p 14

The submission details more than 25 examples of event-based marketing across Australia. An illustrative example, Wavesnet, is highlighted in the following case study.[30]

Wavesnet—A case study of event based marketing

For many years tobacco manufacturer Philip Morris has been communicating with the predominantly female smokers of their brand Alpine cigarettes in various guises. The strategy began in the late 1990s with a quarterly magazine called Waves and the sponsorship of graduate designers fashion shows, and finally gifts sold together with Alpine packs such as make-up mirrors and cosmetic bags. Part of the aim was to develop a database of Alpine smokers, which apparently numbered about 40,000 by the time the internet was integrated into the mix. Databases are important to the tobacco companies as they provide a way of communicating directly with their customers plus constitute a valuable source of market research.

The internet strategy began with the registration of Wavesnet as a company in October 2000 and the development of a funky website, www.wavesnet.net as a promotional tool. Mojo, the advertising agency managing the Alpine account, established the site. The link to Philip Morris was not immediately evident; however, a search of who controls the Wavesnet company revealed that it has three directors and a company secretary who are either directors of Mojo or its holding company, Publicis. Philip Morris has since confirmed that it licensed the use of the Wavesnet trademark to Publicis.

The Wavesnet website promoted accessories and a series of young designer fashion shows—Fashion's Future Designer Awards—in nightclubs in a number of capital cities. It also included an online survey where visitors to the site could subscribe and obtain free entry to the fashion shows, free drinks, gifts and invitations to future events. The fashion awards were also promoted in women's magazines. The site was promoted to young women in various media as a place to 'shop 4 the latest accessories @ www.wavesnet.net. . . . & 10% off everything when u join wavesnet'. Later the promoters became more explicit in their event promotion running a series of dance parties under the banner Glisten.

The events heavily promoted Alpine cigarettes, a brand almost exclusively smoked by women. The colours used on the website and at the events were themed around the colours on the Alpine packs. The only cigarettes available during the event were Alpine cigarettes sold by women in outfits colour coordinated with the pack and the lighting. An organiser for other major events has revealed that in return for handing over sponsorship dollars for another event, Philip Morris wanted 'its corporate colours to be evident at the rave, and for cigarette sellers in fetching outfits to roam the dance floors looking for customers', thereby achieving greater exposure of tobacco products to potential customers.

Computer terminals at the Wavesnet fashion events allowed attendees to sign up on-site. Wavesnet's general manager confirmed that there were plans to host more events and that building up a database of members' likes and dislikes was one of the reasons for the existence of the Wavesnet website.

A key element of the strategy is affinity marketing— leveraging the power of other popular youth brands and products such as cosmetics, CDs, confectionery, lingerie and clothing with the target market. At the state final of Wavesnet's Fashion's Future Design Awards—Who will you be wearing next?—in Melbourne, all attendees were given free gift packs including products such as lingerie, jewellery, herbal tea, mouse pads, magazines, CDs and confectionery.

Not all the sponsors were informed about the involvement of Philip Morris and Alpine cigarettes. The editor of a female online magazine, Femail, which promoted Wavesnet Fashion's Future Design Awards, was not aware that its paid advertorial was sponsored by Philip Morris or that the company owned the Wavesnet trademark. Philip Morris's involvement was not mentioned in the online copy. Later, other sponsors of the Glisten events were also concerned at being linked to Philip Morris; for example, one of the co-sponsors, De Jour tampons, withdrew its support after it was told of Philip Morris's involvement. The company owner said that she did not want her company associated with Philip Morris and would not have agreed to be involved had they known of this prior to the events.

Following controversy over the Wavesnet operation, the entire operation was repackaged under the new name of 'Glisten' (Figure 11.8).

Despite state level attempts to control these activities (some states have banned mobile cigarette girls and boys and Victoria has banned all tobacco from under 18 events) events based marketed continues. Two recent examples include:

• The Big Day Out (2007), the biggest outdoor youth music event of the Australian summer, held in cities around the country, granted exclusive sales right to Imperial Tobacco. At the Sydney event, Imperial promoted and sold the Peter Stuyvesant brand. The cigarettes are sold from 'smoking lounges' where patrons can relax and enjoy a cigarette.73 The company states that this is purely a sales agreement, not a promotional opportunity.
• In April 2007, guests of a Fashion TV Red Ribbon Foundation party at the Sydney Opera House were given complimentary packages of Davidoff cigarettes.74 While it is prohibited in New South Wales to distribute free samples of cigarettes to members of the public, events that are restricted to members of a relevant trade (i.e. hospitality) are permitted to distribute free samples. It is unclear from media reports if the event in question was a relevant trade specific party.

11.6.2 Tobacco displays as advertising

While all states and territories regulate the size, position, and design of tobacco displays at retail, (South Australia regulations come in to effect November 2007) it is a common to see large colourful 'powerwalls' of tobacco products in most supermarkets, convenience stores, and petrol stations (Figure 11.9). Prohibiting the sale of tobacco products to children under 18 is intended to restrict their access to tobacco. This is undermined and contradicted by the bright displays that attract these same children. Because tobacco is displayed alongside other universally purchased consumer goods, displays create the impression that tobacco is much more socially acceptable and commonly used than is truly the case.55 Focus group research with both smokers and non-smokers has found support for display bans.75 The removal of displays is seen as a 'logical extension' of advertising bans.75 p 401

The industry argues that displays are necessary to provide information to adult smokers about different brands in order to encourage brand switching. 2006 research showed that 90 percent of adult smokers in Victoria never decide on what brand they will purchase at retail and only 1 percent said they always decided on what brand based on the retail display.76 These findings suggest that adults virtually never use the information that the industry states the displays impart. There is evidence that displays do influence children's smoking relevant attitudes and intentions. Experimental research with Australian adolescents found that the presence of tobacco displays influenced their beliefs about the ease of purchasing cigarettes, increased their ability to recall cigarette brands and weakened their resolve not to smoke in the future.77

11.6.2.1 International display bans

Norway, Ireland, Iceland and Thailand have banned all tobacco advertising and displays at retail. Several Canadian provinces have banned retails displays, the province of Saskatchewan pioneering the banning of pack displays (Figure 11.10). Health Canada, the Canadian federal government agency responsible for tobacco control, is currently reviewing the display of tobacco products at retail and is proposing a total ban, across Canada, on all tobacco displays where children are permitted. Health Canada describes the marketing potential of tobacco displays: 'The ubiquitous presence of these displays means that they reach young people, former smokers and smokers trying to quit. Their presence makes tobacco products socially prominent, and this prominence conflicts with the health message that tobacco products are harmful. Such displays may undermine government efforts to protect young people and others from inducements to use tobacco products and from becoming dependent on them.'78 p 1

11.6.2.2 The Australian retail setting

Australian tobacco industry document research reveals that as cigarette marketing became increasingly restrictive in Australia the retail environment evolved as the primary communication vehicle for building cigarette brands.79 The industry employs techniques such as strengthening on-pack brand imagery, redesigning point-of-sale hardware to emphasise particular brands, forming alliances with retailers, rewarding retailers through loyalty programs, and promoting brands through retail trade magazines. Carter concluded: 'The point-of-sale, always an important marketing environment for the Australian cigarette industry, has been transformed in the last five decades. Originally retail marketing was a mere support mechanism for above-the-line activities. When above-the-line was banned, the retail environment became the front line for brand building, absorbing massive resources and being seen as the primary site for sustaining relationships with the consumer. When retail advertising was restricted by some states, the industry conceded only incrementally and under duress. The fact that the law is broken in retail marketing suggests that the retail promotions, however modest, are still highly prized in Australia's dark market'.79 p iii99

Retailers have received guidance on how to maximize sales of tobacco products.80 Service Station Australia Limited (a national industry organisation representing fuel retail outlets in Australia) advised retailers to:

• 'Strategically place cigarette dispenser, ideally behind the point of sale unit in full view of customers.
• Have a minimum range of premium and leading brands on display, remember smokers are very loyal to 'their' brand. If the range is too narrow they will not come back.
• Enlist the support of the cigarette manufacturers, when placing an order request a visit from a sales representative, they are 'experts', and if you ask the right questions they can provide very useful advice'.80 p 270

Additionally, retailers were advised to support the tobacco industry associated National Association of Tobacco Retailers (NATR), an advocacy group which opposes tobacco display bans.

State and territory display restrictions often include allowing only one packet of each product line to be displayed. Australian tobacco companies have exploited this loophole by introducing more products lines81. For example:

• Peter Jackson product lines have almost doubled from 1999 to 2005, increasing from 11 to 21
• Winfield went from 11 product lines in 1998 to 18 in 2004

In June 2007, it was reported that Philip Morris is opening a 'concept store' on the fashionable Chapel Street in Melbourne's South Yarra. Tobacco control advocates argued that the planned shop was 'the latest initiative by the tobacco industry to lure new customers from the most vulnerable demographic'.82 p 1 In addition to stocking both Philip Morris and competitor cigarette brands, the store will include 'retractable windows' to accommodate smokers under Victoria's indoor smoking ban.

11.6.2.3 Vending machines

The cigarette vending machine functions as a self-service form of display. Tasmania and ACT ban self-operated vending machines; the seller must operate the machine on behalf of the purchaser. All other states and territories restrict vending machines to licensed or gaming premises, but allow members of the public to operate the machines. As described by the VicHealth Centre for Tobacco Control, the placement of vending machines at adult social venues or events 'operates to create, or reinforce, a damaging association between the venue or event, and the enjoyment that is had there, and the use of tobacco products or particular brands of tobacco products'.37 p 22 Vending machines can also serve to glamorise tobacco products by showcasing them in attractive and eye catching displays (Figure 11.11).

11.6.3 Packaging as advertising

Packaging differentiates brands, being particularly important in homogenous consumer goods categories like cigarettes.83 [31] Marketing literature routinely highlights the critical role played by pack design in the overall marketing mix, emphasising that the 'product package is the communication life-blood of the firm', the 'silent salesman' that reaches out to customers84 p 208 and that packaging 'act(s) as a promotional tool in its own right.'85 p 215 Cigarette packaging conveys brand identity through brand logos, colours, fonts, pictures, packaging materials and shapes. The world's most popular cigarette brand, Marlboro,86 can readily be identified through its iconic red chevron. The Marlboro brand is estimated to be worth $US27 billion, making it the 10th most valuable brand in the world.87

With the global increase in tobacco advertising and sponsorship bans, the pack becomes the most important promotional vehicle for reaching potential and current smokers86, 88-94. British American Tobacco (BAT) and Philip Morris have predicted that in the future, pack design alone will drive brand imagery.95 Imperial Tobacco Ltd's former vice president of marketing agreed that packaging is vital in marketing. 'It's very difficult for people to discriminate blind-tested. Put it in a package and put a name on it, then it has a lot of product characteristics'.96 p 1 This corroborates an earlier comment made by a BAT official that 'one of every two smokers is not able to distinguish in blind (masked) tests between similar cigarettes... for most smokers and the decisive group of new, younger smokers, the consumer's choice is dictated more by psychological, image factors than by relatively minor differences in smoking characteristics.'97 p 5

Unique among industries, the tobacco industry has always claimed that it has no interest in attracting new customers (i.e. non-smokers) but is interested only in stimulating brand-switching among current smokers and in maintaining brand loyalty in current customers. This position has been comprehensively undermined by a multitude of revelations from internal industry documents that candidly acknowledge the vital importance of attracting new smokers (predominantly youth).16, 21, 95, 98-102 It is therefore taken as read that in designing tobacco packs to appeal to potential purchasers, the tobacco industry counts among these, those already smoking the brand, those smoking other brands and those not yet smoking but who might be persuaded to take it up.

The industry denies that packs are a form of advertising. However, there is abundant evidence that privately the industry thinks very differently about the promotional potential of packs. For example, in 1995 a Brown and Williamson employee stated
'... if you smoke, a cigarette pack is one of the few things you use regularly that makes a statement about you. A cigarette pack is the only thing you take out of your pocket
20 times a day and lay out for everyone to see. That's a lot different than buying your soap powder in generic packaging.'103 p 5

As previously discussed, several nations have banned the open display of tobacco products in retail locations. These jurisdictions have reasoned that: 'Power walls and counter top displays are highly visible and eye-catching. They present an unavoidable and unfortunate spill of promotional imagery and product reminders to vulnerable consumers including young people, former smokers... and smokers of all ages who are trying to quit'.78 p 8 Bans on the retail display of tobacco will likely further increase industry investment in innovative pack design, with the pack functioning as a portable advertisement.

Pack design can not only communicate the 'personality' of a cigarette brand to the smoker, but smokers can project these characteristics by handling and displaying the package throughout their daily routines.94 Just as designer clothing, accessories and cars serve as social cues to style, status, values and character so too can cigarette packs signify a range of attributes about users. As 'badge products' cigarettes can reinforce the characteristics conjured by brand image.94, 104-107

11.6.3.1 Innovations in cigarette packaging

The tobacco industry trade magazine, World Tobacco, contains numerous examples of frank appeals to manufacturers to utilise packaging as an advertising vehicle.90-93, 108-110 Tobacco manufacturers were advised 'if your brand can no longer shout from billboards, let alone from the cinema screen or the pages of a glossy magazine... it can at least court smokers from the retailer's shelf, or from wherever it is placed by those already wed to it.'89 p 17 Industry internal documents confirm that companies invest significant research effort into pack design to communicate specific messages to specific demographic groups, chiefly young people.94, 95 In the early 1990s Philip Morris saw opportunities in packaging innovation among young people because they 'are ready for change' and 'once exposed to innovative [packaging] especially young adults see their current packaging as dated and boring'.111 p 2 Packs aimed at younger women should be 'slick, sleek, flashy, glittery, shiny, silky, bold'.111 p 9

International packaging manufacturers and designers remain optimistic about opportunities to increase the appeal of cigarette packs despite intrusive health warnings. One manufacturer commented in the trade press that: 'With the uptake of printed inner frame cards what we will increasingly see is the pack being viewed as a total opportunity for communications—from printed outer film and tear tape through to the inner frame and inner bundle. Each pack component will provide an integrated function as part of a carefully planned brand or information communications campaign.'112 p 37 One packaging firm urged tobacco companies to skirt 'draconian legislation' by using pack over-wrapping to create an in-store advertisement. 'Where cigarette advertising is banned by law' says the company, 'the retailer can 'quite coincidentally' stack up a kind of billboard using the products at the point of sale if, for example, the cigarette cartons of a particular brand bear different parts of an overall design, which complete a puzzle or a caption when stacked up.'90 p 38

Advances in printing technology have enabled printing of on-pack imagery on the inner frame card,112 outer film and tear tape,90 and the incorporation of holograms, collectable art, metallic finishes,113 multi-fold stickers,91 photographs, and retro images in pack design.114-116 In the early 1900s, collectable cigarette cards were a major form of in-pack promotion.117 A contemporary return to the package as the primary source of advertising is apparent in the following Australian examples:

• Subtle changes to cigarette packs and trademarks were observed on both Benson & Hedges and Winfield cigarette packs during 2000–02.118 When researchers called the company to inquire about the changes, an employee said they were 'playing with the logo because we can't do any advertising anymore'.118 p 154
• In February 2006, one month prior to the adoption of picture-based warnings on tobacco packages, Peter Stuyvesant cigarettes were being sold in 'trendy retro-style tins' which, unlike soft packets of cigarettes with on-pack printed warnings, had health warning stickers that were easily peeled off.119 p 151 (Figure 11.12) Retailers reported that the tins were very popular with younger smokers.
• British American Tobacco Australia (BATA) introduced split Dunhill packs in October 2006.120 The pack could be split along a perforated line to create two mini packs, easily shared between two smokers perhaps unable to afford a full pack (Figure 11.13). Once split, one of the two packs did not bear the mandatory graphic health warning. BATA was forced to remove the packets from the market when it was found to be in breach of tobacco product labelling laws. 121
• When the descriptive terms 'light' and 'mild' were prohibited, and cigarette tar yields were scheduled to be replaced with qualitative information about harmful constituents, the industry responded by developing colour-coded packages with new terms: 'Now your Horizon customers can get their favourite brand in an exciting new look pack. With new descriptors and clearer numbers all our packs are much easier to identify. Research proves that your customers will find the new pack more appealing and a lot easier to recognize.'122 p 214

11.6.3.2 Plain packaging as a solution to end the promotional power of packaging

In Australia in 1992, the Centre for Behavioural Research in Cancer recommended that 'regulations be extended to cover the colours, design and wording of the entire exterior of the pack'.123 p 18 In 1995, Cunningham and Kyle argued for the plain, 'generic' packaging of tobacco products, stressing that the pack was a key promotional vehicle and as such should be subject to the same controls that apply to all forms of tobacco advertising.124

Plain packaging would require the removal of all brand imagery (including corporate logos and trademarks) from cigarette packs, permitting manufacturers to only print the brand name in a mandated size, font and place, in addition to health warnings and other legally required product information such as toxic constituents, tax-paid seals, or package contents (Figure 11.14).124 The size and shape of the package would also be regulated in order to prevent novelty pack shape varieties replacing on-pack imagery. All Australian states and territories already mandate the minimum number of cigarettes in a pack (20), reasoning that small packs, being less expensive, are more attractive to youth. Plain packaging would encompass pack interiors and the cigarette itself, given the demonstrated potential for manufacturers to use colours, bandings and markings and different length and gauges to make cigarettes more 'interesting' and appealing (Figure 11.15). Plain packaging would effectively standardise the appearance of all cigarette packages and cigarettes, greatly reducing the status signalling roles and appeal of cigarettes.

11.6.3.3 Effects of plain packaging

As plain packs have never been legislated, evidence about their possible impact necessarily derives from experimental studies where subjects have typically been presented with both mock-up plain and branded packs and asked about associations and preferences. A 1995 Canadian expert panel report, When Packages Can't Speak: Possible Impacts of Plain and Generic Packaging of Tobacco Products, containing several such studies, is the most comprehensive review of the likely effects of plain packaging.125 Collectively, these and other studies have consistently shown that compared to branded packs, plain packs are perceived as 'dull and boring', cheap looking and reduce the flair and appeal associated with smoking.125-130 Teens are much less likely to associate specific brands with specific types of people when packs are plain, and even less so when plain packs also featured a photo of a lung.125

The body of plain pack research shows consistently that pack brand imagery distracts from and therefore reduces the impact of health warnings.129, 130 Students had an enhanced ability to recall health warnings on plain packs, suggesting that pack imagery can distract from health warnings. Health warnings on plain packs were seen as being more serious than the same warnings on branded packs, suggesting that brand imagery diffuses the overall impact of health warnings.126 A recent multi-country tobacco survey examining the effectiveness of warnings showed that smokers in Canada, who were at the time of the study exposed to large picture-based warnings, were significantly more likely to report thinking about the health risks of smoking, to stop from having a cigarette, and to think about quitting because of the health warnings.131 The same study also showed that the larger and more prominent a health warning, the more likely it is to be recalled. Plain packaging would enable the warning size to be further increased and allow for additional information elaborating on warnings and about smoking cessation to be printed on packs. Unregulated package colouring and imagery also contributes to consumer misperceptions that 'light and mild' brands are safer.94, 132

11.6.4 Smoking in movies as promotion

While advertisements for cigarettes can no longer be shown in cinemas before movies, audiences are often exposed to pro-smoking imagery during the movie. In 2002, the total amount of smoking in movies was greater in youth-rated films than adult-rated films, significantly increasing adolescent exposure to movie smoking. Smoking in the movies decreased from 1950 to 1990 and then increased rapidly so that smoking in movies in 2002 was as common as in 1950.133 A more recent (2006) study, the most comprehensive research to date examining total depictions of smoking in movies, has found that the total number of smoking characters is actually declining.134 The study included the top 100 US box office hits for each year from 1996 to 2004. This downward trend was however weakest in films aimed at an adolescent audience. Although many of the movies included in the study depict no adult smoking, more than one third depict smoking as being more prevalent than among US adults at the time of release.

Several review articles have shown that smoking in movies is associated with increases in adolescent smoking initiation.15, 133, 135, 136 A possible limiting factor of this body of research is that the majority of the studies have been conducted with American youth.137 In a US cohort study, 52.2 percent of smoking initiation was attributed to exposure to smoking in movies.138 A criticism of such studies is that smoking may be just one of a constellation of movie characteristics that have broad appeal to children attracted to such films.139 If smoking were removed from such movies, youth who are more likely to smoke may still be attracted to the same sort of films because of wider characteristics of characters and scenes in such movies. Smoking scenes may therefore not be independently predictive of smoking among youth.

Depictions of smoking also enhance positive views of smokers and increase intent to smoke. Teenagers whose favourite stars smoke on the big screen are three times more likely to smoke than those whose favourite stars do not smoke (Figure 11.16).140

There is limited research on the effects or amount of smoking imagery on television. A New Zealand study of primetime television content found that one in four programs contained tobacco imagery, most of which might be regarded as 'neutral or positive'. This equalled to two smoking scenes for every hour of programming. 141 A US study examined the level of youth exposure to televised movie trailers that contained smoking imagery between August 2001 and July 2002. The researchers found that 14.4 percent of televised trailers included images of tobacco use.142 Tobacco use was shown in 24 percent of the trailers for R-rated[32] (restricted) movies and 7.5 percent of the trailers for PG-13 and PG-rated (parental guidance) movies. Ninety-five percent of all youth aged 12 to 17 years in the US saw at least one movie trailer depicting tobacco use on television during the study period. Youth are also exposed to smoking images through video and DVD rentals of both current and historical movie releases.143

11.6.4.1 Counter-advertising

There is some evidence to suggest that showing an antismoking, counter-advertisement before films that glamorise smoking negates positive associations. An Australian study with adolescent females showed that viewing a counter-advertisement increased the number of non-smokers who disapproved of the smoking scenes in the movie and increased the number of smokers who believed they would not be smoking within the next year.144 A similarly designed study with American adolescents found that those who viewed the counter advertising prior to a film showing characters smoking held more negative opinions about the smoking actors.145 A second Australian study with youth cinema patrons found that while placing an antismoking advertisement before movies containing smoking scenes can help to immunise non-smokers against the influences of film stars' smoking, caution must be exercised in the type of advertisement screened.146 Some types of advertising were found to reinforce smokers' intentions to smoke.

11.6.4.2 The tobacco industry and movies

Despite publicly denying that it has not and does not pay for product placement (paying a fee for a product to appear on screen) in movies, study of internal tobacco industry documents reveals a history of paid promotion.147, 148 For example:

• $350,000 to have Lark cigarettes appear in the James Bond movie Licence to Kill (1989)
• $42,000 to place Marlboro cigarettes in Superman II (1980)
• $30,000 to place Eve cigarettes in Supergirl (1984)
• $5,000 to have Lucky Strike appear in Beverly Hills Cop (1984)
• an agreement to pay a $500,000 fee to actor, Sylvester Stallone, to use Brown and Williamson products in five feature films149

In November 2006, Philip Morris USA issued a press release announcing that the company was asking that its brands no longer be displayed on screen and urged the movie industry to no longer use any tobacco products in films aimed at a youth audience.150 This campaign has been criticised as being an industry 'PR campaign' that hopes to skirt meaningful regulation.151

11.6.4.3 Bollywood and smoking

Smoking imagery in movies is not limited to the Hollywood film industry. In May 2005 the Health Minister of India announced a total ban on smoking and tobacco product imagery in all Indian films.152 The proposed ban has yet to be legislated or enforced as the Indian film industry has volunteered to control the amount of smoking in Bollywood films. According to research conducted by the Indian agency, the Burning Brain Society and supported by the World Health Organization, despite film industry promises to self-regulate tobacco promotion on screen, tobacco brands have appeared in more than 40 percent of Indian films released since 2004.153

11.6.4.4 Proposed policy options

The Cancer Council New South Wales has proposed that counter advertising be shown before films that contain pro-smoking imagery.149 Their suggested action points include that:

• all movies are assessed for inappropriate smoking content prior to release
• once they have been identified, these films are accompanied by strong smoking education advertisements
• this requirement is written into law at State and Federal levels

Action on Smoking and Health Australia has called for action to amend the TAP Act to ensure that inducements to promote tobacco products and smoking in films and other media are clearly illegal, with substantial penalties for breaches, and to increase funding for counter advertising.154

The Smoke Free Movies group based at the University of California, San Francisco has outlined four policy actions to reduce smoking depictions in films155:

• Rate new smoking movies 'R'. Any film that shows or implies tobacco use should be rated 'R.' The only exceptions should be when the presentation of tobacco clearly and unambiguously reflects the dangers and consequences of tobacco use or is necessary to represent the smoking of a real historical figure.
• Certify no pay-offs. The producers should post a certificate in the closing credits declaring that nobody on the production received anything of value (cash money, free cigarettes or other gifts, free publicity, interest-free loans or anything else) from anyone in exchange for using or displaying tobacco.
• Require strong anti-smoking ads. Studios and theatres should require a genuinely strong anti-smoking ad (not one produced by a tobacco company) to run before any film with any tobacco presence, in any distribution channel, regardless of its Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) rating.
• Stop identifying tobacco brands. There should be no tobacco brand identification nor the presence of tobacco brand imagery (such as billboards) in the background of any movie scene.

In May 2007, the MPAA announced it will consider smoking—alongside sex, violence and 'adult' language—when it is deciding what rating to assign films. Films which glamorise smoking could receive a higher rating. The MPAA ruled out giving all films containing scenes with smoking an 'R' or restricted rating.156

Thailand has banned smoking scenes on all local television channels since 2000. Any image of an actor smoking or a tobacco product is 'pixilated' or blurred out. There is no published data available on the effectiveness of this policy in preventing youth uptake.

Some Indian tobacco control groups continue to call for a legislated ban on all tobacco and smoking imagery in all films, including all foreign films shown in India.

Finally, there is not universal agreement on controlling the promotion of smoking in the movies.157 Important questions of limiting freedom of speech and censoring artistic license arise when there is no evidence that smoking imagery has been sponsored by the industry. Additionally, portrayals of smoking in movies can vary from overtly glamorous to neutral to remarkably negative; removal of all tobacco imagery could be a disadvantage to tobacco control. An Australian study of viewer reactions to the movie, The Insider, a movie containing varied smoking images, found participants held more negative views of the business conduct of the tobacco industry than those who saw an equivalent control film.158

11.6.5 Internet promotion

Just as tobacco company marketers have infiltrated youth-friendly venues it is conceivable that they have a presence on youth-friendly websites. While the internet is being used extensively to sell cigarettes159, its largely unregulated status holds much potential as a vehicle for both promoting smoking and advertising tobacco products.

Internet use by young people is part of their everyday life. In 2006 more than half of youth and young adult Australians (age 15–24) used the internet on a daily basis.160 Many popular youth websites[33] rely on users to provide content in the form of videos, diaries, photographs, and music. There is the potential for the anonymous exploitation of these sites (including by tobacco companies) to reach a large audience, particularly youth, by both promoting and culturally undermining smoking.

One study examining the tobacco content on the video-sharing website, YouTube, found that tobacco imagery is 'prolific and accessible' on the site.161 p 210 Videos with pro-smoking content ranged from images of young men and women smoking, to smoking fetish scenarios, to magic tricks featuring cigarettes. Additionally, vintage cigarette advertisements appear on the site. While the research was unable to determine if the tobacco industry had posted any of this material on the website, there was evidence that distributors of the Swedish smokeless tobacco, snus, had posted promotional videos on the site.

A content analysis study of pro-tobacco websites revealed that tobacco has a pervasive presence on the internet, especially on e-commerce sites and sites featuring hobbies, recreation, and 'fetishes'.162 p 281 Only 11 percent of the sites examined contained health warnings. The pro-tobacco sites frequently associated smoking with 'glamorous' and 'alternative' lifestyles, and with images of attractive, young males and females. Many of the websites offered interactive site features that are potentially appealing to young people.

Several Australian websites also sell cigarettes.[34] These sites often do not post health warnings nor do they comply with state and territory based legislation surrounding point-of-sale advertising. In May 2005, following media reports about internet tobacco sales, the Australian Federal Police announced an ongoing investigation as to whether owners of tobacco sales sites are breaking laws prohibiting tobacco advertising.163

In May 2007, the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy (MCDS) announced that amendments would be made to the TAP Act to include advertising on the internet.164 Possible changes include broadening the current definition of 'to publish an advertisement' to include 'transmitting' the advertisement in electronic form.165 The federal government will also investigate the inclusion of elements such as:

• display listings of tobacco products for sale in a text-only format
• display prescribed graphic health warnings on the site
• require an age restricted access system so that minors are discouraged from visiting the site and viewing the advertisements within
• quantify any and all taxes and other charges that may be payable over and above the advertised price on the product

The MCDS agreed to work collaboratively towards restricting the retail sale and advertising of tobacco products over the internet and banning sales to people under 18 years of age. Health groups have called for a ban on internet sales of tobacco products to consumers.166