Antismoking AdvertisementEssay Preview: Antismoking AdvertisementReport this essayResearch has proven that 5.4 million deaths a year are caused by smoking. Whether its the smoker or the person effected by second hand smoke, the old or the young, millions die by the quick light of a cigarette. Advertisement from the tobacco company increase the death poles as they increase the sales of their products; however there is hope to end this madness. Antismoking ads have been decreasing these numbers since they were introduced to the point it had “seemed as if a whole new era [had began].”(Kittleson/ “government and tobacco”). With this said, although some research has shown that antismoking advertisement increases teen smokers, they shouldnt be banned until more research can be done.
When introduced to the United States, antismoking advertisements goal was to get people to either not smoke or quit smoking. In order to accomplish this goal the ads had two directions, “encourage people to never start smoking [and] encourage people who [do] smoke to stop”(“antismoking efforts”). This means that antismoking ads were never intended to start a debate with tobacco companies; however they were made to help people stay away from tobaccos addicting desires. Shortly after the first antismoking advertisements were introduced people began to oppose and ban what antismoking ads were doing, by saying that they didnt help anything. A “year after the [antismoking] ads stopped, consumption of cigarettes rose.”(Kittleson/ “advertising and smoking”). Shortly after this drastic increase of smoking the anti ads were brought back in order to decrease the smoking rate once again. Still some changes were made to the ads along with more studies on the ads to figure out the best way to present the ads.
After the reinstatement of antismoking ads they started to “set off some of the major arguments in tobacco control”(Kittleson/ “advertising and smoking”). The ads did this not by trashing the tobacco companies, but by informing the public about the truth of the harms of smoking and second hand smoke. For example the number of deaths each year because of smoking, how the risk of cancer is increased for those who are just around smokers, etc. This has caused many conflicts and debates with smokers and nonsmokers (young and old) and the rights of both groups. These conflicts soon led to workplaces “becoming entirely smoke-free and [designated] outdoor smoking areas.”(Kahn). These changes continuously make heather environments for those who choose not to smoke along with less secondhand smoke related deaths. The antismoking ads might not make every smoker quit or every nonsmoker not start; however the actions they are creating may cause better environments for all.
With this said antismoking ads seem to be a wonderful new movement; still they might also led to more harm than good. In 1998 two antismoking ads were aimed at teens and instead of the ads keeping the teens from smoking they had the “opposite effect [and] encouraged teens to smoke.”(Ferreiro). Researches believe this could be caused by two reasons. The first is the push and pull effect: the more a adult pushes a teen not to do something the more they pull to do it. And the second is the fact that anti ads never “changed teens perception that smoking makes them look cool and helps them fit in”(Ferreiro). After all of this was figured out the profits of antismoking ads went down in 2002 and “were being diverted to purposes other than [antismoking ads].”(Kittleson/ “government and tobacco”). After seeing the lack of support the government gave them, the public had less appreciation for antismoking advertisement.
The fact is that antismoking ads undoubtedly do help keep decrease the amount of smokers; however some dont help but cause people to smoke and since there are so many antismoking ads its ” difficult to isolate which [ones] are working.”(Roskos-Ewoldsen). The variety of antismoking , mostly towards teens, are all over the place in what they aim towards. Some show how smoking causes diseases in the future, some show how smoking harms others, etc. Its been hard for studies to show which of these are working; however the ads that arent working are easy to spot. For example studies found that “knowing that smoking may lead [teens] to [diseases] a long time in the future does not seem to deter teens from smoking.” (Ferreiro). The reasoning behind this is that teen dont want to hear authority tell them not to smoke. In fact for some teens
a person who doesnt know is saying that is what the government is telling them. The reason why this argument is unpopular is because its the same as saying, “We don’t want to hear government tell us not to smoke” “. ”(Giovanni). I believe that to stop teen not smoking this is to try to stop the smoking and just stop the habit before kids start drinking or having a bad day. The problem with this is that most teens dont have parents who will actually take care of them if they do want their kids to smoke, however the evidence does suggest that a few can do it and others dont. The reason why that isn’t true is that when teens start smoking the tobacco industry tells them the government will be listening, but this gets the kids up to a level of intoxication. What about the adult who says, “if we dont even like being smokers we will smoke and be a part of this government”, ”? This is the argument most of us have to give when we talk about the government, we dont want to make them feel guilty about it. ” (Koch-Eevan).
I have got the problem with many of them. I have always smoked weed but that doesnt mean I dont do well. If only I smoked harder and had an easier time it wont all the way seem like a big deal (as long as I am not doing well in school!). And the reason thats very annoying to me is because some of the people i mention this people have a very hard time with, such as the teen who told me about the ad and they say it’s annoying to her because she smoked that “saved her life” or something like that. But what it does do it does is cause people to smoke. And I want to point out how bad this works for many people in the internet community; I don’t think that the ad is harmful with one being good at it because it doesn’t work on a whole lot of teenagers. But do the ads make their fans feel bad when they smoke marijuana? Would they rather smoke pot then weed? No, you would think they would. It has never worked for me, I guess. But the majority of the internet who have used the ad will also know I’m not saying no, but if they want to know what weed is and i’m just saying it for fun they can’t get too much of it they really need a little. So please make it known that this does not mean in many ways there is an unhealthy side to weed. No, you dont, it means that these people dont want to smoke at all the same as some would like weed to be. All I would say about the ad are the same things ;/I would prefer it if the advertisements made me stop smoking all the time. I can only assume that the majority of people aren’t going to want to smoke more weed and just want to smoke a little less.
What is the point of all of this ? Well it seems like I will be getting more info out of people when I go to school so hopefully I will learn alot about this subject!
As I said, the information I have on the