As I'm sure all of you know, cigarettes are less than healthy (to say the least). But as a nation, Americans buy and die from cigarettes at an alarming rate. Numerous studies tout the statistics; one of which is a Truth Campaign ad that says 1200 people a day die from the little white cancer stick. So, while we have all been told and told and told again that cigarettes are bad, Big Tobacco seems to be flourishing. What are they doing right (or should I say wrong)?
Well, this post would be quite irrelevant to the class if my answer wasn't: EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION. The various communication strategies don't come cheap; the budget for Big Tobacco advertising is outstanding. In 1998 when Big Tobacco feared losing to the Tobacco Control Bill, they threw $40 million in 8 weeks towards an advertising blitz, convincing people to go against the bill. The clear effect of this spending is great ads downplaying the harm and over-emphasizing (read as- lying) the benefits of taking a drag. The industry knows exactly how to appeal to a young crowd- smooth taste, popularity, sophistication- to get 'em hooked young.
Another costly yet effective measure comes in the form of Big Tobacco spokespersons. These C.E.O.s and other advocates for tobacco skillfully twist and bend words, definitions, or scientific findings to work in their favor. Any time a Big Tobacco exec is in the public's eye, you can bet they are ready to refute any harsh questions with a perfectly sculpted answer meant to confuse and skirt the issue at hand. By using precise language and a calm, level-headed tone, these fellows can manipulate the English language to do their bidding.
Anti-tobacco advocates could learn a lesson or two from the methods of effective communication employed by Big Tobacco. And with that kind of skill being used for good, the progress towards proper tobacco legislation seems limitless. So how much would it cost to get Martin Orlowsky to switch over from the dark side? Probably a bit more than a pack of cigs.
Yeah I agree that they use good communication to get people to use cigarettes, but I don't think that's just it. Smoking has become a bit glamorized in TV and movies, so its easy to see why people pick up those bad habits.
ReplyDeleteI think anti-smoking campaigns, especially truth are opening a lot of people's eyes and do use effective communication. Their adds present the shocking data on effects of smoking very bluntly and I do think its working... slowly but surely.
Now they even have cigarettes that are supposedly healthy. It's called the smart cigarette. Click here to find out more information about it.
1. My inner twelve year old boy laughed at the picture.
ReplyDelete2. Something relevant to add to the conversation: Thank You For Smoking clip. And a fun fact, Aaron Eckhart actually doesn't smoke at all in the movie. Though if we're looking for great persuasive speech examples later in the semester, I'm totally voting for the ice cream speech from Thank You For Smoking.
I just want to say that this is a topic im really interested in because I have a lot life that people in my just don't seem to get that cigarettes are bad for you. My mother smokes my brother smokes and my friend. I'm currently on a mission to at least help my mom kick the habit "AGAIN" she stopped smoking for almost 7 years and because of some recent changes and mishaps just started back up and I hope to have her back on her feet before the year is out.
ReplyDeleteI saw thank you for smoking, it's a funny movie.
ReplyDeleteI'm actually watching "Thank you for Smoking" now.
ReplyDeleteAaron, thanks for the post.
Persuasion is a dangerous, dangerous tool when it's in the hands of the wrong people of the wrong cause. I think you hit the nail on the head when you brought up Big Tobacco's budget -- the difference between their persuasive campaign and the TRUTH campaign is that one is an advertising, promotional campaign and the other is a non-profit, public campaign.
Big Tobacco has ridiculous amounts of money to pay for market research, advertising space, and lobbyist. Campaigns like the TRUTH campaign depend on grants, donations, and people having common sense and the will to persist in order to change something that can be more persistent than they can... addiction.
The light at the end of the tunnel is the ability for low-budget campaigns to go viral these days -- of course I would say that right? But it's true. The more TRUTH and other campaigns can develop creative concepts for their messages that will get through to people in persuasive, viral ways...the more likely they will be to get more people to stand behind them. Even the generations of people who think smoking is cool might be persuaded to change their mind because the counter-campaign's message is cooler still.
You bring up a really good point that I believe connects to really great marketing. Companies use marketing as a way to effectively communicating and ads can be very persuasive. This reminded me a lot of the beer companies which show men just hanging out with the guys and then once they drink some beer while watching football, gorgeous woman just show up.I think that it is false advertising because woman do not just appear but they are effectively communicating their message, just not the one that is right!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Laura -- this really reminds me of beer commercials as well. Smoking and beer commercials usually have a guy with at least one attractive girl. Like Andi mentioned, persuasion can be extremely powerful. In the case of smoking, the persuasion is unfortunately deadly. It makes me wonder how cigarette sellers feel about themselves. Essentially, they are getting rich from selling people deadly products. Who would want to earn their money that way?
ReplyDelete