Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
New Tobacco Advertising Limits Challenged in Federal Court
In June I predicted that the advertising restrictions imposed by the law that authorizes the FDA to regulate tobacco products will be overturned on First Amendment grounds. Yesterday R.J. Reynolds and several other tobacco companies filed a federal lawsuit that challenges the new rules, which include bans on tobacco-brand sponsorship of sporting or entertainment events, on outdoor advertising within 1,000 feet of a school or playground, and on the use of color or pictures in outdoor ads, indoor ads (except those in adult-only businesses), and print ads carried by publications with significant underage readerships. The suit also challenges the new, larger warning labels (which will cover the top half of the front and back on each package), arguing that they will leave too little space for manufacturers' speech, and the prohibition against discussing the relative risks of different tobacco products without the FDA's permission.
RJR's press release here (PDF).
Joe M|9.1.09 @ 3:56PM|#
How can we live in a society where, simultaneously, marijuana continues to approach legalization, and tobacco continues to approach criminalization? Calling it cognitive dissonance is an understatement.
|9.1.09 @ 4:01PM|#
i've always wondered how much a brand really realises from associating w/ a racecar or the like. i would bet that cigs and beer are the products most likely to get loyalty customers out of those affiliations.
|9.1.09 @ 4:07PM|#
New Tobacco Advertising Limits Challenged in Federal
Court
I think the companies should be allowed to print all the ads on
cigarettes they want. They can be hard to read, especially if you
don't smoke and someone is waving them around, but they should be
free to do so.
|9.1.09 @ 4:09PM|#
...on outdoor advertising within 1,000 feet of a school or
playground...
Considering the only people who smoke are gun-carrying sex
offenders, is this really that onerous a restriction?
Zeb|9.1.09 @ 4:11PM|#
It seems to me that a person or company ought to be able to publish anything that is true in any form they want to.
|9.1.09 @ 4:20PM|#
None of this matters! Gmail is down!
Noooooo!!! Get the children into the shelter! I'll get the guns and
crackers!
Kevin|9.1.09 @ 4:24PM|#
Noooooo!!! Get the children into the shelter! I'll get the
guns and crackers!
As a white guy, I find that to be very racist.
Is there a "Godwin"-like term for racism?
|9.1.09 @ 4:25PM|#
If he shuts down Blogger, he'll have crossed my line of no
return and will face the Mother of All Bloggings.
I don't remember Bush shutting down the Internet.
Tony|9.1.09 @ 4:27PM|#
How can we live in a society where, simultaneously, marijuana continues to approach legalization, and tobacco continues to approach criminalization? Calling it cognitive dissonance is an understatement.
Isn't that the logical direction if we consider their respective
effects on health?
Kevin|9.1.09 @ 4:29PM|#
I don't remember Bush shutting down the Internet.
He did, and he replaced it with an exact replica. Remember that
"page not found" error you got on 6/7/2006 at 8:32pm? That was the
switchover.
Nipplemancer|9.1.09 @ 4:32PM|#
alice - my cigarettes are a distinctive blend of the finest Turkish and Domestic tobaccos. says so on the box!
|9.1.09 @ 4:32PM|#
I logged into Blogger just fine. I can still my precious musings out to a nation of adoring fans. Whew.
Nipplemancer|9.1.09 @ 4:35PM|#
my shopping list is on gmail and my wife is working late. she's gonna be pissed when she finds out dinner is pizza and we're still out of toilet paper.
|9.1.09 @ 4:36PM|#
I can still my precious musings
Oh would you, please?
The sky has gone dark here in Seattle. I can only assume this has
something to do with the gmailfail.
Joe M|9.1.09 @ 4:47PM|#
The sky has gone dark here in Seattle. I can only assume
this has something to do with the gmailfail.
I didn't know gmail was using satellites.
|9.1.09 @ 4:48PM|#
Is there a "Godwin"-like term for racism?
Around here, I think it would be "joe".
As in, "You really joed that thread on cyberchimps, dude."
|9.1.09 @ 4:58PM|#
As in, "You really joed that thread on cyberchimps,
dude."
This could work. Would it be "joed" or "joe'd"? Kind of like
"punk'd" but without Ashton Kutcher (thankfully)?
|9.1.09 @ 5:02PM|#
You guys sure talk about joe a lot. I think he looms large in
your imaginations.
He's winning this thread, too.
BakedPenguin|9.1.09 @ 5:22PM|#
How can we live in a society where, simultaneously, marijuana continues to approach legalization, and tobacco continues to approach criminalization? Calling it cognitive dissonance is an understatement.
Well, while I don't agree with all the BS tobacco rules, to be
fair, marijuana does cause many fewer deaths than tobacco.
PicassoIII|9.1.09 @ 5:27PM|#
Have to agree with Alice for a second. When you hear FDA means
you think you get an ingredient list.
Not going to happen anytime soon. Simply because one provision says
Altria has to tell FDA what's in a Marlboro Red doesn't mean we'll
find out.
Reducing nicotine to a minimum is a backfire from public health
view, a protectionist racket for PM and more for sin taxers.
It's just a replay of MSA and most states PI$$ED that cash
away.
Between this and e-cigs Tobacco control is truly a joke now.
Tobacco is (still) legal there should be no restrictions on the
producers 1st and other rights ... period. Too bad we don't have
more Thomas or Kozinski style thinking in most upper level Fed
courts right now.
It's not looking good for the moment.
|9.1.09 @ 5:31PM|#
alice bowie | September 1, 2009, 4:14pm | #
Why is big tobacco afraid to list the ingredients of thier
products?
because apparently smokers don't care enough to demand they be
told. duh.
PicassoIII|9.1.09 @ 5:41PM|#
Uh, alcohol trumps.
If you buy computer simulated tobacco deaths from neo
prohibitionists then alcohol 'kills' more when you include those
not doing it.
Or at least according to the 'experts'.
http://www.rsadrugscommission.org.uk/pdf/RSA_Drugs_Report.pdf
A March 2007 report by the Royal Society for the encouragement of
Arts, Manufactures & Commerce (UK) found that the financial
health costs of alcohol and tobacco were equal. Drinking, unlike
smoking, played a role in 78 percent of assaults and 88 percent of
criminal damage.
http://www.slate.com/id/2172230/
Twenty-five to forty percent of all patients in U.S. general
hospital beds (not in maternity or intensive care) are being
treated for complications of alcohol-related problems.
Annual health care expenditures for alcohol-related problems amount
to $22.5 billion. The total cost of alcohol problems is $175.9
billion a year (compared to $114.2 billion for other drug problems
and $137 billion for smoking). In comparison to moderate and
non-drinkers, individuals with a history of heavy drinking have
higher health care costs. Untreated alcohol problems waste an
estimated $184.6 billion dollars per year in health care, business
and criminal justice costs, and cause more than 100,000
deaths.
A vast majority of why pot seems benign in comparison is a simple
toxicology rule > dose makes the poison.
http://www.erowid.org/plants/cannabis/cannabis_info3.shtml
That huge UCLA cancer study only followed subjects to 60. COPD
effects are less but similar and CVD effects might be worse.
ALL of this misses the point.
Yes, since we have decided that tobacco is to remain legal then the
producers have their rights. PLAINLY spelled out in the
Constitution. There is NO halfway about this.
For crying out loud Alcohol pushers can still sponsor
motorsports?
A great majority of car ads require the diclaimer 'professional
driver on a closed course' unless they feature hamsters.
Are these NOT very conflicted messages!
Of course, seeing a Viagra logo plastered across a NASCAR hood is
pathetically appropriate. Me i know that Kimi won in the MARLBORO
Ferrari at Spa. Even though i dislike that particular manufacturer
the most i still recognize what that bowlderized UPC code
symbolizes.
Vices are Not Crimes
http://www.lysanderspooner.org/VicesAreNotCrimes.htm
In there is a moral defense of cig makers, in no uncertain
terms.
Argh, just cut&paste links
|9.1.09 @ 5:42PM|#
I always thought cigarettes contained tobacco and paper. Are there other ingredients? I'm a nonsmoker and ignorant in the ways of the weed.
PicassoIII|9.1.09 @ 5:45PM|#
@Ransom147
Some smokers do care and searched out brands like American Spirit,
Nat Sherman and even Winstons these days.
Isn't a free market wonderful.
Of course none of the 'powers that be' want e-cigs. Shows where
their heads are at.
Smoke and die, or take a pill and die, while we all pick yer
pocket.
|9.1.09 @ 5:47PM|#
PL:
there's some concern in the anti smoking nazi community of people
who were related to people who chose to smoke and died as a
consequence, that cos like RJ & PM put chems in their tobacco
products to make them more addictive...
their are cert "organic and pure" products out there, but most
people don't really care enough to pay for them.
all i know about weed is that i hate it.
|9.1.09 @ 5:48PM|#
PicassoIII | September 1, 2009, 5:45pm | #
i agree 100%. which was the thrust of my comment...
|9.1.09 @ 5:57PM|#
PL: actually even worse than crack according to some. some will even tell you w/ a straight face more addictive than heroin.
PicassoIII|9.1.09 @ 6:00PM|#
@ Pro Lib:
Not by a long shot. Reds, Newpies got quite some junk in em.
http://fauxbacco.blogspot.com/
Joe is sorta right. A vast majority comes from burning ANY plant
material (see erowid link above) or this.
http://burningissues.org/car-www/pdfs/WoodSmokeTobaccoSmtablemira.pdf
Still, dioxins from bleached paper, nitrosamines from direct
curing, pesticide residues (including some radioactive ish) and who
knows what else could be a little to half the toxicity.
http://www.healthcentral.com/drdean/408/14275.html
*shrugs*
PicassoIII|9.1.09 @ 6:09PM|#
@ ransom147,
I hear ya.
I've tried, inhaled and enjoyed both.
Years ago .... of course.
Being an environmental chemist this is fascinating stuff too.
PicassoIII|9.1.09 @ 6:13PM|#
Heroin ... LoL.
Once we see a nic fit make someone go fetal position for days.
|9.1.09 @ 6:14PM|#
Again, I'm totally ignorant here. Just thinking about it, I
could see some flavor additives and preservatives being included,
and maybe some illegal opiates. . .okay, I'm kidding about that
part. I imagine the nicotine is pretty damned addictive and doesn't
need any help.
This reminds me of something:
Stuart Mackenzie: Well, it's a well known fact, Sonny Jim, that there's a secret society of the five wealthiest people in the world, known as The Pentavirate, who run everything in the world, including the newspapers, and meet tri-annually at a secret country mansion in Colorado, known as The Meadows.
Tony Giardino: So who's in this Pentavirate?
Stuart Mackenzie: The Queen, The Vatican, The Gettys, The Rothschilds, *and* Colonel Sanders before he went tits up. Oh, I hated the Colonel with is wee *beady* eyes, and that smug look on his face. "Oh, you're gonna buy my chicken! Ohhhhh!"
Charlie Mackenzie: Dad, how can you hate "The Colonel"?
Stuart Mackenzie: Because he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes ya crave it fortnightly, smartass!
|9.1.09 @ 6:37PM|#
PL:
hah!
there used to be a conspiracy theory about Church's. story was they
put something in the oil to make black men sterile...
Pica:
i hear ya. i'm still a tobacco user, and really interested in the e
cigs, as i know i need to quit, but don't really want to.
as far as weed, i never cared for it, it has some physical effects
that i don't like. of course so do shrooms, but there the positive
effects outweigh the negative ones...
|9.1.09 @ 6:49PM|#
it's damn sure not good food.
chicken tastes like what you put on it.
baxter black
The Libertarian Guy|9.1.09 @ 8:24PM|#
Good. Sue the bat shit out of the government.
And I don't even smoke cigarettes. But the price of Middleton's
pipe-tobacco cigars have gone up, so double-fuck the
government.
Ratdog|9.1.09 @ 11:38PM|#
It's the "government chemicals" that make the Sandoz
laboratories LSD-25 in government fried chicken different from the
Sandoz laboratories LSD-25 in civilian fried chicken.
My advice, go with the government chicken, it's from 100% USDA
free-cheese fed chickens resulting in a greasier bird. The extra
grease serves as a lubricant to provide a "smoother trip."
I'm basing my opinion on third person accounts, I've never actually
had either chicken myself, of course.
The Libertarian Guy|9.1.09 @ 11:55PM|#
LSD isn't an effective mind-control agent.
Trust me, I ate that shit like candy for a while. Didn't turn me
into a liberal at all.
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245