Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Policy

Drug Propaganda Thursday

Radley Balko | 12.28.2006 3:40 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

This week, we'll go with one of my all-time favorites. It comes from New Zealand. If you're eating, you might want to pass on this one for now.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: The Trouble with Troubled Teen Programs

Radley Balko is a journalist at The Washington Post.

PolicyCultureWar on DrugsNanny StateDrug PolicyTelevisionDrugs
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (44)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Warren   19 years ago

    ROFL Oh that's precious. I like the way he leaves his credit card on the toilet seat for the next guy.

  2. John   19 years ago

    I'm all for legalizing drugs and letting people do as they please. But that doesn't mean plenty of people aren't destroying their lives with drugs. Yeah, some people use drugs responsibly, but many get addicted and do destroy their bodies, their families and their lives. I don't believe government should give a hoot, but that doesn't make ads like this "propaganda." Ineffective, maybe. A waste of taxpayer money, probably. But propaganda? No.

  3. jp   19 years ago

    I don't get the logic of this one. How is taking drugs like snorting up part of your brain?

  4. steveintheknow   19 years ago

    Love zombie movies. Love new wave. Gotta give it two thumbs up!!

  5. jp   19 years ago

    But zombies don't eat their own brains -- they eat other people's brains. (That's why they're scary, supposedly.)

  6. Warren   19 years ago

    John,
    WTF?
    I'm with you all the way. I am the biggest anti-prohibitionist around. I too have seen people fuck up their lives with drugs. I've seen people fuck up their lives with religion too. People fuck up their lives in all kinds of ways.

    But how is this anything but propaganda? From Dictionary.com:
    1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.

    Because some people have abused drugs, that validates this irreverent, irrelevant, je ne c'est quoi, irregardless?

  7. scape   19 years ago

    So if you snort cranberry sauce from a super cool head stash you'll be rich, good looking and only use sparkling clean restrooms? I don't get it.

  8. Thomas Paine\'s Goiter   19 years ago

    Wait, what kind of high is brain?

  9. daksya   19 years ago

    John, most users don't become dependent.

  10. monkeylicious   19 years ago

    So I just finished Jacob Sullum's Saying Yes. It was excellent, one of the few books that I truly wish I could actually force people to read.

    Towards the end when he's advancing a policy of moderate drug laws to govern a society of moderate drug use, one of Sullum's best points is that part of the (real) harm from drug use come from the ridiculous form in which they're consumed. Why do we snort cocaine (harmful) rather than chew coca leaves or drink coca wine?

    For the same reason that we used to drink Bathtub gin. Prohibition means that suppliers who are both ruthless and economically rational give us hyper-concentrated and adulterated product. Consider: supply is uncertain, it's easier to stash a smaller supply, and people with limited options need to get their money's worth. Notice that although it's available, most people don't spend all their time drinking 160-proof rum.

    Snorting coke may in fact be bad. Drinking original formula Coca-cola almost certainly isn't.

    But now we're left only with the prospect of the former. The Drug War makes safe drug use much, much harder.

    Damned prohibition screws up everything.

  11. Les   19 years ago

    John,

    How do you define "propaganda?"

  12. jet   19 years ago

    This appears to be an advertisement. Misleading, yes, but the airwaves are full of misleading ads. When cocaine and other drugs become legal, churches, rehab centers, and other organizations will buy airtime to convince people that drugs are bad. Other organizations (i.e, drug makers) can counter with ads touting the benefits of their products and showing how the anti-drug organizations are wrong.

  13. Smappy   19 years ago

    Because some people have abused drugs, that validates this irreverent, irrelevant, je ne c'est quoi, irregardless?

    "Irregardless" is not a word. Irrespective is a word. Regardless is a word. Please choose from one of them. Irregardless is a bastardized mash-up.

  14. steveintheknow   19 years ago

    Look you guys this is ART!

    There is a guy, in a bathroom, ripping his skull back and snorting it like coke. That is art. The only thing missing is, him waking up in an ice bath, in an undisclosed warehouse with an organ missing...art.

    Oh and some naked bitches... who hug naked.

    Art.

  15. highnumber   19 years ago

    Irregardless is a bastardized mash-up.

    Was it on the Xmas CD?

  16. JW   19 years ago

    Bregenwurst anyone?

  17. Jerry   19 years ago

    Last night I had a dream that a hamburger was eating me.

  18. El   19 years ago

    I agree with this advertisement. Adrenochrome is the shit.

  19. Warren   19 years ago

    Smappy,
    You persimmon-puss schoolmarm you. 'Irregardless' is a perfectly cromulent word. It means 'regardless only more so'. Unfortunately for you, the English speaking world does not acknowledge you as our arbitrator. Put that in your thesaurus and cross reference it grammar queen.

  20. edna   19 years ago

    "videodrome is more dangerous than that, max. it has a philosophy."

    long live the new flesh.

  21. jp   19 years ago

    Warren, the English-speaking world may not acknowledge Smappy as its arbitrator, but I can't find any authority that approves of "irregardless." E.g., usage note in American Heritage 4th ed. ("it has been considered a blunder for decades and will probably continue to be so"); Garner's Dictionary of Modern American Usage ("should have been stamped out long ago"); even the ultra-permissive Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage ("still a long way from winning general acceptance as a standard English word").

  22. jb   19 years ago

    I don't see how this is so bad. Powder cocaine is quite nasty stuff, even if, as was mentioned, coca leaves and original formula coca-cola aren't bad.

    In the absence of draconian drug laws and SWAT raids, this ad wouldn't be bad at all, and in their presence whatever wrongness it has pales in comparison.

    Now, if he was going into the bathroom to light up a joint, that'd be another story.

  23. Les   19 years ago

    jb,

    I think it really is so bad because of the text at the end. "Every day, more and more people are lining up to destroy themselves." That's just ridiculously untrue.

  24. andy   19 years ago

    Warren,

    Because some people have abused drugs, that validates this irreverent, irrelevant, je ne c'est quoi, irregardless?

    I believe you meant "je ne sais quoi." What you said is akin to saying "I don't that is know." But don't worry about your French, work on your English first.

    You may be the first person I've seen fuck up multiple languages in a single sentence.

  25. Hannibal Lecter   19 years ago

    I don't see what the problem is here.

  26. uncle sam   19 years ago

    This is your druggie on brains.

  27. Warren   19 years ago

    andy,
    Good to know.

  28. Armed and Hammered   19 years ago

    Peter Jackson used the same skull gag to hilarious effect in his first movie, Bad Taste.

  29. Intelligent Language Designer   19 years ago

    These evolving language people are idiots. "Irregardless," a word? Never. The English language was designed to perfection several decades back, just around the time you started school. Those that say that it evolved or is still evolving are idiot satanists. Pay them no mind, while they snort theirs to oblivion.

  30. Aresen   19 years ago

    jp, smappy, ILD:

    Usage determines, disirregardlessly of what you pontificate.

    Uncle Sam @ 7:35 PM wins the thread!

  31. dhex   19 years ago

    holy shit that was truly excellent. the design is nice. the soundtrack: excellent. pure class all around.

  32. jb   19 years ago

    Les: OK, so there is hyperbole. Still, I think it's tame compared to some of the other Drug Propaganda Thursdays, or to other aspects of the drug war in general.

    In fact, since there is a continual stream of new cocaine users, I'd argue that this ad lies less than many commercials for actual products.

    Of course, I'm extremely cynical.

  33. James Gierach   19 years ago

    Legalize drugs to take the profit out of pay toilets.

  34. GreginOz   19 years ago

    Soooo, is Columbia suffering from a 'brain' drain?
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/
    0,,1975161,00.html

  35. Jim Walsh   19 years ago

    I can just imagine Basil Fawlty striding in at the moment of truth and saying, "Is this a piece of your brain..."

  36. montpelier28   19 years ago

    It was a comedy right? I thought it was funny. The War on Drugs isn't funny.It destroys as all wars do.

  37. jp   19 years ago

    Aresen -- U is right, i should just goes wit teh flows.

  38. A Rational Person   19 years ago

    If given the choice, I would much rather have my confiscated money put to the use of creating commercials than SWAT team raids. I am no fan of the War on Drugs but I do agree with the message of this commercial, that powder cocaine is destructive. I was not alive when original formula Coca-Cola existed so I cannot speak for that but certainly cocaine in the form it commonly exists today is VERY destructive. I am all for advertisements that try to convince people not to destroy their lives (I just do not always agree with the way they are funded). This is called persuasion.

  39. Les   19 years ago

    I am all for advertisements that try to convince people not to destroy their lives (I just do not always agree with the way they are funded).

    But this commercial asserts that simply using cocaine will destroy your life. I believe the available evidence shows that the vast majority of people who use cocaine are not destroying their lives because they use it in the same way that the vast majority of people use alcohol, recreationally instead of habitually.

  40. ChicagoTom   19 years ago

    Peter Jackson used the same skull gag to hilarious effect in his first movie, Bad Taste.

    I saw that movie in High School and thought it was a great B movie. Everyone I have ever mentioned it to has no idea what I was talking about. Never realized it was Peter Jackson who directed it.

    "Bad Taste" was the first thing I thought of when I saw the ad. Good to know there are others who have seen this movie, too.

  41. dagny   19 years ago

    The English language was designed to perfection several decades back, just around the time you started school.

    The English language was ruined in 1066. Compared with the bastardizations English has gone through since then, nothing we do now really matters.

  42. daksya   19 years ago

    so I cannot speak for that but certainly cocaine in the form it commonly exists today is VERY destructive.

    Actually, no. Until smoked cocaine really took hold in the 80s, the DSM didn't even have a category for cocaine dependence.

    Thanks to the War on Drugs, most people, certainly Americans, don't know this but the WHO alongwith UNICRI conducted a global study on cocaine use in the early 90s. The resulting report showed that most cocaine users used it occasionally for a period of years and suffered no significant harm. Most harm was concentrated among chronic high-dose users. The report also claimed that coca leaf use had positive benefits. Since these findings contradicted the dogma of the prohibitionists, the US representative threatened to curtail further funding if the report was officially published. It wasn't published. But a press release had been inadvertently released beforehand and was covered by the British Medical Journal. Some of the materials, including a summary of the report and the minutes of the meeting containing the US threat were recovered and are available here. Of course, I'm ignoring lonitudinal ethnographic studies of real-world cocaine use (as opposed to just those who show up in treatment) such as those by Tom DeCortes in Belgium or Peter Cohen in the Netherlands. If you want, I'll find those citations.

  43. Michele   19 years ago

    Sorry- but the DSM is just as political as anything else. Prior to the 80s, cocaine was associated with criminals, long-haul truck drivers and 'jazz-playing Negroes', and therefore of no importance. When smoked cocaine and snorted cocaine both became middle-class problems, scientists became interested in their abuse.
    There's also the factor that cocaine prior to the 80s was relatively impure. Like marijuana up to that point, it didn't have as much of a kick as it does now. During the 80s, when rich and middle class whites atarted using it by the ton and their noses started collapsing and their lungs started to fray, the DSM began to include it.
    That doesn't mean coke wasn't a problem. It just wasn't a problem for people who mattered to those in power.

  44. daksya   19 years ago

    That doesn't mean coke wasn't a problem.

    I didn't say that, was only countering the claim that powder cocaine is "very destructive". Off the top of my head, drug use in the US peaked in 1979. The specific trend for cocaine is closely aligned. Cocaine did merit plenty of attention among academics - see the special issue on cocaine in the Journal of Psychedelic Drugs (later renamed Journal of Psychoactive Drugs) in the mid or late 70s, including profiles of middle-class use.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

69 Percent of Americans Say American Dream Is Not Dead

Autumn Billings | 7.4.2025 8:30 AM

With Environmental Regulatory Reform, California Gov. Gavin Newsom Finally Does Something Substantial

Steven Greenhut | 7.4.2025 7:30 AM

Celebrate Independence Day by Insulting a Politician

J.D. Tuccille | 7.4.2025 7:00 AM

Independence Day Reminds Us You Can Be American by Choice

Billy Binion | 7.4.2025 6:30 AM

Brickbat: Friends in High Places

Charles Oliver | 7.4.2025 4:00 AM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!