The following quote is from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/01/business/01tobacco.html?_r=3&hpw (from a “CDC Public Health News Update” I receive weekly via email).
“Tobacco companies in the United States filed the first lawsuit, in federal district court in Kentucky, against the Food and Drug Administration, challenging a recently enacted federal law containing marketing and speech restrictions. The landmark law, signed by President Barrack Obama in June, requires new warning labels on packaging, limits advertising to black and white for certain audiences comprised of greater than 15% or two million readers under age 18, and bans advertising within 1000 feet of a school or playground, among other restrictions, which critics argue violate First Amendment free speech rights of the tobacco companies. Floyd Abrams, an attorney representing Lorillard Tobacco Company, argues, “The government has great power to protect children from certain products, including cigarettes, but tobacco is a legal product for adults. When you cut back their ability to speak to lawful purchasers, you do start running into legal issues.” Clifford E. Douglas, executive director of University of Michigan Tobacco Research Network contends, “If there’s any commercial speech that is constitutional to restrict, it’s the type of marketing covered in this legislation.” Altria Group, Inc., maker of Marlboro products, is not a participant in this lawsuit and supported the bill which is designed to reduce promotion of tobacco use to children and youth smoking.”
As a parent, I am happy to see this done to limit children being subjected to such advertising, especially since studies prove that children are much more susceptible to its influence. As a patriotic American I feel angered at the arrogance of our current government for enacting a federal law that blatantly limits someone’s (even the disgusting tobacco companies, LOL) freedom of speech. The freedoms afforded to us by the Constitution were not meant to be manipulated to suit different situations like this. A big part of me also sees this as just more big government trying to do the job that parents should be doing themselves.
What is your opinion? And please be respectful of others’ opinions! Thanks!
MT – I’m 31 too and I LOVE Dennis Leary! I still have that on cassette. It was called “No Cure For Cancer” or something like that. I especially loved hi rant on smoking ***** and how you should never do a drug named after a part of your @ss! LOL!
Thank God I’m not alone here!
It is very easy to protect and stand up for the freedom of speech of someone you agree with. It’s much more difficult to stand up for the freedom of speech of someone you don’t. either way, its a basic constitutional right that I am not interested in forfeiting… ever!
Dennis Leary had a bit 10 plus years ago about smoking. He said we could change the name to Cancer Sticks and put a Jolly Roger on the pack and they’d sell more.
The tobacco companies are not marketing to kids. Maybe they could have in some way been marketing in the old days, but I’m 31 and don’t feel they were ever marketed to me.
We are not a free society unless we can make stupid decisions.
If they do this to cigarettes, soda, candy, non-education TV…anything could be next.
“The government has great power to protect children from certain products, including cigarettes, but tobacco is a legal product for adults. When you cut back their ability to speak to lawful purchasers, you do start running into legal issues.”
So, following that line of thinking it’d also be perfectly acceptable to advertise alcohol, firearms, condoms, and all sorts of other adult toys on elementary school fences because the teachers are adults. Nice.
I’m glad they’re being reined in. I don’t think the government is trying to do our job as a parent, I think they’re trying to make it easier on us. Removing the advertising doesn’t mean we don’t still have to teach our children it’s bad, it just means there’s less to undermine us when they’re out and about.
“If they do this to cigarettes, soda, candy, non-education TV…anything could be next.”
This is a very good point too. But, as a former smoker and a current soda drinker (and a candy eater, love those skittles) I can honestly say that I wouldn’t mind seeing those shelves just a bit more bare.
I am Canadian put I would still like to state my feelings and opinions on this if that is alright.
I am very happy to see something like this put in place! okay yes there is a such thing as freedom of speech but there is still a limit to such a freedom. people can be charged for uttering things, and for doing things. you could not display something illegal and cigarettes are illegal to an extent. children are vulnerable and this is a good idea. i think they should e doing even more to eventually wipe out the sales of cigarettes.
I think it is a good idea. I still remember that big camel on a billboard and wondering why cigarettes were so goodWhen I was pretty young. I think they do market to children and that should be stopped. Adults who want to smoke do not need colorful ads near schools in order to entice them to buy them.
Point one, I am a smoker and have been since I was far too young to smoke (11). the single biggest influence in my starting was that my parents both smoked no matter how much I griped about it. at 11 I stole a pack and tried them and have smoked ever since. I have quit smoking a dozen times so far and have always wound up in a very brief time back to smoking. I am the only one of my siblings that ever smoked (four of us).
Point two, I have two children 11 and 13 and have told them in complete honesty that I am an addict and have explained why I believe they should avoid tobacco like they would the plague.
Point three, If we allow the government to keep violating the Constitution at every turn our children will have a great deal more to worry about than whether or not to try tobacco. if the government keeps “protecting our children” our children will be slaves in a totalitarian police state.
Point four, Do you know that Adolf ****** was an adamant non-smoker and believed that it was crucial to “protect youth from the evils of nicotine”?
nuff said
I agree with you completely!
There are a lot of messed up things happening in our country right now.
cigarettes are marketed towards children and teens — adults already know what they are, children don’t. they do not need to advertise to 30 year olds — 30 year olds are either smokers, which means they don’t benefit from the advertising, or non-smokers, which means they don’t pay attention to the advertising. a 20 or 30 or 40 something year old is not going to see a camel light advertisement by the swings at the playground and say, ‘hmm, I think I’m going to pick up smoking now because of that cool joe camel cartoon character!’
while I cannot remember the last time I saw a cigarette advertisement near a playground or a school (I’m in NY, they’re crazy about not smoking here), the law is a wonderful one. cigarette advertisers are angry because they DO advertise to children — that’s their market. they’re thinking how do we get new people to use our product? they know that adults, if they’re not smokers, are likely to not smoke anyways. teenagers are a great demographic though, on the other hand. those advertisement companies are pandering to young people and I’m glad Obama has chosen NOT to ignore it.
the tobacco companies are only mad because they know they advertise to young people.
add; I am a firm believer in free speech. I just don’t think this has much to do with it, to be honest. it has to do with the morals of the tobacco companies. it’s THEM, not the president.
I’m not super against it, but I see why others might be. It is a violation of first amendment rights, but so are many other things.
But I don’t want “how to make a bomb to blow up your school” instructions posted on playgrounds. And really not allowing people to post that is a violation of our first amendment rights.
The truth is the first amendment simply is not completely practical in today’s day and age. But still, I love the first amendment, and I do **** when it takes yet another blow. I’m scared of what our loss of public rights will do to us in the longterm.
Hitler was in so many ways, very very moral! He was against smoking, never committed adultery, was a vegetarian, a patron of the arts… but yet he was an evil man who committed great atrocities. Anyway, you really can’t condone something because ****** was for it, because in most aspects he was a model human being. It makes you wonder if Satan is kinda similar.
The government can try and stop children from smoking all they want, but let me tell you, it won’t work. If a teenager wants to smoke, they are going to smoke. No matter if they do less advertising and add more warning labels.
I do feel the the government is overstepping their boundaries, not only in this area, but in other too. It scares the hell out of me to think about what kind of country my son, and future children, are going to grow up in.