Tag: Tobacco industry documents

R.J. Reynolds Brainstorming Document Targets Younger Smokers

teen-smoking

Teen smokers light up

A 7-page, 1985 brainstorming document from the R.J. Reynolds collection lists ideas about how to market RJR’s flagship brand Camel cigarettes to young people who usually smoke the rival brand Marlboro. A cautionary note on the front page warns, “PLEASE NOTE: the following ideas were generated in an unstructured idea generation session. They have not been evaluated with regard to legal issues, marketing feasibility or cost considerations.” And how.  Some of the ideas listed are pretty wacky, and include having coupons for on-pack contests for the following items thought to appeal to younger smokers:

— Beer
— Clearasil
— Dinner with Eddie Murphy
— Trip won by parents of FUBYAS [“First Usual Brand Younger Adult Smokers”] that gets parents out of town for FUBYAS party (includes cleaning crew and extra refrigerator).
— Catchy, slightly lewd T-shirts (“Wanna hump?”)
— Late show admission with week’s worth of CAMEL packs.
— CAMEL courtesy bus at beach – to and from bars.
— Survival kit (what to do when arrested, etc.)
–“Pay” peer leaders to smoke brand.
— Free nose rings
— Free car insurance

Other ideas include developing a new dance called The Hump, and putting on concerts that have specially-reserved seating for Camel smokers or where Camel packs can be used as an entrance fees.

See the document for yourself here.

Source: FUBYAS Idea Generation Output, 1985, R.J. Reynolds document collection, Legacy Tobacco Documents Library.

Cigarette Makers Thwart Improved Health Warning Labels

Thai cigarette packs, with graphic health warning labels. Cigarette makers have blocked use of such labels in the U.S. through a lawsuit.

A newly-released study of previously secret, internal tobacco industry documents shows the multinational cigarette companies have been working consistently behind the scenes since 1966 to 2012 to block stronger health warning labels on cigarette packs. On-pack health warning labels are an effective and inexpensive way of educating the public about the health hazards of smoking. For decades, countries around the world have been trying to make these labels more effective, for example by using more strongly-worded warnings, or graphic photos of tobacco-related diseases like cancerous lungs, people with tracheotomies or rotting teeth. But cigarette companies view these improved labels as a “global threat” and formed international task forces to block their use.

ALEC: Big Tobacco’s “Third-Party” Ally

Tina A. Walls, former Philip Morris VP of State Government Affairs

Tobacco industry documents reveal that the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) has abetted the failure of state legislatures to take meaningful steps to rein in the devastation caused by tobacco use. In a previously-secret, 1993 internal Philip Morris (PM) presentation called Grasstops Government Relations, Tina A. Walls, then Vice President of State Government affairs at PM, describes the company’s strategies to influence legislators, and demonstrates how ALEC works with corporations to bolster that influence. As she shows Philip Morris employees a chart she calls “The Influence Wheel,” Walls describes how PM’s Government Affairs department analyzes every part of a legislator’s world and misses no opportunity to exert influence. Walls tells the audience how PM provides legislators with trips to “promotional and cultural events” in nice places, and as an example cites a trip ALEC facilitated in which a group of American legislators traveled to Brussels, Belgium. Walls wrote,

“We make sure legislators are aware of, and invited to, promotional and cultural events funded by Philip Morris. {CITE ALEC 1992 TRIP TO BRUSSELS AS AN EXAMPLE}”

Walls also discusses PM’s strategy to keep itself out of the media by using third parties to “carry its baggage,” and describes how PM uses third parties allies like ALEC to dodge issues:

“…we try to keep Philip Morris out of the media on issues like taxation, smoking bans and marketing restrictions. Instead, we try to provide the media with statements in support of our positions from third party sources, which carry more credibility than our company and have no apparent vested interest…”