They cover every single age and demographic there is. For the lower income demographics, they offer "knock off" brands that are more affordable to them. They brand name their cigarettes to target different cultures and nationalities. Brands such as Rio and American Spirit have been used to target the Hispanic and Native American cultures. Cigarette brands like Camel even offer packs in the color pink to target the young girls.
They make it impossible to not be drawn into the smoking world. A study in May 2007 by the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, showed that retail marketing directly increased the likelihood that youth would start smoking. As if that's not enough, they now offer "buy one get one free" coupons to increase the affordability of cigarettes for youth. Studies have shown that the cheaper the cigarettes are, the number of smoking youth increases dramatically. Tobacco companies are marketing geniuses, they manage to put cancer, disease and eventually death into nearly every hand of one of the most intelligent populations in the world.
American Lung Association. (2013). Tobacco Industry Marketing. American Lung Association. Retrieved April 13, 2013 from, http://www.lung.org/stop-smoking/about-smoking/factsfigures/tobacco-industry-marketing.html
This type of information amazes me to this day. I might be one of the very few to say that I have never smoked a cigarette in my life and have no plans on doing so. For my friends who do smoke, it seems that most of them started in the first year or so of high school, making them around sixteen. This is a huge demographic and you were right about the packaging and how innovative yet simple their packaging is, but it still helps attract young crowds. It is crazy to think that it has been illegal to show cigarette commercials on television since 1970 or 1971 and the rate of growth for new young smokers is still sky high. The amount of money spent per day for advertising was an astonishing piece of information, but how hard can it be to sell a product that millions are addicted and will be addicted to?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Taylor, the rate of replacement consumers is holding strong and despite the best efforts of multiple counter-campaigns, young people continually start to smoke. Personally I have never been addicted to cigarettes but I was young and dumb and have tried them before, thankfully I never really liked it and therefore have not smoked a cigarette in 4 years. But like Taylor said "...how hard can it be to sell a product that millions are addicted to...". If Coca-Cola had to take the cocaine out of their product then how could it be legal to sell cigarettes, which we know are extremely addictive?
ReplyDeleteI hear my friends complain constantly about the price of cigarettes and I do not think they realize that no matter what the price of cigarettes are they will continue to buy them.If orange juice suddenly was to expensive to purchase i could easily decide to not drink it and switch to cranberry juice or whatever, which simply is not a tactic employed by cigarette smokers. There are alternative smoking options available today like E-Cigs (electric cigarettes that emit water vapor infused with nicotine) but these are rarely used as most cigarette smokers just want another cigarette.
I guess the lesson we can take from cigarette companies is "If you want to make tons of money and really do not care about the lives of your customers then make a product that they will be physically addicted to and make it be palatable enough to become a norm in modern society." Although this business model is reminiscent of the thought patterns of a sociopath it has been proven to be extremely lucrative.
I see the information and think that's crazy. I knew the cigarette companies put multimillion dollar adds to get the youth interested in smoking. But the best advertising those companies have are the smokers, as a youth i saw my mom smoking but I didn't think anything of it. I can't say that for two of my brothers and sister because now they each smoke almost a pack a day. I don't think that's the result of advertising but from seeing my mother sitting on back porch relaxing after work.
ReplyDeleteI see the information and think that's crazy. I knew the cigarette companies put multimillion dollar adds to get the youth interested in smoking. But the best advertising those companies have are the smokers, as a youth i saw my mom smoking but I didn't think anything of it. I can't say that for two of my brothers and sister because now they each smoke almost a pack a day. I don't think that's the result of advertising but from seeing my mother sitting on back porch relaxing after work.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think saying that cigarette companies 'are marketing geniuses and manage to put cancer, disease and eventually death into nearly ever hand' is harsh rhetorically. It seems to be a vilification of cigarette companies. Yeah these are real dangers of using tobacco, but the choice of smoking or not is ultimately left up to the consumer. I think it is unfair to criticize tobacco companies for offering a product to a public that largely understands its dangers. Tanning beds are known to increase the risk of cancer, yet teenage girls rush to them like their relationship status depends on it. Tanning bed companies are not increasing the girl's risk of getting cancer, the girl is. It's the same for cigarette companies and their consumers.
ReplyDeleteRobert, this article was very informative. However, cigarette companies and tobacco companies are not necessarily responsible for cancer. In the end consumers are what fund these tobacco companies. Therefore it seems to me that cigarette companies aren't necessarily to blame for cancer or trying to sell their products. Every company does something sneaky or possibly even corrupt to sell their products to consumers, and most products we eat, drink, or even buy have something that is bad for you in them. These tobacco companies are simply trying to make money, which I have no real problem with because of the dangers of other products, foods, drinks, and chemicals we consume on a daily basis. We must not demonize companies for making money even though over a long period of time the product may cause cancer. I'm not standing up for those who smoke, however, it is just their choice, and the consumer's choice on whether or not they are willing to have the subsequent health problems for the experience that smoking gives them.
ReplyDeleteThis is a very interesting article. I think it is amazing how many people around the world still smoke even with all the information we know about cigarettes and their side effects. I do disagree that advertising is the same today as it was 50 years ago. Back in the 1950’s and 60’s virtually everyone smoked and people really didn’t know any better. You could see people smoking in shows and movies and it just became a part of everyday life. I think that has changed immensely over the last half century, especially in the U.S., due to new research.
ReplyDeleteIt's articles like this that make me question the future of this country. How can a country that claims to care about the health and future of all Americans continue to allow cigarettes to be sold to minors. Oh sure, retail stores aren't supposed to be able to sell them to people under the age of 18, but that's hardly a detriment. Hell, when I was training for my grocery store position, I had to spend two flipping hours about how to prevent minors from purchasing cigarettes, despite the fact that I wasn't even working in a department that would entail the selling of such.
ReplyDeleteThis post made me think about why advertising would make such a leap in modern times. I cant help but relate it to Casey's response. In the 1940's and 50's smoking was just a way of life. Everyone did it, everyone knew people who did it. The billboards were walking around and talking to each and every person. However, as time has progressed and anti-smoking campaigns were created, perhaps enough of these walking billboards have been removed that advertising on a much greater scale has become necessary. If you never knew someone who smoked, would you start up without that initial push from marketing?
ReplyDeleteI feel like the issue here is with the consumers more than the companies. We all know the health risks related to smoking so regardless of how effective their marketing strategy might be we should, in theory, abstain. But we do not. Instead we allow ourselves to be taken over and we continue to smoke even though it is detrimental to our health. The government has had years and years to try to make smoking illegal if they thought it was prudent, and they obviously have not. So for as long as it remains legal the tobacco companies are completely within their rights and best interests to advertise their product to whomever they would like to. The burden needs to rest squarely on the shoulders of the consumers for making their own poor decisions. They know the risks coming in.
ReplyDelete