The Ghost of Cigarette Advertising

Past

John E. Calfee these are decidedly oblique ("If You Smoke, Please Try Carlton"). With advertising devoted Medical Association proposed that the almost exclusively to promoting the desirability federal government ban all advertising and other of smoking, it is not surprising that many who promotion of cigarettes. The new policy would believe smoking is undesirable also believe we apply primarily to magazine and billboard ad- would be better off without advertising. vertising since cigarette advertising on television But where does the simple, upbeat message is already prohibited. The AMA's proposal has of cigarette advertising come from? The answer been embraced by public health groups, schol- probably seems obvious to most people. Cigaars, and pundits such as George F. Will. Legisla- rette advertising serves the interests of the cigation to implement the ban has been introduced rette manufacturers, and what the manufacturin the House and Senate, and the Surgeon Gen- ers want is to promote smoking and keep eral of the United States, long the pointman for cigarettes and health worries as far apart in the federal anti-smoking advice and policy, has testi- public mind as possible. Government regulation fied in support of the legislation. must be responsible for what little health inSupport for the ban is inspired by many fac- formation there is in cigarette advertisements. tors, not the least of which is the nature of ciga- This is the view I was taught-dressed up in the rette advertising itself. Most cigarette advertising language of "market failure"-when I went to today unabashedly promotes the pleasures of work at the FTC as a staff economist in 1980. smoking-even the pleasures of life-with no But this common-sense view is wrong. A mention of health hazards except as required by look at the history of cigarette advertising suglaw. Advertisements carry fine-print notices of gests that today's sanitized advertising copy probthe brand's "official" tar and nicotine content as ably would not have come about, and most cermeasured by the Federal Trade Commission (the tainly would not have persisted, in the absence of result of an agreement between the FTC and the FTC regulation. When cigarette advertising was cigarette manufacturers), and carry a manda- less regulated, competition among manufacturtory, government-written health warning. Other- ers routinely led to advertisements containing inwise, the only hint of health problems is in ad- formation on the health effects of smokingvertisements for a few ultra-low-tar brands, and much of it in blunt and provocative languageeven though this was sometimes highly destructive to the interests of the cigarette industry as a John E. Calfee is visiting lecturer at the College of Business and Management, University of Maryland, whole. Health advertising was an effective means and assistant to the director of the Bureau of Eco- of promoting one brand over another and thus nomics at the Federal Trade Commission. The au- was an important weapon for smaller firms seeking to wrest business from larger firms. This thor's views do not necessarily reflect those of mem competition also brought rapid improvements in hers or other staff of the commission.
CIGARETTE ADVERTISING is back in the news. In February 1986, the American
REGULATION, NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 1986

35

THE GHOST OF CIGARETTE ADVERTISING PAST

.SS

,

,.:.

>>,<

"ti ,;

Vii: