Big Tobacco Forced to Own Up In a Big Way

   By SheSpeaksTeam  Jan 01, 2013

The next time you see an advertisement for cigarettes you may be surprised by the statement big tobacco companies are making. The major tobacco companies are now being required under law to put out advertisements explaining that they have in the past deliberately deceived the public about the addictiveness and health risks of smoking.

CNBC reports about the latest court ruling that will cause tobacco companies to release these statements in their ad campaigns. In the past, tobacco companies have gone to court fighting against the ruling of putting out the inflammatory statements about their business practices citing it as a violation of their freedom of speech.

But now after a ruling in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia ordered tobacco companies to go ahead with the advertisements, the wording is just being finalized in courts. One of the five different statements companies must now advertise to the public is, “A federal court has ruled that the defendant tobacco companies deliberately deceived the American public by falsely selling and advertising low tar and light cigarettes as less harmful than regular cigarettes.”

The ads will not be a part of the already-required warning labels on cigarette packs, but will be displayed publically in a yet to be determined format. U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler explains that the statements she is ordering tobacco companies to make is not a new idea. Judge Kessler says, “The government regularly requires wrongdoers to make similar disclosures in a number of different contexts.”

What do you think of the new ruling forcing tobacco companies to make public advertisements about how they have deceived the public?

Do you think an ad campaign like this will do anything to lower the rate of cigarette smoking?

Make a Comment

thriftysoul by thriftysoul | PERU, IN
Jan 14, 2013

I am also a former smoker, and I agree. However, I also think this is ridiculous. Consider alcohol. Its damage is more insidious and less obvious, but is anyone making them put themselves out of business? Drunk drivers also kill. Alcoholics do more terrible emotional damage to families, often physically abuse them, as well. Where is the legislation? Where are the lawsuits? Where are the loudspeakers?

leleibold by leleibold | Hazel Green, AL
Jan 09, 2013

Speaking as someone who used to smoke, this is kind of useless. If people want to smoke, they will smoke. This ad isn't going to make them go, "Oh, big tobacco lied, I should quit!" I also don't think it is going to deter other people from starting to smoke. It usually happens at a young age when you are more impressed with what your friends think and do than with what lawmakers are arguing about.

mixedlex by mixedlex | Whitye Hall, MD
Jan 05, 2013

I don'[t think much will affect the rate of smoking. Maryland doesn't allow smoking in public buildings and has a minimum price on tobacco and I am still gagged almost everywhere I go.

Kay3131 by Kay3131 | New York, NY
Jan 02, 2013

I think tobacco companies should be required to pay for Quit Smoking programs run by/at Hospitals and MedicalCenters.

melsh9 by melsh9 | SHELTON, WA
Jan 01, 2013

Good smoking kills and second hand smoke kills.