|
Philip Morris ran an
ad noting, "No one should be allowed to sell cigarettes to minors. Minors should not
smoke. Period. That is why Philip Morris developed a comprehensive program
to prevent sales of cigarettes to minors." The protestations
are too vehement,
somehow. One newspaper series, in the Louisville
Courier-Journal, looking into the gap
between the companies' public statements and their day-to-day behavior, noted that
in the places where strict licensing and strict enforcement have been used against
store owners, they have been very effective. But the industry has
fought fiercely against giving state health departments the power to
carry out effective enforcement... The
companies are on record as against most methods of enforcement, including
inspections, sting operations, surveys, and holding merchants responsible for
illegal sales. Instead they suggest punitive measures which would be certain not only to
backfire, but to cast the enforcers in the worst possible light. They suggest targeting for
arrest children who buy cigarettes rather than retailers who sell them. They also
suggest arresting or fining the clerks in stores, not the managers or owners. What the
industry is against is quite logical-anything that has been shown to be effective in any
studies or in any actual town or state enforcement actions. The situation is similar
to that of the CTR (Council for Tobacco Research) - maintain a public posture that
appears honorable and in line with public opinion, and in practice prevent anything that
would reduce sales in any way. It would be difficult to believe an industry could be so
dishonest as to carry out such a two-faced program, but having seen the documents
from 1954 to the present, and looking at one example after another when the
companies' intentions have been tested, it is impossible to escape the conclusion that
the industry is doing just that again. |