PHILIP MORRIS's OFFER: READING THE FINE PRINT

Although there are many reasons why the FDA, the President, and Congress are almost certain to reject Philip Morris's offer to avoid regulation by the FDA, one is the many loopholes, limitations, and even contradictions the offer itself contains.

Below are only a few examples which ASH pointed out in a press release the day after the offer was announced.

Although it may at first seem to be somewhat comprehensive, Philip Morris's dramatic proposal to limit the sale, advertising, and promotion of cigarettes in return for immunity from FDA regulation has a number of loopholes, limitations, and contradictions.

ASH is therefore urging members of the press to help inform the public of these problems, and to counteract what is expected to be a barrage of paid publicity touting these proposals.

Here are some of the problems:

  • PRODUCT PLACEMENT: Although Philip Morris is suddenly proposing as part of its comprehensive package to ban payments to movie makers for featuring tobacco products in films, the Tobacco Institute announced in 1990 that its members were all ending "paid placement of tobacco products in films." Were they lying then, or are they lying now?
  • INDIVIDUAL CIGARETTES: Philip Morris proposes to ban the sale or distribution of individual cigarettes. However, this practice is already illegal under existing law, and therefore need not be bargained for.
  • EVENT SPONSORSHIP: Tobacco product sponsorship would still be permitted whenever the promoter claims that he expects 75% of those in attendance to be adults. But faced with the loss of lucrative tobacco sponsorship otherwise, many promoters are likely to make this claim regardless of how many children are really expected.
  • STADIUMS: Cigarette advertising would remain unchecked in facilities devoted to motor sports and rodeos, the sports in which the ads seems to be primarily concentrated and most effective. Only "permanent" ads would be prohibited by the proposal; thus ads which are moveable or changeable apparently would still be permitted. Also, it is not clear if ads in stadiums used only by professional sports teams, or stadiums used only by amateur sports teams, would be affected at all.

    These are only a few examples of carefully-hedged provisions in the proposal which make it disingenuous as well as deceptive, says ASH, the organization the tobacco industry blames for the current FDA proposal to help keep cigarettes out of the hands and mouths of children.

    [ASH Logo]ASH - ACTION ON SMOKING AND HEALTH

    2013 H Street, NW / Washington, DC 20006 / (202) 659-4310