Plain packaging argument

Forums › Off topic › Plain packaging argument

khull

1245 posts

Uber Geek

#110467 9-Oct-2012 18:51

There have been forum posts about banning smoking but this thread is about plain packaging. Is there any discussion to be had on people who have already made the decision to smoke?

I am sick of the agree/disagree ads being pushed in your face for something that obviously means a lot to a group of individuals but the impression I am getting is it is a one sided discussion

1 | 2 | 3 | 4

447 posts

Ultimate Geek

#698643 9-Oct-2012 18:56

I find it interesting. I'm not a smoker and I hate walking around people who are, but because smoking isn't actively advertised in the media, it's not like you can push one brand as being cooler than another so what difference does it make?

I wouldn't have a clue as to what brands are out there, but I may just be looking in the wrong places. I didn't think it would matter if the boxes were branded or not because of this.

I guess it would make it hard for me to start though. 'Hi, I'd like some smokes please.' 'Certainly sir, what would you like?' 'Umm.....I have no idea to be honest.'

SaltyNZ

8168 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

2degrees

Lifetime subscriber

#698645 9-Oct-2012 19:00

Well personally I only smoke them for the articles, but some people *are* narrow minded you know.

iPad Pro 11" + iPhone 15 Pro Max + 2degrees 4tw!

These comments are my own and do not represent the opinions of 2degrees.

rvangelder

352 posts

Ultimate Geek

#698763 9-Oct-2012 22:07

Mostly people's choices are based on having reduced things down to good things and bad things. Smokes, specifically nicotine, hit the brain's reward system and turns what really is a poison into a positive experience - a "good thing".

There's a line that's can be crossed when tampering with the reward system - cross that line and a substance deserves to be regulated to oblivion.

mjb

996 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#698768 9-Oct-2012 22:18

khull: I am sick of the agree/disagree ads being pushed in your face...

I love the line in the ads that goes "We accept that smoking is bad ... but..". Just seems so... wrong.

contentsofsignaturemaysettleduringshipping

JimmyH

2886 posts

Uber Geek

#698773 9-Oct-2012 22:31

I don't smoke, nor am I involved in selling tobacco, so I am not too fussed one way or the other.

I do, however, have some reservations about the increasingly intrusive nature of "Nanny State" into lives - as long as sale to kids is banned, people don't smoke inside where I work, and the per-pack tax is set at a level high enough to recover any extra health costs imposed by smokers, quite frankly I don't really care whether an adult chooses to smoke or not. I have no interest in lighting up, nor do I have any particular interest or desire to persecute someone who chooses to do so. Actually, I find it a bit odd that some people get so worked up about the lifestyle choices that other people choose to make...........

(Also, I'm a bit worried that when our bureaucratic overlords have finally goose-stepped over the last smoker they will come after my lifestyle choices - and they can take coffee off me when the prise the last cup from my cold dead hands!)

As for the commercial - I tend to skip all ads (yay a DVR with a skip button) so have only seen it about once - therefore it doesn't really annoy me. But I'm a supporter of free speech and if they want to push an argument that way they good luck to them - it can't be any more annoying that the loud saturation-bombing of Harvey Norman ads I had to endure where I was staying last Christmas.

DonGould

3892 posts

Uber Geek

#698782 9-Oct-2012 22:47

khull: I am sick of the agree/disagree ads being pushed in your face

That ads are nothing about packaging.

They are about minimizing the impact of smoking in the minds of those who do and promoting smoking.

Every time one of those ads appears on TV a smoker is reminded that it's time for a smoke or to buy another packet.

The industries point has been made, they're not asking people to make pubic submissions, they've just found a clever way to get away with using TV advertising to draw attention to their product on TV in a space where TV advertising of their product is banned.

I'm quite surprised that the ASA is letting the ads on TV.

Promote New Zealand - Get yourself a .kiwi.nz domain name!!!

Check out mine - i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz - don@i.am.a.can.do.kiwi.nz

Asmodeus

1015 posts

Uber Geek

#698784 9-Oct-2012 22:48

Well since they are all locked away in opaque cabinets now it seems not too matter so much any more. I went to buy some cigars for a party and I asked to see what they had and they refused to show me anything except a price list. I had to get them to bring them out one by one by choosing random ones off the list until they brought something I liked.

Friend of mine who smokes cigs said he was at a supermarket and they wouldn't even bring a pack from the cabinet over to the checkout without bagging it first. That coupled with the warnings and images is making it seem less important

Hatch

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Hatch (affiliate link).

Zeon

3913 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#698792 9-Oct-2012 23:08

As long as smokers cover their healthcare costs, don't throw their butts everywhere and be courteous with their second hand smoke then that's all I care about. I think this whole anti tobacco thing is just some kind of crazy Tariana Turia vendetta. People choose to smoke, yes they become addicted but they know they will get addicted if they smoke so invalid argument.

Speedtest 2019-10-14

eracode

Smpl Mnmlst
8769 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#698817 10-Oct-2012 01:04

mjb:
khull: I am sick of the agree/disagree ads being pushed in your face...

I love the line in the ads that goes "We accept that smoking is bad ... but..". Just seems so... wrong.

+ 1. And apart from that, the logic of the analogies they use in the radio ads seem stretched or twisted and don't really make sense. Eg relabelling wine bottles and not running over possums in your car? They certainly don't make me pause and think "hey, maybe there's another side to this argument". Just bloody annoying illogical ads. Hadn't thought that maybe it was just a way to get a cig ads on tv/radio, until Don G posted above. So maybe in the end, just very very clever as he said.

Sometimes I just sit and think. Other times I just sit.

gregmcc

2145 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#698828 10-Oct-2012 06:35

JimmyH: I don't smoke, nor am I involved in selling tobacco, so I am not too fussed one way or the other.

I do, however, have some reservations about the increasingly intrusive nature of "Nanny State" into lives - as long as sale to kids is banned, people don't smoke inside where I work, and the per-pack tax is set at a level high enough to recover any extra health costs imposed by smokers, quite frankly I don't really care whether an adult chooses to smoke or not. I have no interest in lighting up, nor do I have any particular interest or desire to persecute someone who chooses to do so. Actually, I find it a bit odd that some people get so worked up about the lifestyle choices that other people choose to make...........

Well this happend last night, coming home just on dusk, saw the orange glow of several smokes, upon getting closer I realised it was coming from a group of 8 & 9 year old kids who were playing out on the street, is that a lifestyle choice!! or or simply the cool factor of smoking?

Jas777

838 posts

Ultimate Geek

#698858 10-Oct-2012 08:24

Don't smoke. Not ever going to. What does interest me is the argument that it should be banned because it costs the taxpayer a lot in Health costs.

Should Recreational Horse riding be banned too? Because the health costs from people falling off horses is way more than what is gathered from people who do it.

There are of course many instances of activities that cost more to look after than generate, so who pays?

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#698859 10-Oct-2012 08:26

JimmyH: I don't smoke, nor am I involved in selling tobacco, so I am not too fussed one way or the other.

I do, however, have some reservations about the increasingly intrusive nature of "Nanny State" into lives - as long as sale to kids is banned, people don't smoke inside where I work, and the per-pack tax is set at a level high enough to recover any extra health costs imposed by smokers, quite frankly I don't really care whether an adult chooses to smoke or not. I have no interest in lighting up, nor do I have any particular interest or desire to persecute someone who chooses to do so. Actually, I find it a bit odd that some people get so worked up about the lifestyle choices that other people choose to make...........

(Also, I'm a bit worried that when our bureaucratic overlords have finally goose-stepped over the last smoker they will come after my lifestyle choices - and they can take coffee off me when the prise the last cup from my cold dead hands!)

As for the commercial - I tend to skip all ads (yay a DVR with a skip button) so have only seen it about once - therefore it doesn't really annoy me. But I'm a supporter of free speech and if they want to push an argument that way they good luck to them - it can't be any more annoying that the loud saturation-bombing of Harvey Norman ads I had to endure where I was staying last Christmas.

Perfectly stated! I think the status quo is fine. I avoid smokers but am happy for them to choose the lifestyle they desire.

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#698870 10-Oct-2012 09:12

The ads don't actually say "we agree smoking is bad", they say "we agree smoking is harmful" which is, all things considered, probably worse. It's a bit reminiscent of the tobacco company study in Europe which managed to prove that smokers do not actually place a drain on healthcare resources, because smokers die younger. That study has been quite firmly suppressed by the tobacco industry (despite they fact they commissioned it, and it proved exactly what they set out to prove). There's actually an episode of the This American Life podcast which goes more into that.

DonGould:

That ads are nothing about packaging.

They are about minimizing the impact of smoking in the minds of those who do and promoting smoking.

Every time one of those ads appears on TV a smoker is reminded that it's time for a smoke or to buy another packet.

The industries point has been made, they're not asking people to make pubic submissions, they've just found a clever way to get away with using TV advertising to draw attention to their product on TV in a space where TV advertising of their product is banned.

I'm quite surprised that the ASA is letting the ads on TV.

I'm not sure I agree with this statement. The ads are paid for by British American Tobacco (no contributions from Imperial Tobacco or Phillip Morris) and do not contain any branding other than their company name. I have yet to encounter a smoker who can tell you which of the big 5 or 6 tobacco companies produced the brand of tobacco they smoke - if you know what you're looking at the crest on the packet usually tells you the company but not by name. Why would BAT advertise for their competitors?

Bee

731 posts

Ultimate Geek

#698873 10-Oct-2012 09:13

As A smoker, I think the only solution is to ban them from NZ completely. However this is never going to happen for a variety of reasons - one of them being that the government makes huge profits out of the tobacco industry even after the health costs...

The Plain packaging is not about whether smoking is good or bad. Imagine plain packaging on Beer and wine - or bread -It would never happen and no government would even consider it...

Doing your best is much more important than being the best.

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek

#698884 10-Oct-2012 09:29

Kyanar:
I'm not sure I agree with this statement. The ads are paid for by British American Tobacco (no contributions from Imperial Tobacco or Phillip Morris) and do not contain any branding other than their company name. I have yet to encounter a smoker who can tell you which of the big 5 or 6 tobacco companies produced the brand of tobacco they smoke - if you know what you're looking at the crest on the packet usually tells you the company but not by name. Why would BAT advertise for their competitors?

A rising tide lifts all boats...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4