Comments on: Vintage ads for doctor-recommended smokes https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/ Marketing Ethics for the Easily Swayed Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:40:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99778 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 19:04:32 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99778 Those vintage ads are very compelling societal examples of pervasive marketing persuasion, aren’t they? When my Dad quit smoking when I was a baby (utterly unheard of back then for any kind of ‘manly man’!), his friends and colleagues all had the same question for him: “Are you SICKLY or something?”

Like

]]>
By: Kathleen https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99772 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 18:34:21 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99772 I just scrolled through every one of your linked collections of vintage ads. The unselfconscious misogyny. Heroin for coughs.

And remembered discussions with much younger coworkers who opposed all jury awards against tobacco companies and blamed smokers entirely for their own problems. Yet, these young guys had no knowledge of the tremendous resources devoted to making smokers: selling of Cool, denial of dangers (and/or minimizing perceptions of said dangers) all the while breeding more and more addictive tobacco. They had never heard of any of that and were not entirely sure that they believed me.

In the last few years, my husband and I (both never-smokers) have sought out a number of classic films and TV shows – mainly from the 1930s to very early 1960s. We are often struck by product placement, but especially the role of smoking, and often think that, were we teens or preteens of the period, we would certainly identify with the smokers, who were invariably smarter and so much cooler than the others.

Liked by 1 person

]]>
By: Kathleen https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99769 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 18:13:46 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99769 Especially the ones who tell patients that statins should be in the water supply.

Liked by 1 person

]]>
By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99746 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 15:14:56 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99746 Good points, Mark. Alas, so much of health care is focused on treating to numbers, not on actual outcomes.

Like

]]>
By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99745 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 15:13:21 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99745 I wonder the same thing, Dr. Joe!

Like

]]>
By: markmcc1985 https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99725 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 14:01:07 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99725 Thanks! This nicely illustrates two concepts often used as justification for various treatments:
(1) Expert opinion
(2) Mechanism of action
Note that expert doctors are used to endorse smoking. And there is mention of the theoretical reasons why smoking should be fine (filters, alpha-cellulose). A more rational approach is to simply look at OUTCOMES.

Liked by 1 person

]]>
By: Dr. Joe Kosterich https://ethicalnag.org/2013/11/03/vintage-ads-cigarettes/comment-page-1/#comment-99723 Sun, 03 Nov 2013 13:47:18 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=12422#comment-99723 And I wonder what we will think of doctors endorsing statins and SSRI’s in 20 years time?

Liked by 1 person

]]>