Take a look at this ad.
We bet that you probably won’t even realise what it’s for until you’re about halfway through.
Although this ad is from the UK, Australia has introduced its own cigarette plain packaging legislation, which will turn the packets of all the brands into the same, dull olive colour … that is generally accepted to be the least appealing in branding.
The tobacco giants were, predictably, angry and brought a court case alleging the Australian Government was infringing their trademark property (the brands).
Today the High Court has handed down their decision in the case and have upheld the right of the Australian Government to legislate for plain packaging. This from the Sydney Morning Herald:
The decision is expected to have significant influence globally with both the United Kingdom and New Zealand considering plain packaging.
Health experts have hailed the decision as a major victory for global health.
It clears the way for the government to impose a ban on all brand marks and logos on cigarettes, to take effect from December this year.
Large graphic health warnings will dominate the packs and the manufacturers’ brand names will be written in a small generic font.
Attorney-General Nicola Roxon and Health Minister Tanya Plibersek declared: “This is a victory for all those families who have lost someone to a tobacco related illness.
“No longer when a smoker pulls out a packet of cigarettes will that packet be a mobile billboard.”
Smoking rates in Australia were 16.6 per cent in 2007 which the Australian Government wants to bring down to less than 10 per cent by 2018 through a combination of increased taxes and plain packaging.
The new laws will take effect on December 1 this year.
Do you think plain packaging will discourage people from taking up smoking?
Comments
64 Comments so far
Plain packaging will only hurt the tobacconists, which, like many retailers, are already hurting from online shopping.
As will many items, tobacco aficionados can easily buy their favourite brand of tobacco for personal use from an international supplier online, pay the import duties and taxes via customs and receive the product with all of its branding in place, free of any anti-smoking warnings and assured they have actually received a genuine product.
Moreover, even with the import duties and taxes, they will probably have paid much less than at their local tobacconist, who can’t even determine from the plain packaging, if the product is the right product or if it is a genuine product.
loading...
Got my first plain package with graphic images this week so I kept my old box and swapped them into it.
loading...
My dear Mum died of Emphysema 2 years ago. She was only 66. She didn’t just die suddenly, she was gravely sick for 10+ years.
When Mum started smoking as a teenager, cigarette branding was everywhere – magazines, billboards, the movies and, of course, the packet itself. As in Marketing 101, the brand messages were designed to convey a feeling or aspiration to the smoker: Dunhill = prestigious, Marlborough = Rough and rugged, Alpines = Cool and active (healthy even!) etc.. Kids starting smoking chose whichever brand they aspired to be like. So yes, branding makes an impact.
I think it is difficult for the current generation to understand how a new generation, that has never seen any branding associated with cigarettes, will respond to a product that has no glamourised images attached to it. A product that is now well known to kill people (says so on the packet), rob people of money, ruin their health and result in an addiction that is stronger than that of many hard drugs.
I believe that no branding for cigarettes, coupled with contemporary knowledge about the impacts of smoking, will result in it being boring enough to make some children uninterested.
The law comes into effect on my Mum’s birthday – she would have been 68. A great present for my Mum, who knew too well the impacts of smoking, but could not kick the chemical addiction until it was too late…
loading...
A dear, long term friend of mine has some OCD traits (there is a family history of OCD, anxiety and depression) and she is pretty obsessive about smoking. I’ve lost count of the number of times she’s quit smoking only to take it up again the next times she’s very stressed out. She has been told by her dentist she has gum disease and signs of precancerous lesions in her mouth. She also has a degree of airways disease (slight).
She now has young grandchildren that she dotes on and babysits regularly. Unfortunately, I know she will kill herself with her smokes, partly because she doesn’t seek psychological help to quit permanently.
I doubt that plain packaging makes any difference to those like her, but I’m still for it. The biggest irony is that she knows exactly what mouth and throat cancer “looks like” and how it’s treated and the long term outcomes for the majority of those patients. She is a surgical nurse on a ward that does a lot of ENT surgery, some of it, the real big ops.
loading...
As the daughter of a mum who has smoked for 40 years, I can say anything – ANYTHING – they can do to try to deter people is worthwhile (what harm will it do?).
I can hear my mum wheezing from the other end of the house, you know how the ad says you can lung cancer before you can see it? Well when I go to my parents it is a constant reminder that with my mum, I’m really just waiting for her to be diagnosed with something, if not cancer then emphysema. She’s not even sixty yet but her level of disability from smoking is ridiculous. Half of all people who smoke will end up dying from it.
So while of course it won’t be the big fix for everyone (what would?), it’s something to stop young people beginning this vicious poisoning of their precious bodies.
loading...
“(what harm will it do?)”
Well, it depends on whether you consider restricting the right of a company to brand a completely legal product harm or not.
I don’t smoke, and I support smoking restrictions, but I also support the (very last) right of a company to market their legal products.
loading...
I really believe that our food intake is a much greater concern than tobacco smoking in relation to cancer. I’ve lived in Japan, a country that has the highest proportion of smokers anywhere in the world but also with one of the lowest cancer rates. China is another example of a country with a very high number of smokers per capita and also one of the lowest cancer rates and in particular lung cancer surprisingly enough. The difference between them and us is their diets are so much healthier – much less meat and more vegetables. However, with the intro of fast food outlets they too are seeing certain cancers increasing among a certain demographic. The government should be spending more time educating the young on the dangers of a bad diet and too much alcohol. I’m in no way saying that smoking is a good thing but there are other things that are worse in my opinion.
I also dont believe the plain packaging will do anything to deter young people. I think its the act of smoking that they consider cool not the box the cigarettes come in.
loading...
I disagree- Smoking is a huge risk factor for heart disease, blood clots, cancer, COPD and I have seen enough people at work to know the very real risk.
But these people tend to eat the wrong food and drink alcohol aswell. they are all bad and worse in combination.
Also think it hard to compare people from different races and they tend to have different health issues anyway.
It’s the big picture and all those risk you mentioned are also important to target.
loading...
I agree with one of the comments already made and that is that eating the wrong foods eg trans fats, too much meat etc causes more cancer and health concerns than smoking. I lived in Japan, a country that has the highest proportion of smokers than anywhere in the world and also the lowest cancer stats. China is very similar with extremely low lung cancer rates and a very high number of smokers per capita. The difference is that their diets are low in fat and include small amounts of meat and lots of vegetables. I’m not saying that cigarettes are in anyway fine, however I really believe that our diet is a much bigger concern.
I also cant imagine plain packaging having any effect on young people smoking or not smoking. I really think its the act of smoking that young people consider cool, not the box that the cigarettes come in.
loading...
ask yourself this: what benefit does tobacco provide to the australian population? if it is so bad, why not just ban tobacco? forget the income the government gets, if it is as bad as we are told it is, that people are ingesting poison, why not just get it over with and ban it? If there is a food product on the market that is potentially cancerous, it gets banned. if there is a type of drink that contains unacceptable levels of toxins, it gets banned. why is tobacco okay to sell, even though we know it is bad for you?
oh, and by the way, my 1 pack a week sets me back $22. the cost of the patches is currently $27. I don’t get concession discounts, I don’t get welfare reductions, I pay full bottle.
I will try again to give up. I may try many times before I succeed, but if I couldn’t buy tobacco products, I would be going cold turkey right now.
as for the plain packaging, I don’t look at the packet anyway.
loading...
I thought all the gross teeth pictures on them were supposed to put people off, I really don’t think plain packs will make that much difference personally.
loading...
Reading the comments, I get the feeling a lot of people are completely missing the point. I doubt anyone is claiming plain packaging is supposed to make people quit – as demonstrated in the ad, it’s to make cigarettes seem less appealing to kids and Tweens. Most smokers begin before they turn 18 so it makes sense to aim prevention strategies young. How many smokers trying to quit do you think wish they never started? It takes a multi pronged approach and this is just an extra tool in the armor so to speak. Of course it’s no magic cure (not even close) but I am happy about this policy and proud of Australia for leading the way.
loading...
Up the taxes on cigarettes. I believe that will be the only thing that ll work. Make them practically unaffordable – and put the extra revenue into the millions smokers cost out health care system.
loading...
When I stopped smoking in 1996, tobacco prices were ridiculous. Now the price of a pack of cigarettes is totally ridiculous. At 30 or 40 bucks a pack, who can afford to smoke ?
loading...
They’ve been doing that for years already Caroline – smokers already pay about $10 a packet now and guess what, it’s not stopping anyone. There’s also been studies done that show nicotine addiction is more prevalent in lower socio-economic groups, so make them completely inaffordable and guess what’s going to happen? You honestly think people are just going to go “Oh well, can’t afford it I just won’t get any?” No. We’re talking about an addiction here – affordability doesn’t even come into it.
The simple fact is it doesn’t work. The odd thing is, that everyone who supports the logic in this are also the first to start protesting if you propose a fat-tax on unhealthy foods, even though obesity related illness costs much more to our public health system these days than smoking.
loading...
“obesity related illness costs much more to our public health system these days than smoking.”
I’d like to see the proof of that.
And the point of increased tobacco prices is also to stop people taking it up – to cut off the supply of new smokers, not just reduce the number of existing smokers.
loading...
Don’t think some of those links posted, but if you go look it up there is plenty of research and reports that obesity has overtaken smoking as the top cause of premature death and illness in Australia.
loading...
Regardless of how much obesity costs, smoking is still a major cause of death and disease in Australia and action still needs to be taken to reduce the burden. Even if obesity costs more it doesn’t mean we should drop the ball on cigarettes.
loading...
smokes are now about $14 a pack. The latest price hike has forced my husband to halve his habit. So he hasn’t quit but he is smoking less – that’s something, right?
loading...
Actually Lisa Jensen it does work. It’s one of the only things that is proven to work- Every time the govt. puts up cigarette prices the number of people who smoke drop by a couple of percent.
loading...
Duhhhhhh !
The article is about bringing on plain cigarette packaging. Somehow, I wasn’t expecting the video to be an episode of “Friends”. Before I hit PLAY I knew exactly what I would be seeing.
loading...
Way to be rude.
Obviously the article is going to discuss what the video is about. That’s why you’re supposed to watch the video before you scroll down if you want it to be a surprise.
loading...
I don’t really think it will make a difference…
Making smoking illegal would be the only way to curb it, although I guess people would still smoke anyway…
I don’t know what the answer is to this problem I just know that smoking gives enough people cancer to know that it’s not a good idea!!!!!
loading...
There’s more evidence on the health benefits of fruit and vegetables and cancer, heart disease reduction than evidence that cigarettes cause cancer so where are the billboards, public health campaigns, TV advertisements and healthy labeling for fruit and vegetables? Hope processed food, junk food and soft drink is next!
loading...
Are you kidding me? You realise you can’t just make wild claims and say they’re facts, right?
loading...
I think this is a really futile exercise because it trivialises the serious addiction to nicotine that people acquire. Is the government really so ignorant to the physiology of smoking that they think a lack of pretty logos and colours will deter people? Addicts would smoke cigarettes sold to them in a used handkerchief for Pete’s sake!
loading...
I think the idea is that it will detract from the appeal of young people taking up smoking. It isn’t aimed at stopping those who are addicted. I think everyone knows it will take more than plain packets to stop an addiction.
loading...
When i was in high school we used to compare what disease you had today on your smokes. i don’t think this will work at all
loading...
Anything that ostracizes smokers is a good thing because it will stop people taking up the habit in the long run. I can see yet more awkwardness with the in-laws though when I ask them to keep their cigarette packets out of sight. I don’t want my toddler seeing photos of those eyeballs or severed feet.
loading...
Wow. I’m sorry but that is one of the most ignorant things I’ve ever heard. Are we going to ostracize all the alcoholics too? And the drug addicts, and those with eating disorders causing them to be either excessively over or under weight? We better include all the gamblers in there too. Let’s just push them all to the fringe of society and ignore them til they go away shall we?
loading...
I don’t see alcoholism and eating disorders as the same as smoking. The cause for a lot of people to smoke is that when they’re young it’s ‘cool’. Making cigarette packs all the same removes the brand identity that many people require in order to want to smoke. Most of the smokers I know wish they’d never started and if plain packaging was around when they were young maybe they wouldn’t. By ostracizing smokers you are making it less ‘cool’. I fail to see alcoholism and eating disorders as the same as that. Perhaps in some way drug taking is similar to smoking. You can’t just pick other addictions and say they’re all the same as each other because people become addicted to different things for many reasons. I believe ostracizing smokers will deter other people from taking it up. I think those that I know who have had alcohol addictions and eating disorders would be quite insulted to hear you comparing them to smoking. The start if those addictions is much more complex and a different beast entirely.
loading...
Point is I don’t know of anyone who “chooses” to become addicted to anything, and I don’t believe the beast to be as entirely different as you think.
There have actually been studies linking mental health to smoking (that’s how the whole Zyban/Champix thing came about) because nicotine causes the brain to release dopamine, so people with depression are often more likely to smoke. Research has also shown that there is a genetic predisposition to smoking – there is a specific gene which determines whether a teen is likely to take risks, and try smoking in the first place, but there is also a specific gene which determines whether they are likely to have that first puff and throw it out, or end up addicted. How is that so different to a genetic predisposition towards alcoholism? How is a teenager self-medicating depression, or with such low self-esteem they feel the need to sacrifice their health to impress others such a different beast?
Would ostracizing people with other addictions stop people developing them? No. Nor will it for smoking. Don’t get me wrong – I would love to see all smokers free of it and healthy, but vilifying people for their addiction as a preventative example does much more harm than good.
loading...
I cant see the ad because it wont let me, but i get the point, i would never lift a smoke in the world unless it was for medical reasons, but otherwise never touching one, its good they stopped plain pakaging, i think like some of the people around the world would atleast stop smocking, but most of them would to try to find away to smoke.
P.S im half awake so if this comment is cr@p please just be aware that i am half asleep!!!
loading...
In unrelated news, sales of funky cigarette cases go up 5000%!
loading...
Not just funky cigarette cases. What’s the bet that the tobacco companies licence third party manufacturers to produce cigarette cases that look just like the ‘real thing’….the old branded packets.
loading...
I’m fairly certain that would be illegal, as it’s branded advertising through merchandise.
loading...
I’ve been thinking that for ages, like tampon case covers, phone covers, cool cigarette cases will be all the rage.
loading...
I can’t see how plain packaging is ever going to stop people from smoking. Very few people smoke these days to be “cool” or “popular” It is an addiction. They’re not buying it because the package is a “pretty colour” Most people who I know that smoke actually put the cigarettes into another container “leather ect” so I don’t think they’re too worried having people know what brand they’re smoking.
Alcohol is also a drug that provides few real proven health benefits, especially when we live in a society and country where binge drinking is a real problem. How about plain packaging for all those vodka cruisers and other drinks. Young people ARE drinking to appear cool to their peers. They’re also getting into fights, drink driving and killing themselves and innocent people and countless other incidents that have never been caused by a smoke.
Drinking is seen as not only socially acceptable, it’s considered socially desirable. The government pays hardly any attention to it because binge drinking has almost become a “way of life” to so many in this country. With the exception of those tiny “drink responsibility” on alcohol ads, what else are they actually doing?
loading...
I agree. Alcohol is dangerous and that fact is ignored or just given lip service by the government. And do not get me started on poker machines and related gambling activities. Someone once said that the biggest hurdle to overcoming alcohol and gambling addictions is weaning governments off their addictions to the taxes gained from drink and pokies. I am not opposed to regulating cigarette sales (ex smoker) but do not see why it is ok when alcohol and gambling reign effectively unchecked and do a great deal of harm in families and in society. All this tells me is that less politicians smoke and more politicians like a drink and enjoy a bit of a bet.
loading...
Hmmmm….I can see it affecting market share, but not necessarily the amount of smokers. People rarely start smoking after buying a packet, they start after they’ve tried a few and then they get addicted. I imagine they’ll now just buy a packet and use a case…. and there may be a market for reusable cases to slip over the top of the packets, I can see them now.
I wouldn’t stop drinking wine if they removed the labels.
But then again, it’s worth a try.
loading...
I think it’s good that the brands aren’t on display … but I actually think people will find the plain olive packaging quite ‘trendy’ and that it won’t discourage people from buying/taking up smoking
loading...
fantastic initiative by nicola roxon and then tanja plibersek. i heard a guy on the radio this morning (a public health EXPERT) say that they will be recognised internationally for this.
if i hear one more person that is against it say ‘it won’t work’ i will scream. if you truly believe it won’t work then why do you care (in the case of retailers and ciggie companies). you’re pissed off because it WILL work and that effects your bottom line.
loading...
Good. Now when does the plain packaging for junk food start?
loading...
Like button isn’t working – thumbs up to this comment!
loading...
Drinking alcohol in moderation isnt harmful, smoking even one cigarette is.
loading...
Yet it’s still legal. if the government really wanted people to stop they would make cigarettes perscription only but they like the money they get from taxing it to much
loading...
That’s illogical but. Who in their right mind would prescribe cigarettes…
loading...
Oops, that was meant to be a reply to a comment which has since disappeared, so it doesn’t make much sense now! The original comment was saying that alcohol should be in plain packaging if cigarettes are.
loading...
I hate it when government spends my money in order to tell another person/business what to do with their money/product.
Salt and Sugar are extremely dangerous commodities in regular doses, but they have not been sufficiently vilified enough for public mandated sanctioning.
Twenty years from now a cultural shift might be all that stands in the way of you and that next bar of chocolate.
God help you if you get in the way of me and my next deep fried twinkie. I will friggin buy Freemont street and militarize it before I let that happen.
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
loading...
Really?
There are health benefits to some types of sugar and iodized salt. Not sure about a deep fried twinkie, but each to their own. As long as it is all in moderation. There are no health benefits or moderate amounts of smoking that have been shown to be safe. Smoking causes health issues for the people who are around smokers as well.
I guess I deserve neither liberty nor safety.
loading...
Us health experts believe that 35 million deaths a year globally can be linked to sugar consumption. Sugar is as addictive and damaging as alcohol and tobacco, according to the University of California team who believe governments should impose taxes to help curb consumption.
loading...
So you feel this way about seatbelts, quarantine regulations, regulations about lead in children’s toys, speed limits, requirements that doctors be appropriately qualified, allergy warnings, gun control…and the list, obviously, goes on. In each case a little freedom is given up in the name of public safety. I am unconvinced that a liberal society (whatever that means….even most libertarians have a line) would function better than one that regulates dangerous products.
Adults can continue to buy cigarettes – the only freedom that is being sacrificed is the cigarette company’s commitment to branding…and I couldn’t care less about that at all.
loading...
Jackie – I neither supported the right to smoke around others nor did I proselytize benefits of smoking. Simply the right to do do unobstructed by others. Whether you deserve liberty, I think the context of the quote is if you want to take my liberty, don’t expect me to come running to defend yours when it’s gone. BTW I don’t smoke.
Now,now Anonymous, you’re putting words into my mouth
What happens in a publicly owned space is completely open to democratic debate, but private citizens have the right to be free of the beliefs of others to infringe upon their personal trading choices.
Interestingly enough I disagree with the premise and you are single handedly asking me to justify my entire beliefs system, which I’m more than happy to do, but we can always be civil and agree to disagree, it’s not personal.
I believe in consumer power and the ability of intelligent people to make concientious decisions, all the tax payer funded campaigns in the world don’t challenge the unyielding power of people to say NO!
loading...
My daughter watched a man (I assume a dad) light up a cigarette as he drove out of our childcare car park this morning. She asked me why people smoke. We briefly discussed that many years ago people didn’t completely understand that it was harmful and that cigarettes were very addictive (that is a fun concept for a 3 year old!).
Her response, I hope that I don’t smoke. My thought, but I didn’t say anything, well just don’t start.
I know that it probably isn’t politically correct, but we know there is no benefit to smoking, so why can’t we ban it. Or each year lift the age that you are allowed to smoke so noone new can take it up. So next year you have to be 19, the following year 20 and so on, until it is illegal for everyone to smoke.
loading...
Hi everyone,
Our spam filter has gone into serious overdrive today and it driving us a little batty. We’re finding and restoring your comments as soon as we can and we WILL get to them all, I promise. Please be patient if your comment doesn’t appear immediately the way it usually would.
Jamila
loading...
My comment has not been posted. Are you still working through spam or were comments lost when you went offline last night?
Thanks
loading...
Same as Jac QLD. My comment has not been posted.
At the time it would not allow me to re[post as it said i had already posted.
Frustrating!
loading...
I think that anything that discourages people from taking up smoking is a good thing. Good on the High Court!
loading...
If it reduces the chance of anyone taking up smoking as a habit, then it is a good development.
loading...
No, I don’t. But if it works, it’s worth a try.
loading...
Excellent! Amazing that the tobacco companies claim plain packaging won’t make one iota of different and then spend millions trying to block it …
loading...
Excellent! Amazing that the tobacco companies claim plain packaging won’t make an iota of difference and then spend millions trying to stop it …
loading...
I don’t think plain packaging alone will stop people from taking up smoking, but a combination of things like increased taxes, stricter rules on advertising/displaying cigarettes and the plain packaging will all hopefully play a role in future generations being less likely to start the habit.
I just don’t understand how people can moan about the government over regulating that industry – the evidence that cigarettes are harmful is overwhelming and the cost to society is massive. It’s not a case of the Government taking a stab in the dark and hoping something will reduce the number of smokers – the current measures are backed up by research as well.
From a personal standpoint, I sell cigarettes and there are still ‘kids’ taking up smoking. I’ll check someone’s ID and they might have turned 18 the month before.. a lot of it is peer pressure and the desire to look cool I guess..
loading...
I think this is absolutely fabulous!
Not only will it level the playing field for the tobacco companies, giving them far less leverage, it will also, very likely, create an even greater wedge between smokers and non-smokers. All in all, a positive step towards lowering the number of smokers in this country.
PS. The kids in the ad from the UK are adorable.
loading...