Download There is no doubt that R.J Renoyld™s Cool Joe advertising ca

There is no doubt that R.J Renoyld’s Cool Joe advertising campaign
has increased sales of their Ca
mel Brand Cigarettes. The companies ability to
manipulate the buyer into thinking that Joe Camel i
s “cool” because he
smokes cigarette’s, has had a profound influence on the entire cigarette
mar
ket. But who is RJR’s, Cool Joe campaign target audience. This is the
question which has brought m
uch attention to the RJ Renoylds Company and
their marketing tactics. Many believe that the compa
ny is trying to appeal to
minors by showing that Joe Camel is “cool”, and he smokes cigarettes,
therefore cigarettes are “cool”. But cigarette’s aren’t cool. They are
expensive, habit forming, a
nd deadly to those who smoke them.
The RJ Renolyd’s Company state that they are protected under
the free
speech clause of the constitution. The first Amendment states that Congress
is prohibi
ted from making any law that would restrict freedom of speech. RJR
feels that the courts cannot pr
ove that they targeting children. RJR also feels
that the blame for under age smoking should not b
e placed on the shoulders
of their advertising campaign but rather on the stores distributing thos
e
cigarettes to minors.
However, many poles and studies have proved that those most directly
effected by the Cool Joe campaign are children. Cigarette sales to minors has
skyrocketed from 0.
5% to 32.8% since the beginning of the campaign. And
although RJR feels that they are protected un
der the first amendment some
aspects of commercial expression are not. Commercial speech is regula
ted to
“prohibit false and deceptive advertising”. Many believe that RJR is using
false and dece
ptive tactics to reach out to an illegal market
I believe that cigarette advertising should be ba
nned altogether. Once a
smoker picks a brand of cigarette he or she usually sticks with that brand
.
There is no need for companies to compete with each other. Cigarette
advertising should be lim
ited only to prices and sales on that particular brand
of cigarette. There is no reason why such
a dangerous product should be
advertised other than to encourage a new generation of smokers.
Selling such a potentially harmful and addicting product is a legal
problem for business people. B
ut at the same time I also believe that we as
consumers have been educated enough on the dangers o
f smoking. By also
putting a warning on the box the buyer is aware of the harmful effects.
There
fore I feel that by 18 years of age the consumer is well enough educated
to make his or her own de
cisions about what they want to do to their own
body.
American Cigarettes are extremely popula
r throughout the rest of the
world. As GI’s traveled around the globe with them they brought their
cigarettes. So it is no wonder that much of cigarette companies business is
generated overseas.
I believe it is up to a persons government to protect their
well being. In that case foreign coun
tries should decide on their own whether
or not it is right to advertise cigarettes i n their coun
try. The United States
Government does not have the right to inflict their rules and regulations
on
other nations.
Cigarettes are harmful to the smoker and those around them. Cigarette
adve
rtising should be strictly regulated and watched. We all know the
dangers and effects of smoking a
nd it is up to the consumer to decide, is it
wortthere doubt that renoyld cool advertising campaig
n increased sales their camel brand cigarettes companies ability manipulate buyer into thinking that
camel cool because smokes cigarette profound influence entire cigarette market cool campaign target
audience this question which brought much attention renoylds company their marketing tactics many b
elieve that company trying appeal minors showing camel smokes cigarettes therefore cigarettes cigare
tte aren they expensive habit forming deadly those smoke them renolyd company state they protected u
nder free speech clause constitution first amendment states congress prohibited from making would re
strict freedom speech feels courts cannot prove they targeting children also feels blame under smoki
ng should placed shoulders their advertising campaign rather stores distributing those minors howeve
r many poles studies have proved those most directly effected children sales minors skyrocketed from
since beginning although feels protected under first amendment some aspects commercial expression c
ommercial speech regulated prohibit false deceptive advertising many believe using false deceptive t
actics reach illegal market believe should banned altogether once smoker picks brand usually sticks
with brand there need companies compete with each other should limited only prices sales particular
there reason such dangerous product advertised other than encourage generation smokers selling such
potentially harmful addicting product legal problem business people same time also consumers have be
en educated enough dangers smoking also putting warning buyer aware harmful effects therefore feel y
ears consumer well enough educated make decisions about what want body american extremely popular th
roughout rest world traveled around globe with them brought wonder much companies business generated
overseas persons government protect well being case foreign countries decide whether right advertis
e country united states government does have right inflict rules regulations other nations harmful s
moker around them strictly regulated watched know dangers effects smoking consumer decide wortEssay,
essays, termpaper, term paper, termpapers, term papers, book reports, study, college, thesis, desse
rtation, test answers, free research, book research, study help, download essay, download term paper
s