Australia: the healthiest country by 2020
National Preventative Health Strategy – the roadmap for action

Key action area 3: End all forms of advertising and promotion of tobacco products

|TOC|next page

Table of contents

Tobacco kills one in every two long-term users.[76] Many young people show signs of dependency on tobacco products[77-79] (including failure in quitting[80]) before they reach majority age. Anyone trying to introduce cigarettes on the market today would fail. Most Australians believe it would be a good thing if tobacco products were one day no longer sold in retail outlets.[81] There can be no justification for allowing any form of promotion for this lethal product.

The US National Cancer Institute has concluded that there is a causal relationship between the promotion of tobacco and increased tobacco use.[82] Both industry documents and scientific studies show that promotion continues to involve highly sophisticated targeting and segmentation of both existing and potential users; that the tobacco industry does not effectively self-regulate its marketing practices; and that companies typically respond to partial bans by increasing expenditure in ‘permitted’ media, such as payments to retailers and proprietors of entertainment venues to display or supply tobacco products, and through new media forms developing as a result of emerging technology. The National Cancer Institute report also points to activities designed to enhance public image and affect attitudes to smoking, such as entertaining influential individuals, sponsorship and donations to ‘good causes’.[83]

Modernising tobacco advertising prohibition act
Australia’s Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act 1992 and tobacco control legislation in the states and territories effectively prevent most promotion of tobacco through traditional forms of media. However, many newly emerged forms of marketing aimed primarily at young adults (such as viral marketing through internet sites, entertainment venues and events) also influence teenagers.[15] Staggering numbers of people are using social networking sites in which there is considerable discussion of smoking.[84] Submissions from expert health agencies[85] to a review of the Act in 2003[86] identified numerous loose ends and important loopholes that need to be addressed to ensure that the Act remains effective into the 21st century. The May 2007 meeting of the Ministerial Council on Drug Strategy agreed that all governments would collaborate to ban the sale and advertising of tobacco products over the internet; however, legislative amendments have not yet been drafted, and none of the other recommendations from the 2003 review has been acted on.

Guidelines adopted in November 2008 by the WHO’s Conference of the Parties to the FCTC in relation to Article 13[87] specify that in addition to plain packaging and bans on point-of-sale displays and corporate communication, legislation to restrict promotion by the tobacco industry should also cover modern communication technologies, including the internet, satellite television and mobile telecommunications.

Action 3.1
Legislate to eliminate all remaining forms of promotion including advertising of price specials, public relations activities, payments to retailers and proprietors of hospitality venues, promotion through packaging (see Action 3.4 below) and, as far as feasible, through new and emerging forms of media.

Reporting on expenditure on any residual promotion
In the United States all tobacco companies must supply the Federal Trade Commission annually with detailed information on exactly what they spend on all forms of advertising and promotion of tobacco products. The Australian Government needs to be provided with similar information, not least so it can assess the need for action on any promotional activity that any company believes is not covered by existing Australian legislation.
Top of page
Action 3.2
Regulate to require mandatory reporting of amounts spent on any form of promotion – on payments to public relations companies or any other third parties, as well as details of any other promotional expenditure.

Point-of-sale displays
Displays at point of sale normalise tobacco products in the eyes of children[88] and prompt impulse purchases in smokers and recent ex-smokers.[89] Children and smokers need protection from inducements to buy tobacco products. National consistency has been sought by industry in submissions to the Taskforce. Legislation is being progressively implemented in most jurisdictions, but is absent or not sufficiently robust in others.

Action 3.3
Amend legislation to ensure that tobacco is out-of-sight in retail outlets in all jurisdictions.

Promotion through packaging
In Australia and other countries that have already banned traditional forms of tobacco marketing, packaging has become a cornerstone of marketing strategy. Brand names and package design enable the communication of personal characteristics, social identity and aspirations,[90] and are a crucial aspect of marketing tobacco products.[91, 92] Market-testing studies show that package design – through the use of varying colour and other design elements – induces smokers to expect, and then actually experience, their cigarettes to be lower strength, lower in tar and lower in health risk than exactly the same cigarettes presented without this packaging.[93, 94] These misperceptions are part of the constellation of modifiable tobacco marketing factors that make smoking easier to take up and harder to quit.

As noted above, there can be no justification for allowing any form of promotion for this uniquely dangerous and addictive product which it is illegal to sell to children. ‘Plain packaging’ entails prohibiting brand imagery, colours, corporate logos and trademarks, and permitting manufacturers only to print the brand name in a mandated size, font and place, in addition to required health warnings and other legally mandated product information such as toxic constituents, tax-paid seals or package contents. A standard cardboard texture would be mandatory, and the size and shape of the package and cellophane wrapper would also be prescribed. A detailed analysis of current marketing practices[92] suggests that regulations prescribing plain packaging would also need to encompass pack interiors and the cigarette itself, given the potential for manufacturers to use colours, bandings and markings, and different length and gauges to make cigarettes more ‘interesting’ and appealing. Any use of perfuming, incorporation of audio chips or affixing of ‘onserts’ would also need to be banned.

Consumer research indicates that decreasing the number of design elements on the package reduces its appeal and perceptions about the likely enjoyment and desirability of smoking.[95] Requiring cigarettes to be sold in plain packaging would reinforce the idea that cigarettes are not an ordinary consumer item. It would also reduce the potential for cigarettes to be used to signify status. Plain packaging would increase the salience of health warnings: research subjects show an improved ability to recall health warnings on plain packs.[96-98]

Guidelines for implementation of Article 11 adopted by the WHO’s Conference of the Parties to the FCTC state:
Parties should consider adopting measures to restrict or prohibit the use of logos, colours, brand images or promotional information on packaging other than brand names and product names displayed in a standard colour and font style (plain packaging).[99]
Top of page
Shareholder nervousness[100] and industry opposition to restrictions on pack design are a strong indication of the importance of packaging to tobacco sales.[101]

‘In our opinion, [after taxation] the other two regulatory environment changes that concern the industry the most are homogenous packaging and below-the-counter sales. Both would significantly restrict the industry’s ability to promote their products.’ Morgan Stanley Research (2007)[102]

Threatened legal challenges from tobacco companies also testify to the importance they attach to packaging as a promotional mechanism. Given that trademark law is aimed at protecting broader public interests and does not provide for absolute private property rights, plain packaging is justifiable, proportionate and not inconsistent with international trade agreements. International agreements provide flexibilities and exceptions to protect public health.

The industry has argued that plain packaging would make it easier to counterfeit cigarette packets. However, this need not be the case. Strategies proposed in the FCTC’s draft protocol to combat illicit trade include the mandating of tax markings that would make cigarette packages extremely difficult to counterfeit.

Action 3.4
Eliminate promotion of tobacco products through design of packaging.

To speed the adoption of plain packaging, the Australian Government could consider a differential rate of excise and customs duty for plain packets introduced to market prior to the required date.

|TOC|next page