This paper was presented at the Association for Education in Journalism and
Mass Communication in San Francisco August 2006.
I am not the author. If you have questions about this paper,
please contact the author directly.
If you have questions about the archives, email rakyat [ at ]
eparker.org. For an explanation of the subject line, send email to
[log in to unmask] with just the four words, "get help info aejmc," in the
body (drop the "").
(Oct 2006)
Thank you.
Elliott Parker
====================================================================
Abstract for Study Buddies:
Cigarette marketers often used college newspapers to reach their
young target audience. From the 1920s to the 1960s cigarette
companies were lucrative campus advertising sponsors.. The goal of
this research will be to show how cigarette advertisers refined their
product's image to appeal to college students. The campus newspaper
of The University of Tennessee, The Orange and White, will serve as a
case history to demonstrate how this goal was achieved.
Study Buddies, Matchmakers, and Career Advisors: Cigarette Promotion
in the University of Tennessee Newspaper The Orange and White 1926-1963.
Elizabeth Crisp Crawford
History Division – AEJMC
University of Tennessee Knoxville
7700 Gleason Road Apt. 5-E
Knoxville, TN 37919
[log in to unmask], 865-603-1547
Smoking must be one of the strangest habits among humans – the only
creature that takes smoke into the body for pleasure. Purposefully
inhaling smoke into the lungs would seem unnatural and contrary to
the organs' purpose. However, the practice is as old as
civilization. Ancient Greeks, Indians, and Arabians all practiced
the inhalation of various herbs and other substances for medical and
ceremonial purposes. 1 Although smoking is not new, at the start of
the century most smokers smoked cigars. Cigarettes were seen as
somewhat decadent and slightly subversive. Smoking was almost
entirely a male custom associated with "rough-and-ready boys,
dandies, and improper women."2 However, by the 1950s more than one
third of U.S. women smoked.3 Some estimates state that by the 1950s
the total population of smokers had reached nearly 70 million.4 This
startling shift leads one to question how this habit that was once
obscure could have attained such a large degree of popularity.
Many factors contributed to the prevalence of cigarette smoking. In
addition to the addictive nature of tobacco, industrialization and
mechanization were key factors. The commercial production of
cigarettes had been a cottage industry until 1881 when James A.
Bonsack invented a cigarette-making machine. Then, in 1883 James
Buchanan Duke, who had inherited his father's tobacco business in
Durham, North Carolina, purchased two cigarette machines. In five
years time, Duke's company was selling nearly a billion cigarettes
annually, far more than any other producer. 5 Other manufacturers
soon followed in Duke's footsteps. The cigarette industry was rapidly
becoming a major force in the U.S. economy.
In addition to mass production, marketing played a key role in the
spread of the habit. Until World War I, cigarette production in the
United States remained relatively stable. Once the United States
entered the conflict in 1917, the National Cigarette Service
Committee distributed millions of free cigarettes to the troops in
France. The cigarettes became such a morale factor that General
Pershing demanded priority for their shipment to the front. The war
solidified the habit among the American people. Between 1910 and 1919
cigarette production increased by 633 percent, from less than ten
billion annually to nearly 70 billion annually.6
One method that cigarette marketers used to reach their target
audience was advertising in college newspapers. The purpose of this
research is to reveal how cigarette companies used the college
newspaper to reach their target the youth market. From the 1920s to
the 1960s cigarette companies were lucrative advertising sponsors.
Advertisements played an important role in creating and reinforcing a
culture in which smoking is seen as glamorous and sophisticated,
enjoyable and pleasant, rugged and masculine (or chic and feminine),
and symbolic of independent thinking or coming of age.7 Therefore,
the goal of this research will be to show how cigarette advertisers
refined their product's image to appeal to college students. The
campus newspaper of The University of Tennessee, The Orange and
White, will serve as a case history to demonstrate how this goal was
achieved. Advertisements will be examined from the 1920s, 1930s,
1950s and 1960s. The 1940s will be excluded from the study because of
the scarcity of advertising in The Orange and White because of the
outbreak of the Second World War.
Cigarette smoking is a major preventable cause of serious
chronic disease. Medical research has clearly demonstrated that
nicotine is an addictive drug, arguably in the same category as
morphine, amphetamines, and cocaine. Although a variety of factors
can influence a persons decision to smoke (i.e. parents who smoke,
having friends who smoke, low self-esteem), researchers are beginning
recognize the role that print advertising plays. Studies have
recently concluded that frequent exposure to cigarette advertising
significantly increases the likelihood of starting a smoking habit.8
Given these facts, understanding how young people were persuaded to
smoke in the past might foster better understanding about how
previous generations of youth were attracted to cigarettes.
In addition, very few references in the scholarly literature
are made to cigarette advertising and promotion on college campuses.
However, from the large number of advertisements found in college
newspapers, it seems that these publications were an important
marketing venue for the cigarette industry. Therefore, this research
will serve to fill lacunae in the current scholarship on cigarette marketing.
Cigarette Advertising:
Tobacco companies use advertising to entice people to start smoking
and purchase their cigarette brands. Critics see cigarette
advertising as inducing consumers, especially children, to take up
smoking and call for further limits on its volume, location and
substance. On the other hand, some tobacco advocates conclude that
regulation of cigarette advertising has little influence on cigarette
use and has the unintended consequence of increasing tobacco industry
profits by reducing competitive advertising expenditures.9
Cigarette Advertising 1920s and 1930s:
As soldiers returned victorious from the battle fields in Europe, R.
J. Reynolds was creating its first nationally marketed cigarette,
Camel Cigarettes. The brand rapidly attained market dominance with an
upscale smoke that delivered a new tobacco taste. In no time, George
Washington Hill's American Tobacco Company created a richer sweeter
product, Lucky Strike cigarettes. Hill hired hard-sell expert Albert
Lasker of the Lord & Thomas Agency to do whatever was necessary to
win the cigarette war. As a result, Lucky Strike broke all previous
records. Hill, urged by Lasker, jumped at the chance to reach an
untapped audience – women. The Lucky Strike campaign involved several
advertising innovations. Hill was concerned that women disliked the
green packaging because it clashed with their clothes. To remedy the
problem he hired Edward Bernays who promoted the color green at the
season's fashion show. Hill also used celebrities from the
entertainment world to promote the cigarettes. The new slogan, "Reach
for a Lucky instead of a sweet" resonated with the weight conscious
female audience.10
Although the new Lucky slogan resonated with women, it did not fare
as well with the candy industry. The tobacco-candy fight was a rough
one. As a result, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) became deeply
entrenched in the conflict. American Tobacco appropriated $12.3
million for the battle. To accommodate the candy industry, Lucky
Strike modified the slogan to "Reach for a Lucky Instead," and ran a
"future-shadow" series of advertisements featuring double-chinned and
heavy-belted silhouettes behind trim figures. In spite of American
Tobacco's efforts, the FTC banned American from marketing cigarettes
as a weight reducing device, even by suggestion.11 By establishing a
connection between smoking and a slender figure, George Washington
Hill was able to erase some of the negative stigma from cigarette
smoking. In fact, he convinced many women that smoking was good for
their image.
In spite of the success of cigarette marketing to women, the issue
of women smokers remained a controversial issue. For instance, many
colleges prohibited women from smoking on campus. Women also found
themselves unable to smoke on ships, in railroad diners, and in train
station smoking rooms. However, by the mid-1920s some colleges had
established smoking rooms, while railroads and shipping lines relaxed
their regulations.12 Advertising further fueled this cultural
revolution. In 1926, the Newell-Emmett agency daringly presented a
poster showing a woman perched beside a man in a romantic moonlit
seaside scene saying, "Blow some my way". These four words were
shocking to many people. Yet Chesterfield persistently continued the
campaign, paving the way to the immense women's market.13
Health claims during the late 1920s and 1930s varied from claims
that a particular brand caused less throat irritation and coughing,
to aiding digestion and improving concentration and disposition or
even as a remedy for the cold and flu.14 This time period is unique
because of the positive health claims that the cigarette industry
made regarding health. This uniqueness is partially due to the
competitive nature of the cigarette industry at the time15 and the
lack of regulation. For instance, No one had ever heard of a
"coughless" cigarette before Old Gold appeared…No rasping…No
coughing…with "not a cough in the carload" and Lucky Strike's
appealed to taste and health with their slogan "It's Toasted – No
Throat Irritation".16 These health related appeals were ultimately
recognized as being far more detrimental to the industry than appeals
to taste, texture and mildness because they reminded smokers about
their own fears about smoking.17
Cigarette Advertising 1950s and 1960s:
After World War II, evidence was rapidly accumulating
regarding the potential heath risks of smoking. The press reported on
various epidemiological studies providing statistical links between
smoking and cancer. While some physicians remained among the
doubters, medical opinion began to swing toward the opinion it holds
today.18 The sharp decline in sales that resulted panicked the
industry. The number of health claims in cigarette advertisements
peaked in the 1950s reaching their greatest level of intensity from
1950-55.19 The negative health claims used to persuade the public
often reinforced consumer fears. While these health claims might
benefit the brand, they tended to harm competitors and injure the
cigarette industry in general because the "less harmful than…" claim
suggests that other brands are more harmful.20 Therefore, they are
usually used by upstart or struggling cigarette brands to gain a
market edge on the more prominent brands. Health claims quickly
declined after the 1955 FTC guidelines and, later, the 1960 FTC ban
on tar and nicotine claims.21
Another way that the industry responded to decreased sales was
to heavily promote filter cigarettes. Since Lorillard introduced the
miraculous Kent Micronite filter hit the market in 1952, competition
in filtering power has been a key marketing strategy.22 The
advertisements for Kent's Micronite filters claimed, "Kent offers the
greatest health protection in cigarette history."23 Micronite was
described as "pure, dust-free, completely harmless material that is
so safe, so effective, that it is actually used to help filter the
air in hospital operating rooms." However, the Kent advertisements
did not mention the fact that Micronite is made from asbestos. The
campaign was launched just after researchers had linked asbestos to a
host of respiratory ailments.24
Filters appealed to smokers because they appeared to offer a
more healthful alternative. The new brands presented their
advertising firms with a formidable challenge. Consequently,
cigarette advertising embarked on what has become known as the
"filter wars".25 Rosser Reeves called this rivalry "one of the most
vicious running advertising dog fights in our advertising
history".26 In response to the challenge, the industry used several
approaches to sell filtered cigarettes. One is to discuss tar and
nicotine yield and other explicit health matters. Filters are also
advertised for what they do not do. For instance they do not impede
taste. Finally, one can talk up filter quality without saying exactly
what the filter achieves. For example, "Twice as many filters in the
Viceroy Tip…"27 The advertisements never mentioned reducing
carcinogens because the filters could not effectively eliminate them.
Another problem was that was when the filters were most effective;
they removed a large portion of the nicotine in the smoke. As
nicotine is the addictive ingredient in cigarettes, smokers were
unsatisfied and left craving more. Other strategies included using
stronger tobaccos and loosening the materials inside the filter tip
making it less effective. However, as a result of their successful
marketing, filters made up 20 percent of the market by 1955.28
In addition to health related appeals, many cigarette
advertisements used sex appeals. Women's objections to sex-based
advertisements and narrow social roles went largely unrecognized
during the 1950s. The advertising image of women as happy homemakers
had always worked, and traditionally few women had voiced the
aspiration for more from life than this role could offer.29 Many
cigarette advertisements reinforced views of women that seem
extremely traditional or even sexist to the 21st century reader.
Cigarette advertisements also used celebrities to promote their brand
of cigarettes. One early advertisement featured Broadway star
Patricia Morison introduced as "one whose beauty and talent carried
her to stardom." Morrison, smoking a cigarette, says "There is
nothing quite like Camels. They taste so good and they are so mild".30
Advertising Regulation & College Campuses:
In 1955, two years after the Sloan-Kettering report linking
smoking to cancer, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) imposed the
first advertising guidelines31. In mid-September 1954, the FTC
announced its intention to issue a set of Cigarette Advertising
Guides and circulated a set of those guides for industry comment.
After about one year of comment with the tobacco industry, the FTC
formally announced the guides on September 22, 1955. These guides
signified the FTC's intention to seek injunctions against any advertising that:
1. made references to "either the presence or absence of any physical
effect of smoking";
2. represented that a cigarette brand "contained less nicotine, tars,
acids, resins, or other substances" than other brands unless the
claim and its significance could be supported by reputable scientific proof;
3. made references to smoking on the "(a) nose, throat, larynx, or
other parts of the respiratory tract, (b) digestive system, (c)
nerves, (d) any other part of the body, or (e) energy"; or
4. represented "medical approval of cigarette smoking."32
The tobacco industry's perspectives and interest was nurtured
and protected by the Tobacco Institute, a nonprofit organization
founded in 1958. Its membership consists of the major U.S.
manufacturers of cigarettes, smoking and chewing tobacco, and snuff:
The Bloch Brothers Tobacco Company, Brown & Williamson Tobacco
Corporation, Conwood Corporation, G.A. Georgopulo & Company, Helme
Products, Larus & Brother Company, Liggett & Myers, Lorillard,
Phillip Morris Incorporated, R. J. Reynolds Industries,
Scotten-Dillion Company, and United States Tobacco Company. The
Institute received financial support from the contributions from the
large tobacco firms according to their share of the market. The
Institute promoted pro-tobacco medical research, attempts to
discredit anti-smoking publicity, publishes information on the
historical role of tobacco, its place in the national economy, the
industry itself, and the public's use of tobacco products.33
The Public Health Service's Surgeon General Leroy F. Barney
M.D. issued his first statement on the subject of tobacco in the
Journal of the American Medical Association in November of
1959.34 Then, in June of 1961, the American Heart Association, the
American Cancer Society, and the National Tuberculosis and
Respiratory Disease Association requested that a commission be
created "to consider the responsibilities of government, of business
and voluntary agencies relative to the health hazards of cigarette
smoking and to recommend a solution to this health problem that would
protect the public and would interfere least with the happiness of
individuals."35
On June7, 1962, U.S. Surgeon General Luther Terry announced
the creation of an Advisory Committee on Smoking and Health36. With
the approval of President John F. Kennedy, the Surgeon General
established an "expert committee to undertake a comprehensive review
of all data on smoking and health". The members of the committee
were respected scientists who had no previous opinions on the subject
of cigarette smoking and health. Each of the members was approved for
the appointment by the tobacco industry, the American Medical
Association, and several other national health agencies. Cigarette
smokers comprised half of the committee members.37
Also during June of 1962, the Tobacco Institute released a statement
announcing that the tobacco industry had always taken the stance that
"smoking is a custom for adults38." Following that position, a
number of companies decided to cease advertising in college
publications and engaging in other campus endorsements. For years,
most companies had been conducting campaigns to convince university
students to smoke their specific brands, both by purchasing
advertising in college publications and through the activities of
paid "campus representatives" who gave away sample packs.39
Then on January 11, 1964, after 15 months of intensive study, the
Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General released its monumental
statement that changed the tobacco industry forever. Its two most
important findings were that cigarette smoking was a health hazard of
great enough importance to merit immediate action and that cigarette
smoking is causally related to lung cancer.40 According to the
American Cancer Society, "The report produced shock waves, there was
an immediate public reaction, and a sharp, albeit short-lived, drop
in cigarette sales."41
The historic findings of the Surgeon General's Advisory
Committee served as a catalyst for numerous industry guidelines. In
1965, for example, the Trade Regulation Rules on Cigarette Labeling
and Advertising became effective, in 1967 the Federal Communications
Commission entered the smoking-and-health controversy through the
application of the "Fairness Doctrine" in broadcasting and radio, and
in 1970 the Federal Trade Commission persuaded Congress to pass the
Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act that banned cigarette advertising
from radio and television and required unequivocal warning labels on
cigarette packages. As a result of the 1970 legislation, the tobacco
industry volunteered to publish nicotine, tar levels, and health
warnings in all advertisements.42
Cigarette Advertising in The Orange and White:
The Orange and White was the campus newspaper for the University of
Tennessee until 1965 when the newspaper changed its name to The Daily
Beacon. Like most campus newspapers, The Orange and White was widely
available among the student body and was distributed free-of-charge.
The newspaper was circulated weekly and covered current events,
campus news, and social events. Although The Orange and White was the
campus newspaper at the University of Tennessee, it can be said that
it represents the typical campus newspaper of the time in its
content, circulation, and sponsorship.
Advertising trends in The Orange and White during the 1920s:
During the 1920s, tobacco advertising was not a major presence
in The Orange and White. For instance, the newspaper averaged two or
three tobacco advertisements each week during the 1926-1927 academic
year. Approximately ten percent of the advertising in the campus
paper related to tobacco and half of the tobacco related
advertisements related to pipe tobacco instead of cigarettes. The
major advertisers were R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company's Prince Albert
pipe tobacco and Camel Cigarettes as well as Liggett & Meyers Tobacco
Company's Granger Pipe Tobacco and Chesterfield Cigarettes.
The primary persuasive appeal that cigarette advertisements in
The Orange and White used related to lifestyle. All of the cigarette
advertisements featured affluent men upscale settings such as private
men's clubs, golf courses, and fine restaurants, driving expensive
automobiles, or traveling. For instance, the text of a 1926 Camel
advertisement said: "Wherever you travel, by sea or by land, in
places of work or places of pleasure, you find friends of Camel."43
The luxurious image of the cigarette is also reflected in the men's
appearance. The men are dressed in fine attire and usually are
wearing suits, topcoats, and hats. Many of the men wore bow ties and
preppy clothes that made them look like dandies. Although the Camel
and Chesterfield advertisements were similar in their approach, they
did have a couple of important differences. The Camel advertisements
gave the impression of a very upscale or Ivy League collegiate
experience. On the other hand, the Chesterfield advertisements
portrayed the sophisticated lifestyle of young professionals.
Therefore, it seems that Camel sold the present by illustrating the
definitive collegiate experience and Chesterfield capitalized on
college students' future ideals.
Women rarely were portrayed in the advertisements. And, if
they were present in advertisements, they were accompanying men at a
social event, selling cigarettes (ie. cigarette girls), or "mothers
visiting the club-house," as the caption states in one advertisement.
Even the text of the advertisements suggested that men were the
advertisements' target audience. The text of 1927 Camel advertisement
that featured the mothers stated, "Careful observation will reveal
that men of quality demand quality in a cigarette – smoke
Camels."44 Likewise, women were never portrayed smoking or holding
cigarettes. However, one Camel advertisement that ran April 21, 1927
seemed to indicate that Camel was supporting the possibility that
women might enjoy smoking. The advertisement contained the
illustration of a party scene focused on a man offering cigarettes to
a seated man and woman. The man had just accepted a cigarette and the
woman looked as if she was considering whether to accept the
offer. The text stated,
Modern smokers make known their preference. And, they call for
Camels. Never in any age was there a smoking favorite like Camel.
Camels understand every mood of the modern smoker. Camel mildness and
smoothness are supreme with the critical taste of present-day people.45
Therefore, the text seems to suggest that forward-thinking or modern
women should choose Camel. And, men will encourage women to be modern
by offering them Camels. Although the idea that smoking was a habit
for men was the consensus of the vast majority of the advertisements,
the advertising included some foreshadowing of the future public
acceptance of women smokers.
The advertisements used illustrations instead of photographs
as their primary visuals. Chesterfield ads used realistic drawings of
idealized men that were reminiscent of the drawings of Norman
Rockwell. Rockwell's style could often be described as "photographic"
in its detail and sharp focus.46 On the other hand, the
advertisements for Camel were much more stylized. The figures were
elongated and flattened and the illustrator seemed to prefer the
profile view when possible. This stylized approach to the Camel ad
seemed to become more pronounced toward the end of 1927. These
characteristics are reminiscent of the Art Deco movement that was
popular in the 1920s and 1930s.47
Although the Chesterfield and Camel advertisements differed in
aesthetics and their creative approach, many of the messages in the
copy were surprisingly similar. The three major messages found in the
copy were that the tobacco was of the highest quality, that it tasted
good, and that the brand is preferred by discriminating smokers. For
instance the copy for a 1927 Camel advertisement stated,
No matter what price you pay, you can buy no better cigarette than
Camels. Smoke them as frequently as you please. You will never be
left with a cigaretty after-taste: Camel's aren't made that way. That
is why experienced smokers demand them. That is why millions thrill
to three short words: "Have a Camel!" 48
The copy for a similar Chesterfield advertisement claimed:
They've found it out! Nothing can ever take the place of natural
tobacco taste in a cigarette and smokers have found it out. More than
anything else, Chesterfield's natural tobacco taste accounts for its
steady rise to prestige.49
Therefore, the advertising suggested that individuals who smoked
Camel and Chesterfield cigarettes would gain social approval from
their peers and would be praised for their sophisticated taste if
they smoked these particular brands of cigarette.
Although each advertisement and advertiser used a slightly different
approach, the overarching theme was that smoking was part of becoming
a refined individual and contributed to one's social status.
Specifically, the advertisements suggested that smoking was an
important right of passage for young men in college that would help
them be perceived as cultivated gentlemen when they graduated and
would contribute to their future career success.
Advertising trends in The Orange and White during the 1930s:
Advertising's presence in The Orange and White doubled during the
1930s. During the 1934-1935 academic year, the newspaper averaged
three to five advertisements each week, comprising nearly a quarter
of the total advertising space due to the large size of the
spots. The major tobacco advertisers were R. J. Reynolds Tobacco
Company's Camel Cigarettes, Liggett & Meyers Tobacco Company's
Chesterfield Cigarettes and Granger Pipe Tobacco, P. Lorillard
Company's Old Gold Cigarettes, and The American Tobacco Company's
Lucky Strike Cigarettes.
During the 1930s cigarette advertisers embraced a larger array of
persuasive appeals. The advertising focused less on being perceived
as a dandy or college gentleman. Instead of the idealized upper class
world of the 1920s, the advertising in the 1930s used a more
seemingly realistic approach to collegiate life. The advertisers
used the appeal of being part of a fun social group, celebrity
endorsements, humor, the taste or pleasure of smoking, or the
invigorating lift that cigarettes provided. In addition, the
advertisements used photographs more frequently than illustrations
and employed more headlines and less copy than before. Another major
change in focus was the direct marketing of cigarettes toward women.
Men were still targeted more often than women, but women were
definitely included in the advertising campaigns.
During the 1930s Lucky Strike and Camel were the top selling
cigarettes of the time. However, they used very different
appeals. Camel marketed their cigarettes as a way to drive away
study fatigue. The advertising campaign used the slogan, "Get A Lift
With A Camel!"50 Headlines like "YOU'LL ENJOY this thrilling
response in your flow of energy"51 or "HAVE YOU TRIED this way of
regaining energy?"52 reinforced the energizing theme in the slogan.
Each of the advertisements featured a student perusing a particular
field of study with two contrasting "before-and-after" photographs of
the student: one photograph depicted the student studying in a lab,
library, or dorm room and another showed the student smiling while
smoking a Camel. For instance, one such advertisement involved
student named Charles Stephens who was a junior in pre-medical
studies. His testimonial stated,
I've read recent scientific investigations which confirm Camel's
energizing effect. But I already knew from my personal experience
that Camels lift up my energy and enable me to tackle my next
assignment with renewed vigor. It has definitely been established
that Camels are a milder cigarette.53
The student testimonials usually comprised approximately three
quarters of the advertising space. The remaining area usually
included smaller endorsements from professional athletes, "girl
explorers," pilots, and celebrities and an endorsement for
Camel-sponsored radio programming. Although the featured student was
always a man, women were often included in the smaller endorsements.
However, the women were always engaging in an enterprising occupation
such as Mrs. William LaVerre the "girl explorer,"54 Miss Marion
McMichael the "Air Hostess,"55 or Miss Georgia Englehard the
"Mountain Climber."56 Camel Cigarettes used endorsements,
testimonials, and vitality claims to promote their cigarettes.
Lucky Strike used a very different approach to marketing its brand
of cigarettes. Instead of helping students with their studies,
Luckies helped students mingle. Lucky Strike's campaign headline "How
Refreshing!57" implied that smoking Luckies would help enliven social
gatherings. The advertisements usually featured a casual social
occasion with an even number college-aged of men and women. Usually
one of the men offered a Lucky to the others who eagerly accepted the
offer and reached for the cigarettes. Unlike the Camel
advertisements, the Lucky ads featured one central image and minimal
text. The images used for the Lucky Strike advertisements had a
Norman Rockwell inspired appearance in their portrayal of idyllic
social scenes. As a secondary message, the Lucky strike campaign
focused on taste and quality. The advertisements featured the Lucky
Strike slogans, "Luckies They Taste Better" and "It's toasted." They
also included a diagram of a tobacco plant showing the high-quality
leaves that were used in Lucky Strike cigarettes.
On the other hand, Old Gold Cigarettes used Hollywood glamour and
celebrity appeal to market their brand. Each of the celebrities
endorsed Old Gold's "throat-ease." For instance, Carol Lombard
claimed, "Old Gold's throat-ease makes it a better cigarette,"58 Bing
Crosby maintained, "My throat is my fortune…that's why I smoke Old
Golds,"59 and Claudette Colbert said, "Please tell women smokers more
about Old Gold's throat-ease."60 These celebrity appeals targeted
both men and women and implied that Old Golds are safe cigarettes.
In addition to the celebrity appeals, Old Gold also used humor
to promote its brand. For instance, one headline appealing to men
asked, "Pawed by a Pudgy Wudgy? … light an Old Gold."61 The ad copy
elaborated on the headline.
When trapped by a Mushy Mamma…don't give way to dark despair. Count
to ten and light a sunny-smooth Old Gold. Its fragrant fumes will
enchant the matron's senses…while you slip spryly from her arms. Darn
clever…these O.Gs! At trying times…try a Smooth OLD GOLD. 62
The illustration showed a lean handsome man reaching for an Old Gold
with an overweight date sitting on his lap. Another headline
appealing to women said, "Wearied by a Windbag? …light an Old Gold."
Again, the copy supported the headline by stating,
If you're cornered at a fancy-dress ball by a tedious "ME-Man," don't
let the pest spoil your party. Count ten and light a sunny smooth Old
Gold. Every puff of a mellow, mild O.G. is like a friendly pat on the back.
The illustration featured a beautiful woman, yawning and reaching for
an Old Gold, seated next to a fat cartoon-like man. These humor
appeals also implied an element of fear -- a fear of obesity. Each of
the images portrayed the lean attractive individual smoking.
Advertising trends in The Orange and White during the 1950s:
Cigarettes maintained a steady presence in The Orange and White
during the 1950s averaging two or three advertisements each issue,
approximately a quarter of the advertising space due to the large
size of the advertisements. However, advertising for other kinds of
tobacco virtually disappeared. The major cigarette advertisers during
the 1953-1954 academic year included R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company's
Camel Cigarettes, Liggett & Meyers Tobacco Company's Chesterfield
Cigarettes, and The American Tobacco Company's Lucky Strike Cigarettes.
During the 1950s, advertisers used some of the same appeals that
they used during the 1930s. Advertisers used more celebrity appeals
and peer group testimonials than ever before. Many of the
advertisements contained both types of endorsements. However, the
testimonials were beginning to relate to health issues because of the
emerging cancer concerns. A new addition to the cigarette
manufacturers advertising arsenal was the introduction of contests
and surveys. The surveys contributed to the referent power of the
particular brand by giving the impression that other people with
similar taste prefer a particular type of cigarette. For example,
Chesterfield, Camel and Lucky Strike all claimed to be the most
popular cigarette.
As in the 1930s, Camel used testimonials as their primary persuasive
appeal. However, instead of using student endorsements, Camel used
celebrities and other prominent individuals. Although Camel switched
to celebrity appeals, they still used peer influence as a secondary
persuasive device in their invitations to give Camels a 30-day trial.
Camel used a variety of celebrities to promote their cigarette. For
instance, one Camel advertisement featured Mickey Mantle who said,
I started smoking Camels when I joined the Yankees because so many of
my teammates smoked them. That was a smart decision. Camels are mild
and swell tasting! 63
Likewise, Jane Greer, a Hollywood Movie Star, said,
I started smoking Camels after trying many brands. I found Camels'
mildness and flavor far more enjoyable than the rest. You will, too!
Why don't you try Camels today?64
In addition to a signed photograph of the celebrity, each
advertisement included a paragraph on "How the stars got started"
that described the celebrity's rise to prominence. Besides the
celebrity endorsement, every Camel advertisement included a smaller
illustration of college students smoking Camel cigarettes and an
invitation to try Camels. An invitation stated,
Start Smoking Camels Yourself! Make the 30-Day Camel Mildness Test.
Smoke only Camels for 30 days – see for yourself why Camels' cool
mildness and rich flavor agree with more people than any other cigarette! 65
Finally, the headline at the bottom of the advertisement stated, "For
Mildness and Flavor… Camels Agree with More People than Any Other Cigarette!"
Unlike Camel, Lucky Strike never mentioned health issues directly or
indirectly. Instead, Lucky Strike focused on taste and the collegiate
peer group. The 1953-1954 Lucky Strike campaign concentrated on a
student jingle contest. Winning students would have their jingles
published in a Lucky advertisement and will receive a $25.00
prize.66 The advertisements channeled the collegiate spirit by
showing active university students singing the praises of Lucky
Strike cigarettes. Usually the advertisements featured beautiful
co-eds, but handsome young men are pictured as well. The headline
usually stated, "It's all a matter of taste…Luckies taste better –
Cleaner, Fresher, Smoother."67 Below the headlines, students are
pictured along with headlines that the contest winners submitted such
as the slogan that Warren Perry from Northwestern University submitted:
It takes three years of steady work to earn a Ph.D. It only takes one
pack to know that L.S. /M.F.T.68
Likewise, John D. Neulan from Princeton University suggested the
following jingle,
In college crowds you'll always see those packs of red and white –
It's Lucky Strikes they choose to buy, Their flavor tastes just right! 69
The Lucky Strike campaign also stated in its advertisements that
their recent survey of college students found that more students
prefer Lucky Strikes than any other cigarette. Therefore, like their
campaign in the 1930s, the 1950s Lucky Strike campaign focused on
college social life
Advertising trends in The Orange and White during the early 1960s:
Cigarette advertising mushroomed in The Orange and White during the
early 1960s before the Tobacco Institute discontinued campus
promotion in its 1962 decision. In spite of the decision, cigarette
advertisements did not completely disappear from The Orange and White
until September of 1963. During the 1961-1962 academic year, the
newspaper averaged four to six cigarette advertisements each week,
nearly half of the advertising space. The number of advertisers also
increased. The major advertisers included: The American Tobacco
Company's Lucky Strike Cigarettes, Pall Mall Famous Cigarettes,
Dual-Filter Tareyton Cigarettes, Liggett & Meyers Tobacco Company's
Chesterfield King Cigarettes and L & M Filters, R. J. Reynolds
Tobacco Company's Camel Cigarettes, Menthol Fresh Salem Filter
Cigarettes, and Winston Filter-Cigarettes, Phillip Morris's Marlboro
Filter Cigarettes, and Brown & Williamson's Viceroy Filter Tip
Cigarettes. Although the number of brands doubled due to the
introduction of filtered cigarettes, the only two new manufacturers
that started advertising in The Orange and White were Brown &
Williamson and Phillip Morris.
Because of the 1955 guidelines, cigarette advertisers could no
longer make any claims about the supposed energizing, health or
physical effects of smoking, or any reference to the medical
establishment's approval of the smoking habit. The testimonials that
were popular during the 1950s were greatly reduced during the early
1960s. Only Camel still used endorsements and it no longer used
celebrity appeals. Many of the advertisers began to use a comic strip
format or cartoon characters for humor based advertising. Other
advertisers sponsored advertorial columns that combined entertaining
content with a soft sell approach. More contests were introduced to
reward participants for submitting marketing surveys and to foster
brand loyalty through the premiums offered.
The 1961 Lucky Strike campaign centered on the "Lucky Puffers" comic
strip, each week the Lucky Strike cigarettes would be involved in new
adventures. For instance, an "upperclassman cigarette" warns a
"freshman cigarette" to stay away from the school of Pyrotechnics, a
matchbox, and shows him to his dorm, a pack of cigarettes. The copy
below the comic strip stated,
SOPHOMORES, JUNIORS, SENIORS: DON' T TREAD ON FRESHMAN! They have
been known to become employers. A freshman wants, above all, to be
inaugurated into your world. Walk him to class, teach him longhand,
explain how the Ph.D. wears his tassel, introduce him to Luckies (and
tell him how college students smoke more Luckies than any other regular).70
As before, Lucky Strike still appealed to taste. The advertisement's
sub headline stated, "CHANGE TO LUCKIES and get some taste for a
change!" Although the format changed, Lucky Strike still used a
humorous approach and appealed to the charm of collegiate life.
Like the Lucky Strike advertisements, The American Tobacco Company's
Dual Filter Tareyton also appeals to humor and taste. The headline
for the Tareyton campaign stated, "Tareyton delivers the flavor…Dual
Filter Does It! The advertisement featured a muscular Roman boxer
cartoon character named Junius Cassius who smiled as he enjoyed a
cigarette. The text of the advertisement stated:
Tareyton's Dual Filter in duas partes divisa est! Slugging Junius
(Pretty Boy) Cassius takes off the brass knucks to enjoy his favorite
smoke. Says Pretty Boy, "Ecce Tareyton, one filter cigarette that
really delivers the gustibus. Try Tareytons. Next time you buy
cigarettes, take a couple of packs vobiscum.71
Although this advertisement did not directly connect smoking with
health, it portrayed a muscular Roman boxer smoking their cigarette
brand. The clever copy also lends humor and sophistication to the brand.
Humor was also used in sex appeals. For instance, the Winston
campaign used the headline, "It's what's up front that counts."72 The
primary image in the advertisement is usually of a college-aged
couple on a date and either the man or the woman is holding a
cigarette supposedly showing the filter "up front." However, the
position of the cigarette combined with the suggestive headline
results in a rather overt sexual innuendo.
Pall Mall also used sexual humor to sell cigarettes. Pall Mall
sponsored a comic series called "Girl Watcher's Guide" that gave
advice on how to perfect one's technique and was based on the book
The Girl Watcher's Guide by Donald J. Sauers. The illustration for
the first in the series showed "Three views of an average, healthy
girl…front, side, and back."73 In addition to giving instruction on
watching, Pall Mall offered free membership cards to everyone who
wanted to join the "American Society of Girl Watchers." Subsequent
advertisements in the series included "Lesson 2 – What about
standards?" "Lesson 3 – Concerning self-control," and "Lesson 4 – Why
men watch girls." Each of the advertisements contained much more
advice about watching "girls" than information about Pall Mall
cigarettes. The only mention of Pall Mall was contained in the sub
headline, "Pall Mall's natural mildness is so good to your taste! So
smooth, so satisfying, so downright smokeable!"
In addition to the "Girl Watcher's Guide," Max Shulman also offered
love advice in his column "On Campus" sponsored by Marlboro. Max
Shulman is the author of "The Many Loves of Dobie Gillis." In his
column entitled, "The Many Loves of Thorwald Dockstader" Shulman wrote,
Thorwald thought over all of his girls and came to a sensible
decision. "I think," he said to himself, "That I will stick to
Marlboros. I am not rich enough for girls."
However, the column did not relate exclusively to "girls." Of his
column, Schulman wrote,
Aside from fleeting mentions of Marlboro, this column has another,
and more urgent mission: to cast a hot white light on the vexing
questions that trouble college America – "Should the Student Council
have the power to level tariffs?" and "Are roommates sanitary?" and
"Should housemothers be compelled to retire upon reaching the age of 26?" 74
This soft-sell approach that Schulman called the "limp or spongy
sell" interspersed cigarette promotion with his humorous column. In
spite of the soft sell, the column still seemed to imply that smoking
Marlboros was part of the ideal college experience.
Like Marlboro, Camel also sponsored a column. However the column
entitled "Career Clues" offered business advice. In this advertorial
column a successful entrepreneur related his advice for career
success. For instance, Edwin J. Ducayet, the president of one of the
world's largest helicopter manufacturing firms, Bell Helicopter
Company, gave his endorsement for Camels by saying that he had been a
Camel smoker since his undergraduate days at M.I.T.75 Nearly all of
the men giving career advice mentioned that they started smoking in
college. In addition to the career advice, the advertisement
featured a photograph of the businessman smoking Camel cigarettes.
Therefore, the advertisements seemed to suggest that smoking Camels
is part of the career advice offered.
Discussion:
Unfortunately, the 1963 decision to stop advertising in campus
newspapers does not mark the end of the story. The tobacco industry
continues to target young people even after the 1964 Surgeon
General's Report. For instance, in 1981 CBS presented a "Perspective"
report reproaching the makers of Viceroy Cigarettes for employing
advertising "slicksters" to create a strategy to ensnare the
young. The strategy was obtained from a report that suggested that
smoking should be presented to youth as a rite of passage such as
shaving, wearing a bra, or drinking alcohol. Although the strategy
was not implemented, it showed that Brown & Williamson intended to
hook the young.76 Furthermore, a Brown & Williamson marketing
executive was quoted anonymously in the Louisville Courier-Journal
stating that "Nobody is stupid enough to put it into writing, or even
in words, but there is always the presumption that your marketing
approach should contain some element of market expansion, and market
expansion in this industry means two things – kids and women."77
Because of the negative publicity that smoking and the tobacco
industry has received in the United States, the number of smokers is
declining. For instance, the number of smokers in the United States
dropped from 40 percent of the population in 1960s to 25 percent in
the 1990s. The alarming truth is that cigarette companies lose more
of their clients each year than do the manufacturers of any other
product, 434,000 die from smoking related diseases and 1.5 million
quit. Therefore, the tobacco industry needs to win 2 million new
smokers every year to break even78. Although the tobacco industry
insists that it is just trying to encourage smokers to switch brands,
there are only six major cigarette producers in the United States and
two of the six, RJR Nabisco and Phillip Morris, control 75 percent of
the market. So, if a cigarette smoker changes brands, it is likely
that he or she will switch to another brand produced by the same
parent company. Therefore, researchers agree that the primary
objective of cigarette advertising is attracting new smokers.79
Although cigarette marketing efforts have been extremely successful
in promoting cigarette smoking, the evidence shows that health
information does have an impact on smoking. In 1964, cigarette sales
declined by 20 percent after the release of the Surgeon General's
Report.80 Although the industry denies it, advertising restrictions
do decrease demand. The American Cancer Society conducted a survey of
thirty-three countries found that countries with tightly restricted
tobacco promotion experienced the largest reduction in tobacco
consumption. The study found that the most effective efforts combine
a total ban on cigarette promotion, heath warnings, and continual
price increases. However, the research also found that the
elimination of tobacco promotion is enormously influential in its own right.81
Along with the elimination of many venues for tobacco advertising,
anti-smoking PSAs have had a lasting impact on the public perception
of cigarette smoking. Although few people remember that Deborah Kerr
promoted Chesterfield Cigarettes, many can recall her co-star's
anti-smoking PSAs. Both Deborah Kerr and her Oscar winning co-star
Yul Brynner are known for their roles in the 1956 film adaptation of
Richard Rogers and Oscar Hammerstein's hit Broadway musical The King
and I.82 In addition to his performance in The King and I, Brynner is
also known for his role in the fight against lung cancer and
cigarette smoking. Dying from lung cancer, Yul Brynner made a
television commercial that said, "Now that I'm gone, I tell you:
Don't smoke, whatever you do, just don't smoke." The campaign ran
after he died in 1985 and remains one of the most unforgettable
antismoking statements ever created. In addition to his PSA, he left
a legacy that continued his fight against cancer through the creation
of The Yul Brynner Head and Neck Cancer Foundation.83
Throughout history, cigarette promoters have successfully advertised
smoking in spite of health concerns. The glamorous and idealized
images that the industry presented effectively counter argued the
medical research and advice of the time. Only by curbing the
advertising efforts of the burgeoning industry was the population
able to turn from this devastating habit. The history of cigarette
advertising and its legacy of cancer and death teach a sobering
lesson in the power of the insinuations contained in advertising
messages. In the case of tobacco, the promise of a vigorous and
glamorous life was tragically realized in millions of cancer deaths.
1 Wagner, Susan Cigarette Country: Tobacco in American History and
Politics. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971, 4.
2 Laird, Pamela Walker Consuming Smoke: Cigarettes in American
Culture. Reviews in American History, 28, (2000): 96-104.
3 Craig, Steve and Terry Moellinger "'So Rich, Mild, and Fresh': A
Critical Look at TV Cigarette Commercials, 1948-1971." Journal of
Communication Inquiry 25 (January 2001): 55-71.
4 Wagner, 77.
5 Meyer, John A. "Cigarette Country" American Heritage 43 (1992): 72.
6 Meyer, John A. "Cigarette Country" American Heritage 43 (1992): 72.
7 Craig and Moellinger, 55.
8 Hawkins, Katherine and Audrey Curtis Hane "Adolescents' Perceptions
of Print Cigarette Advertising: A Case for Counteradvertising"
Journal of Health Communication 5 (2000): 83-84.
9 Solo, J. L. "Exorcising the Ghost of Cigarette Advertising Past:
Collusion, Regulation, and Fear Advertising" Journal of
Macromarketing 21 (2001): 135-145.
10 Sivulka, Juliann Soap, Sex, and Cigarettes: A Cultural History of
American Advertising. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1998, 166-167.
11 Wagner, Susan Cigarette Country: Tobacco in American History and
Politics. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971, 60.
12 Sivulka, 166-167.
13 Sivulka, Juliann Soap, Sex, and Cigarettes: A Cultural History of
American Advertising. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1998, 166-167.
14 Ringold, Debra J. & Calfee, J. E. The Informational Content of
Cigarette Advertising 1926-1986. Journal of Public Policy &
Marketing, 8 (1989): 1-23.
15 Calfee, John E. & Ringold, Debra J. What can we learn from the
informational content of cigarette advertising? A reply and further
analysis. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 9, (1990): 30-42.
16 Pollay, Richard W. Filters, Flavors…Flim-Flam, Too! On "Health
Information" and Policy Implications in Cigarette Advertising.
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 8, (1989): 30-39.
17 Calfee & Ringold, 30-42.
18 Solo, J. L. "Exorcising the Ghost of Cigarette Advertising Past:
Collusion, Regulation, and Fear Advertising" Journal of
Macromarketing 21 (2001): 135-145.
19 Ringold, Debra J. & Calfee, J. E. The Informational Content of
Cigarette Advertising 1926-1986. Journal of Public Policy &
Marketing, 8 (1989): 1-23.
20 Pollay, Richard W. Filters, Flavors…Flim-Flam, Too! On "Health
Information" and Policy Implications in Cigarette Advertising.
Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 8, (1989): 30-39.
21 Ringold & Calfee, 1-23.
22 Craig, Steve and Terry Moellinger "'So Rich, Mild, and Fresh': A
Critical Look at TV Cigarette Commercials, 1948-1971." Journal of
Communication Inquiry 25 (January 2001): 55.
23 Jacobson, Michael F. & Mazur, Laurie A. Marketing Madness: A
Survival Guide for a Consumer Society. (1995) Westview Press:
Boulder, CO. 150.
24 Ibid.
25Craig & Moellinger, 55.
26 Ibid.
27 Calfee, John E. & Ringold, Debra J. What can we learn from the
informational content of cigarette advertising? A reply and further
analysis. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. 9, (1990): 30-42.
28 Craig, Steve and Terry Moellinger "'So Rich, Mild, and Fresh': A
Critical Look at TV Cigarette Commercials, 1948-1971." Journal of
Communication Inquiry 25 (January 2001): 61.
29 Sivulka, Juliann Soap, Sex, and Cigarettes: A Cultural History of
American Advertising. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company, 1998, 254-255.
30 Ibid.
31 Miles, Robert H. Coffin Nails and Corporate Strategies. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, (1982) 39.
32 Solo, J. L. "Exorcising the Ghost of Cigarette Advertising Past:
Collusion, Regulation, and Fear Advertising" Journal of
Macromarketing 21 (2001): 137.
33 McGrew, Jane L. "History of Tobacco Regulation" based on a paper
prepared for the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse.
DrugLibrary.org
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/nc/nc2b.htm [July
19, 2005].
34 Ibid.
35 McGrew, Jane L. "History of Tobacco Regulation" based on a paper
prepared for the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse.
DrugLibrary.org
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/nc/nc2b.htm [July
19, 2005].
36 Miles, Robert H. Coffin Nails and Corporate Strategies. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, (1982) 39.
37 McGrew, Jane L. "History of Tobacco Regulation" based on a paper
prepared for the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse.
DrugLibrary.org
http://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/Library/studies/nc/nc2b.htm [July
19, 2005].
38 Wagner, Susan Cigarette Country: Tobacco in American History and
Politics. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1971, 122.
39 Ibid.
40 Miles, Robert H. Coffin Nails and Corporate Strategies. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982, 41.
41Ibid, 41-42.
42 Miles, Robert H. Coffin Nails and Corporate Strategies. Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1982, 44.
43 The Orange and White, Saturday, November 6, 1926.
44 The Orange and White, Thursday, January 6, 1927.
45 Ibid, Thursday, March 24, 1927.
46 Hollis, Richard Graphic Design: A Concise History New York, NY:
Thames & Hudson Ltd. 2004, 99.
47 Hollis, Richard Graphic Design: A Concise History New York, NY:
Thames & Hudson Ltd. 2004, 83-85
48 The Orange and White, Thursday, March 24, 1927.
49 Ibid, Thursday, April 28, 1927.
50 The Orange and White, Friday, September 26, 1934.
51 Ibid, Friday, October 19, 1934.
52 Ibid, Friday, September 26, 1934.
53 Ibid, Friday, November 2, 1934.
54 Ibid, Friday, November 2, 1934.
55 The Orange and White, Friday, November 9, 1934.
56 Ibid, Friday, November 16, 1934.
57 Ibid, Friday, September 26, 1934.
58 The Orange and White, Friday, November 23, 1934.
59 Ibid, Friday, October 5, 1934.
60 Ibid, Friday, October 26, 1934.
61 Ibid, Friday, February 8, 1935.
62 Ibid, Friday, February 8, 1935.
63 The Orange and White, Thursday, September 24, 1953.
64 Ibid, Thursday, March 4, 1954.
65 Ibid, Thursday, March 4, 1954.
66 Ibid, Thursday, October 22, 1954.
67 Ibid, Thursday, February 25, 1954.
68 Ibid, Thursday, February 25, 1954.
69 Ibid, Thursday, February 25, 1954.
70 The Orange and White, Friday, October 6, 1961.
71 The Orange and White, Friday, September 29, 1961.
72Ibid, Friday, September 29, 1961.
73Ibid, Friday, January 19, 1961.
74 The Orange and White, Friday, September 24, 1963.
75Ibid, Friday, March 6, 1962.
76 Teeter, Dwight L. and Loving, Bill. Law of Mass Communications:
Freedom and Control of Print and Broadcast Media (Eleventh
Edition). (2001). Foundation Press: New York, NY. 228.
77 Jacobson, Michael F. & Mazur, Laurie A. Marketing Madness: A
Survival Guide for a Consumer Society. (1995) Westview Press: Boulder, CO. 152.
78 Ibid,151.
79 Ibid, 152.
80 Jacobson, Michael F. & Mazur, Laurie A. Marketing Madness: A
Survival Guide for a Consumer Society. (1995) Westview Press: Boulder, CO. 160.
81 "Government Tobacco Prevention Policies and Consumption Trends in
Thirty-Three Countries from 1970-1986" World Smoking and Health
(American Cancer Society), 15 (1), 32-37.
82 Crowther, Bosley "The King and I" The New York Times [July 28,
2005] http://movies2.nytimes.com/gst/movies/movie.html
83 The Yul Brynner Head and Neck Cancer Foundation.
www.yulbrynnerfoundation.org [July 28, 2005]
|
