Tag: censorship

  • FDA Takes on Tobacco

    After the discovery of the harmful health effects tobacco products can have on the body, the method of selling and promoting tobacco has sparked many debates. Those in opposition to the advertising of tobacco question how companies can legally advertise their products that have been proven to cause damage to the body. In addition, children, who may not understand the grave danger these products can cause, could potentially view these advertisements and be persuaded to use tobacco products. In order to regulate the advertising of tobacco, Congress began censoring the advertising of cigarettes by banning promotions on television and radio in 1969. The censoring of advertisements continued in 1989 when Congress prohibited advertising directly to children. However, Congress did not stop there. New regulations have been released that further force the censorship of marketing tobacco products.

    While some agree to the censorship laws imposed on tobacco advertising, others posit that these regulations encroach on the company’s freedom of speech. Their main argument states that although it is commercial speech, it is still the company’s freedom of speech. Two large tobacco companies have already filed suit against the new laws on grounds of the First Amendment. Those in opposition see this as limiting the company’s freedom of expression by controlling what content they can release, and where. They also see it as the government not trusting individuals to make smart, informed decisions on their own.

    The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued  a broad set of censorship rules that affected the advertising and promotion of tobacco as well a set of new requirements relating to sales distribution of the product.  On June 22, 2010, the chosen rules were implemented into the law.

    cigs

    There are three primary requirements relating to the selling and advertising of tobacco. First, the rule banned tobacco brand names from sponsoring any athletic, musical, social or cultural event. The brand is also restricted from sponsoring a specific athlete or team at such events. Second, any audio advertisements were also required to use only words with no music or sound effects playing in the background. Lastly, the rule prohibits the selling of any items such as hats and tee shirts sporting tobacco brands or logos.

    Since the initial rule was issued by the FDA, another requirement was passed. Outdoor advertising on platforms such as billboards is also prohibited. Rules are continuously being presented to the court, attempting to create even more restrictions for tobacco advertising. Most recently, a rule was presented that would limit tobacco advertisements to using only black text with no graphics at all. This rule was denied.

    Tobacco sales have decreased significantly within the past 3 years. Do you think this is a result of the censorship laws the FDA imposed on the advertising of tobacco?

    – Hannah Turner, Emily Foulke, Briana McWhirter

  • SOPA to end online advertising

    The internet today is an extremely powerful tool with almost limitless applications and opportunities for innovation. In the world of capitalism it can be argued that the internet has become the single most powerful tool used to market towards consumers. Online ad campaigns can drastically cut costs while potentially reaching a massive audience, especially if it happens to go viral. The analysis and interpretation of Big Data has enabled companies to quantify extremely specific trends amongst the everyday consumer. As the internet continues to evolve, so does the way in which Advertisers utilize it to market their products.

    Recently congress has yet again brought up the infamous SOPA bill challenging the liberty the internet provides and forcing all information online to be copyrighted and accounted for. SOPA is an acronym that stands for the Stop Online Piracy Act. This bill’s purpose is to crack down on online copyright infringement, by limiting access to sites popular for the trading of pirated content. You have most likely heard the saying that pirating is not a victimless crime, and we all know that is the truth. The question is, is this the way to go about solving the problem?

    Picture-33

    Now in theory this may seem like a good idea, but once we delve further into this topic it becomes apparent that there are much deeper ramifications. Now this does not merely affect owners/creators of internet websites, but also the online advertisers that cater to these websites as well. Rex Harris with Techli.com points out a potential threat to advertisers:

    “ For those that are unfamiliar, this is what happens when a publisher is unable to deliver in full on a contract (for instance, a guaranteed number of online impressions). When this happens, the publisher must “make it good” for the advertiser with either a cash credit, or by offering even more ad inventory that was initially contracted. Can you imagine what will happen when sites are temporarily being shut down on a regular basis or when sites are blocked from running their clients’ advertisements? Impression guarantees will be nearly impossible to keep, and SOPA will turn online advertising into an unstable, grossly inefficient business for everyone involved.”

    The overabundance of censorship will hinder online advertisers from doing their jobs, thus producing lower revenue for online advertising.

    Austin Johnson, Jade Johnson-Grant, Jami Rogers, Ty Thomas