A New Frontier Is Opening Up for Cigarette Ads

Now that tobacco companies have agreed to ditch their advertising icons to settle a raft of liability lawsuits, what will replace the Marlboro man and Joe Camel?

Try landscapes, animals and scissors.

Such are the devices used in Britain, where tobacco firms for years have faced restrictions similar to those likely to take effect in the United States. Often combining scenes from nature with wry humor, the British ads hint at the future of cigarette advertising in the United States.

Take a recent British ad for Marlboro--one entirely lacking in rugged cowboys and frontier imagery. It shows a brilliant desert sunset with a yellow traffic sign that incongruously warns: “Subject to Flooding.” The caption reads: “Welcome to Marlboro Country.”

Bowing to anti-smoking forces, tobacco companies in the United States have agreed to strict limitations on advertising. They said they won’t use humans and cartoon figures in ads--giving up the decades-old Marlboro man and the more recent Joe Camel, two of the most powerful images in advertising. Ads in publications read by youths can be text only.

The industry also has agreed to eliminate all forms of outdoor advertising--from roadside billboards to stadium posters to window signs. The deal is a minor blow to the outdoor advertising industry, which derives 8% of its $2 billion in revenue from cigarette ads.

As the experience of cigarette manufacturers in Britain shows, such prohibitions have not disarmed the tobacco industry. Tobacco firms have been forced to become more inventive and resourceful; some of the best advertising in Britain is for cigarettes.

Ads for Gallaher’s Silk Cut cigarettes, for example, have been hailed internationally. The ads cleverly show purple silk being cut by various means--cat’s claws, cheese graters, scissors. The brand is never mentioned.

As tobacco firms in the United States look beyond timeworn images of glamorous, cigarette-toting young adults, advertising could become more creative--and effective.

“The advertising is going to be new and different,” said Diane Cook-Tench, a professor at Virginia Commonwealth University and a former advertising executive. “There is potential for stronger work.”

Few expect cigarette manufacturers to entirely abandon advertising themes they’ve nurtured for decades. Cook-Tench said that Philip Morris Cos. may use horses, spurs or cloudless western skies in pitches for Marlboro, now that it can’t use the Marlboro man. Marlboro reportedly used an ad several years ago that showed wild horses but no rugged cowboy.

“They have millions invested in the western frontier,” she said. “I can’t see them giving that up.”

But other brands would have to make dramatic changes. Virginia Slims, for example, could no longer rely on its trademark slender models to promote the brand.

There are signs that cigarette manufacturers have been toying with new approaches in advance of the settlement. New ads depict the Marlboro man in a western landscape but curiously omit any mention of Marlboro or “Marlboro country.”

Benson & Hedges, another Philip Morris brand, introduced three new ads featuring anthropomorphic cigarettes. They are either rocking on a porch swing, resting on a hammock or playing chess. Previous ads for Benson & Hedges showed smokers as outcasts, relegated to sitting on airplane wings or building extensions.

It seems unlikely that those ads will survive the settlement, and tobacco companies definitely won’t be able to use the images in magazines with high youth readership. Ad agency executives expect tobacco advertising to disappear from the pages of those publications.

Leo Burnett, the Chicago-based advertising agency that produces ads for Marlboro and Benson & Hedges, declined to comment.

“It is clear someone is already thinking about how to get through the loopholes,” said David Wojdyla, executive creative director for Bozell Worldwide in Chicago. “You don’t need humans.”

The deal will make it harder for cigarette makers to reach nonsmokers because they can no longer promote tobacco along highways and in public gathering places.

With those outlets closed to them, cigarette manufacturers are expected to focus their efforts on direct mail and magazines, providing a potential boost to the publishing industry. Another avenue open to cigarette manufacturers is corporate sponsorships of cultural events, an area in which Philip Morris is already quite active.

Cigarette manufacturers could also gussy up packaging to catch the consumer’s eye. Blue Moon, a relatively new brand from RJR Holdings Corp. aimed at Gen-Xers, has built its advertising around the snazzy artwork on its packages.

However, the agreement requires that the size of warning labels be increased to 25% of the package.

Terms of the negotiated settlement also include rules proposed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Those rules, set aside by a federal court decision that the government is appealing, call for restricting ads to black and white only and permit cigarette ads only in magazines not read by kids. The ad industry said the FDA rules would cost them $1 billion.

What impact the new measures have on smoking remains to be seen. Countries with heavy restrictions on advertising, such as Sweden, Norway, Italy and the former Soviet Union, have seen little decline in tobacco usage. USC marketing professor David W. Stewart said advertising restrictions in Canada had an impact because they were tied to an increase in the cigarette tax. When the tax was eased, smoking went up.

“Why people smoke has more to do with social factors--parents smoke, friends smoke. A lot of influences come into play,” Stewart said. Stewart said that the advertising restrictions may end up benefiting tobacco companies, especially the industry leaders. It will be difficult to introduce new brands or hype less popular brands with fewer advertising venues, he said. Barred from outdoor advertising, cigarette companies will see their promotional costs go down, he said.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

Change in Habit

As domestic cigarette advertising spending skyrocketed from $250 million in 1963 to $4.8 billion in 1994, the industry adjusted to increasing regulation about where it could advertise. In the 1960s, most of its marketing budget was devoted to radio and TV ads. When cigarette ads on radio and TV were banned in 1971, the industry switched its emphasis to in-store promotions and coupons. Advertising spending by tobacco companies in the United States.:

1963

Television: 61%

Newspapers, magazines: 18%

Radio: 13%

Direct mail: 5%

Other: 3%

1994

Promotions: 35%

Coupons: 26%

Specialty items: 18%

Newspapers, magazines: 6%

Outdoor: 5%

Other: 10%

*

Total cigarette advertising* spending, in billions:

1994: $4.83

*

How the settlement affects advertising:

Restricts tobacco advertising to black text on a white background except for advertising in adult-only facilities and publications.

Prohibits advertising tobacco products on billboards and outdoor signs.

Bans human images, such as the Marlboro Man, and cartoon characters, such as Joe Camel, from all advertising.

Limits the size, location and number of ads used in point-of-purchase promotions.

Prohibits Internet advertising in the U.S.

Prohibits product placement in movies and on TV and payments to celebrities to smoke in movies or on TV.

Bans merchandise bearing the name or logo of tobacco products.

Prohibits offers of non-tobacco items in exchange for proof-of-purchase labels.

*

*Includes newspapers, magazines, outdoor and transit advertising, point-of-sale promotions, specialty items, public entertainment, direct mail and coupons.

* Sources: Settlement documents released by state attorneys general, Federal Trade Commission

* Researched by JENNIFER OLDHAM / Los Angeles Times