Campaign Blog

Martin Cullip: for plain read large and disgusting

Mon 20th February 2012, posted by editor

Plain packaging promises paternal government of the worst kind

The public health community like to euphemistically describe their plans for tobacco as “plain packaging” but, in truth, there is very little ‘plain’ about it. If Australia is a guide, the UK will soon see tobacco packs vandalised by super-sized gross images of rotting lungs, near disembodied eyeballs and dead bodies. 

It is ironic that the Advertising Standards Authority bans film advertisements which display gore and mutilation, on the understandable premise that children might experience nightmares, when the rules change for tobacco. What could possibly be more stressful to a child than having their worst fears exploited by those who have a deep-seated hatred for smoking, or are paid to openly exhibit one. Plain packaging is designed purposely to raise this irrational horror to a whole new level.

Since The Australian government passed their legislation, it has emerged that they will soon proudly boast ghastly colour images of mutilation and death on 75% of the front, and 90% of the back of cigarette packs. They might have more honestly presented it as “disgusting packaging” rather than plain, at least their public would have then understood what was to come.

Australian anti-smokers, by their own admission, are now acting as trail-blazers for identical legislation elsewhere. We in the UK should not trust our corresponding bodies to be more possessed of common sense and perspective. Indeed, a recent EU consultation is transparently frank. Despite admitting that “hard empirical evidence is impossible” to assess the effectiveness of withdrawing branding in favour of disgusting images, the document is adamant that it should be enacted anyway.

Disappointingly, although this is a European paper, the UK is lauded throughout as being a shining example of compliance, so the same will happen here unless the decent majority object. Spookily, the EU enthuses that if branding were to be removed, 75% of the front, and 90% of the back of cigarette packs could be solely devoted to Hammer Horror images. Exactly the ugly situation in Australia.

The EU consultation baldly states that “plain packaging would supplement the introduction of pictorial warnings and reinforce their effect”. All well and good if pictorial warnings had been proven to work, but since being implemented in the UK in 2008, there has been no downward movement in the number of smokers.

This shouldn’t come as a surprise, since evidence promoting the efficacy of pictorial warnings is eclipsed by studies proving apathy or resistance. Smokers, young and old, are mostly turned off the message by shock tactics and respond by ignoring or rebelling, according to experts.

There is no evidence that plain packaging will drive down smoking rates, it sets an alarming precedent for similar moves against products such as wine, fizzy drinks and fast food, and is an abuse of the trust we hold in our representatives to make life more pleasant, rather than derelict and objectionable.

Those campaigning for removal of branding like to call it ‘plain’, but most would call it ugly. The result would be somewhere in between. Plain ugly.

A longer version of this post appears on The Free Society. Click here.

 

Comments: