.Right: an advertising poster featuring the iconic "tough-guy" actor John Wayne promoting a brand of cigarette.
Arguments in favour of placing a ban on the branding cigarette packages
1. Cigarettes are a major health hazard
Chemical analysis shows that cigarettes are composed of many compounds and substances that are toxic. Among these are tar, which contains poisonous chemicals such as: ammonia, toluene and acetone; nicotine; carbon monoxide and hydrogen cyanide.
They also contain a variety of metals including lead, nickel, arsenic and cadmium and pesticides such as DDT and methoprene. Other chemicals such as benzene and naphthalene are added when cigarettes are being made.
The Cancer Council of Victoria's fact sheet on the effects of cigarette smoking states, 'Smoking is one of the leading preventable causes of death and disease in Australia, responsible for about 15,000 deaths annually. In 2003, tobacco caused more than one in every 10 deaths in Australia, and taking into consideration sickness and disability as well as deaths, tobacco caused more disease and injury in Australia than any other single risk factor. Tobacco is also responsible for most of all drug-caused deaths. In 2004-05, smoking caused 14 times as many deaths as alcohol, and 17 times the number of deaths due to illicit drug use.'
The Cancer Council of Victoria has also stated, 'It has been conservatively estimated that smoking kills about one half of all persistent users. Over the decades, the death toll from tobacco use has been vast. In the 50 years from 1950 (when the initial reports identifying smoking as a cause of lung cancer were published) to 2000, smoking is estimated to have killed 679,000 Australians.'
The social costs of smoking (including health costs) are estimated at $31.5 billion each year. Annually, over 750,000 hospital bed days are attributable to tobacco related diseases.
Statistics such as the above have led state and federal governments to take a variety of actions to discourage Australians from either taking up smoking or continuing the habit. The move to remove conspicuous branding from cigarette packages is part of a series of federal government initiatives intended to reduce the incidence of smoking within the Australian population as a means of promoting public health.
2. Reducing brand loyalty may reduce cigarette consumption
It has been argued that product image is a significant part of why consumers continue to smoke cigarettes.
Cigarette brands enjoy the highest brand loyalty of all consumer products, with less than 10% changing brands annually. brand choices are usually made early during the life of a smoker, with a high concordance between the brand first smoked and the brand eventually selected as a usual brand.
The image projected by the package is an important element in establishing brand loyalty and is constantly reinforced every time the smoker takes out the pack to remove a cigarette. Unlike many products, cigarettes are not simply consumed and the package discarded. The pack remains on the smoker's person for some time while the contents is gradually consumed. This allows for a high degree of consumer identification with the product.
Research officer, Becky Freeman, and Professor Simon Chapman and Dr Matthew Richards have together investigated cigarette marketing as part of their work at the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney. In a report they stated, 'Packs can not only communicate the "personality" of a brand to smokers, but smokers can project these characteristics by handling and displaying the package throughout their daily routines. Just as designer clothing, accessories and cars serve as social cues to style, status, values and character so too can cigarette packs signify a range of attributes about users. As "badge products" cigarettes can reinforce the characteristics conjured by brand image.'
The job of the package in the case of the established smoker is to communicate to the smoker that that this is the brand he or she habitually smokes and to reinforce his or her sense of the distinctive features of the brand to which the smoker was initially attracted.
3. Removing brands on packets will make it harder to promote those brands, especially to young smokers
It has been claimed that brand image is a significant component of how cigarette companies promote their products.
It has been suggested that young smokers are particularly vulnerable to the appeal of image and that they will buy a given brand of cigarette because the image associated with that particular brand appeals to them in some way.
Becky Freeman is a research officer and Simon Chapman is a professor at the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney. In an opinion piece published in The National Times on April 29, 2010, Freeman and Chapman claimed, 'In studies with young people, plain packs were perceived as dull and boring, cheap-looking and reduced the flair and appeal associated with smoking.' Freeman and Chapman have further noted, 'Just as designer clothing, fashion accessories and fast cars serve as cues to style, status and character so too can a cigarette pack reinforce social identity.' Referring to the impact that attachment to the image associated with a particular brand can have, Freeman and Chapman have observed, 'Just as designer clothing, fashion accessories and fast cars serve as cues to style, status and character so too can a cigarette pack reinforce social identity.'
Young women are another group the tobacco industry targets via its packaging. Freeman and Chapman have stated, 'In the industry's own words, packs aimed at younger women should be "slick, sleek, flashy, glittery, shiny, silky, and bold". A brown box featuring a diseased lung can hardly be seen as fitting this glamorous description.'
4. Distinctive packaging is one of the last forms of advertising available to cigarette manufacturers
It has been argued that distinctive packaging and point of sale displays reduce the impact of bans on cigarette advertising.
Advertising bans have been put in place in many countries as it has been seen as unethical and irresponsible for governments to allow the promotion of a product which is a known serious threat to public health. The European Union and World Health Organization (WHO) have both specified that the advertising of tobacco should not be allowed. The WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which came into effect on 27 February 2005, requires that all of the 168 countries that agreed to the treaty ban tobacco advertising unless their constitution forbade it.
Some countries also impose legal requirements on the packaging of tobacco products. For example in the countries of the European Union, Turkey, Australia and South Africa, cigarette packs must be prominently labeled with the health risks associated with smoking. Canada, Australia, Thailand, Iceland and Brazil have also imposed labels upon cigarette packs warning smokers of the effects, and they include graphic images of the potential health effects of smoking.
In this context, it seems inconsistent that cigarette manufacturers can use their product packs as a form of promotion.
When there is less opportunity to establish brand imagery through traditional methods of advertising packaging plays an even more important role in establishing and driving brand image.
Investment firm Citigroup has stated that plain cigarette packaging is the 'biggest regulatory threat to the industry, as packaging is the most important way tobacco companies have to communicate with the consumer and differentiate their products'.
5. Legal objections to removing brands are without foundation
(The following is a summary of arguments presented by registered patent and trademark attorney Glen Gordon, on the Crikey website on May 5, 2010)
Cigarette companies have claimed they are losing some of their intellectual property rights, primarily their trademark and the copyright on the intellectual property of their present cigarette packaging.
However, the proposed new plain packaging will include the trademark, in small black letters in a standard font and position on the packet.
Most trademarks are registered in just this form, as plain words in upper case, and this type of registration covers the word in whatever form it is actually used - irrespective of whether it is in a fancy script or in a special colour or surrounded by graphics and attractive patterns. For example, the word mark 'Winfield' is Australian trademark registration No.369487 dating from December 18, 1981, and owned by British American Tobacco(BAT).
The primary right obtained from trademark registration is a negative right; it is actually the right to prevent other people from using the trademark. Thus, the change to plain packaging will not adversely affect this right. For instance, in the future if someone were to manufacture in Australia Winfield cigarettes in their present packaging for export to other countries, BAT would still be able to take action to prevent this.
The situation with copyright is broadly similar. It confers the right to take action against third parties who are copying and misusing the owner's old packaging artwork and this right unaffected by requiring plain packaging.