Liberty Speaks

Flipping through popular magazines like: Essence or Ebony, one might spot advertisements of a close group of friends playing on the beach, enjoying carnival games, speeding off in a roller coaster, feeling Alive with Pleasure. These ads may seem like the perfect depiction of a new boardwalk amusement park but, in reality these images are promoting Newport Pleasure cigarettes. Specifically marketing to minorities, by exploiting African American models and advertising in black magazines, in order to reach profitable communities. Cigarette companies since their conception have manipulated the public’s perception of cigarettes through ads. Companies, like Philips Morris, have directed their advertisements to adolescents, minorities and lower-income communities for years. Tobacco companies are targeting whom they consider receptacle customers, promoting poison to these lucky consumers. In America’s scientific society, the health aspects are heavily discussed and focused on in discussions about cigarettes. Yet, the public ignores the economic and social issues that arise from this drug, being overly marketed. In lower-income minority communities Big Tobacco preys on residents, by profiting off their pain. Due to the stress levels, and average income within these communities, cigarettes may seem like a valid relief yet, the stigma and legislation against smoking perpetuate the inferior status of these people.

There are disproportionate levels of tobacco advertising in lower-income communities, especially ones that have minority residents. Because Tobacco companies faced more restrictions from the government, on advertising, they have pursued minorities and lower income communities in their marketing schemes. Since the 1970’s “Tobacco companies were focusing campaigns on women and minority communities…” (Vaknin,105). In the past decades, major cigarette companies like Phillip Morris or R.J Reynolds have targeted previously considered weaker communities. Either being the female community or the minority cigarette brands believed these groups were the perfect buyers for their company. Currently they tend to heavily focus mainly on poor minority neighborhoods rather than females and colored people. It has been noted that “Certain brands…were marketed specifically to the Hispanic market in the United States” (Vaknin,90). Either targeting specific communities or using different cultural references to spark interest from specific groups of people. In Boston, “…signs remain prolific and prominent in Boston’s lower-income neighborhoods, especially those with substantial African-American and Hispanic populations” (Smith). These signs that are not only in colored communities but, speak specially to colored people. An R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Executive said, “We don’t smoke that sh**. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the black and stupid.” (Bach,1) their stance on their cigarettes are that of distaste, calling their own product “sh**”, yet, the company and its executives somehow believe it is appropriate to sell this dangerous drug to underprivileged communities, claiming that they must be inept.

The power of a skillfully crafted advertisement can sometimes be lost on consumers, who tend to implicitly feed into the narrative manufacturers create for their products. Advertisements can draw people in using images that one can relate to, or flashy sponsors that people admire.  Within poor areas the culture of smoking is becoming increasingly popular. A study observed that “...heavy smokers also do not believe that other remedies for reduction of stress are available, they also believe (more than nonsmokers) that smoking has an effect on mood and stress experience” (Wetter et al., 1992). Within these regions of increased smoking, poor residents use nicotine as an escape from their problems, literally buying into the myth that cigarettes will help one cope with life of low wages and continuous bills Once addicted to the drug, there is a reliance on the feeling nicotine gives someone who uses it, and due to the heavy promotion of the drug it is becoming more likely that cigarette use will become standard within these neighborhoods. Research done to observes smoking trends in society discovered “The approaches from social psychology are usually concerned with the start of the smoking career, the age of adolescents when habits are acquired...Smoking is explained as a learned behavior determined by the social environment (Wetterer & Troschke, 1986)” (Lujic, et al, 10).In these lower-income communities the fact that smoking is becoming more prevalent causes generations to be influenced by the influx of advertising within these areas. As children watch the adults in their neighborhood continuously smoking and spending money on packs of cigarettes they are inadvertently being encouraged to smoke when they become adults. Sadly, the reality is that many children pick up the habit years before adulthood, not realizing that they are becoming prey to R.J. Reynolds and Philips Morris and Imperial Tobacco group.

There are countless campaigns against smoking currently being fought, however, these campaigns focus on the health issues, ignoring the social consequences that smoking causes in improvised neighborhoods. Throughout the years the government has solely paid attention to what cigarettes would do to the overall health of Americans; starting “Tips, the first federally funded anti-smoking paid media campaign, features former smokers talking about their smoking-related illnesses” (CDC). This made it clear what the White House was only concerned with, preventing diseases that were caused by smoking. So, the awareness campaigns that begun from this era were fixated on the health of a cigarette smoker. However, there were no in-depth discussions about who these smokes were, and the demographics, hypothetical people and situations were exclusively discussed. When these campaigns started there was no consideration of how specific groups were affected by cigarettes, and there is still little discourse about the plethora of effects smoking has the lower class. Even Ash, an anti-smoking company, stands for Action on Smoking and Health with the slogan “Global action for everyone’s health” (Ash). Even though they combat cigarette smoking, Ash completely ignores the economic and societal effects of smoking. These slogans and commercials, that depict what cigarettes do to one’s body. are a scare tactic showing the nasty effects of smoking. This overly simplified solution does not help the complex problem; these organizations don’t research constantly smokes, rather they present the masses with generalized information hoping to people to make a change. However, this quixotic outlook cannot be remedied unless these organizations realize what they are doing wrong. Anti-smoking companies, like Ash, are inconsiderate of the larger issue, the overmarketing of cigarettes within poor urban areas. Not only causing the health problems Tips warned America about but, also causing lower-income communities to be increasingly scrutinized by other communities.  Sociologists uncovered “That ‘poor’ … possess very few materials, political… resources… reinforced by their lower status” (De Swann; et al,46). Their research makes it evident that poorer communities are disenfranchised by society. As De Swann explains “elites”  prosper, indifferent to the pain improvised people endure, as resources for smoking prevention are targeted towards “elites” (the upper class), ensuring that the overall quality of life is higher within rich neighborhoods.

Although the health effects of cigarettes are significant it is not the only problematic result of smoking cigarettes in a lower-income community. There are also economic deterrences manufactured by smoking aside from the adverse societal and health apects Increased government regulation on big tobacco companies, have not necessarily benefited anyone within inner-city neighborhoods, “… increasing taxes on cigarettes has provided a powerful disincentive to consumers of cigarettes” (Hirshbein). Policy creators, however, tend to forget about the fact that many poor people smoke to relieve themselves of their daily stress. Additionally, this tax on cigarettes then becomes an added strain on poor people’s household income when they purchase daily packs of Pleasure. Although, some argue that the increased tax helps discourage smokers and nonsmokers from purchasing these dangerous drugs, the issue is that mainly nicotine-addicted people will be affected by this tax law. Due to their addiction it would be hardest for them to stop buying daily or weekly pack of Pleasure so, addicted smokers would primarily be affected by the tobacco taxes. Since 72% of smokers come from low-income neighborhoods (The Truth Org.), the tax results in poor people getting heavily taxed more than someone from an upper-class community, creating a disproportionate effect within the anti-smoking efforts. However, the use of this money can combat the high number of ads in these unprivileged areas. If the taxes were geared back towards the community by either creating programs that would allow people to know the economic dangers as well as the health risks involved in smoking then the increased tax might be a force of power that could help poor minorities.

Even though, it is not customary to consider the economic and social implications of smoking within a community it is vital that this becomes more common. It is not only important to study the physical hazards of drugs but, all of its consequences in order to realize the damage that it can have within an area. Since, there are specific tactics that can be employed to combat the popularity of smoking indoctrinated into the people in these communities it is necessary to recognize and encourage the creation of specific programs. Furthermore, noticing the agendas of Big Tobacco, allows for more restrictions to be put on their marketing and product development. Instead of being complicit with cigarette brands that direct special attention towards poor people of color, the government needs to crack down on this industry, creating programs and legislation that promote a nicotine- free household rather than perpetuate their improvised lifestyle.   Nicotine recovery programs, like Smokers Anonymous have already been established to guide addicts through the process of recovery. However, the high concentration of centers in affluent communities versus the lacking presence of this program within lower -income communities, show the implicant bias that anti-smoking organizations have against impoverished smokers. This adds to the oppression that underprivileged smokers face: with taxes that are used against them and programs that are not implemented in their communities. Developing institutions that work to help residents beforehand, free programs could be created to help to alleviate the stress of people in these neighborhoods, having free recreation center can be useful for people in stressful communities. Society needs to understand the circumstances that may cause lower class monitories to smoke and try to support them rather than scrutinize them. Forcing heavy taxes on something they use for relief only reinforces poor residents’ low status in society. However, if it is ensured that these taxes are used to fund education in these communities and pays for the programs proposed within this essay it may be possible to use these taxes for a higher purpose.

Promoting Newport Pleasure cigarettes,only using African American models and advertising in black magazines, to try and market to minorities. Cigarette companies since their conception have manipulated the public’s perception of cigarettes through ads. Companies, like Philips Morris,  have targeted specific demographics, directing their advertisements to adolescents, minorities and lower-income communities. Tobacco companies are targeting whom they consider receptacle customers, promoting poison to these lucky consumers. In America’s scientific society, the health aspects are heavily discussed and focused on when discussions about cigarettes ever arise. Yet, the public ignores the economic and social issues that arise from this drug, being overly marketed. In lower-income minority communities Big Tobacco preys on residents, by profiting off of their pain. Due to the stress levels, and average income within these communities, cigarettes may seem like a valid relief yet, the stigma and legislation against smoking perpetuate the inferior status of these people. .

There are disproportionate levels of tobacco advertising in lower-income communities, especially ones that have minority residents. Because Tobacco companies faced more restrictions from the government, on advertising, they have pursued minorities and lower income communities in their marketing schemes. Since the 1970’s “Tobacco companies were focusing campaigns on women and minority communities…” (Vaknin,105). In the past decades, major cigarette companies like Phillip Morris or R.J Reynolds have targeted previously-considered weaker communities. Cigarette brands believed female and minorities were the perfect consumers for their product. Due to their perceived lacking intelligence, these inferior groups. Currently they tend to heavily focus mainly on poor minority neighborhoods rather than females and colored people. It has been noted that “Certain brands…were marketed specifically to the Hispanic market in the United States” (Vaknin,90). Either targeting specific communities or using different cultural references to spark interest from specific groups of people. In Boston, “...signs remain prolific and prominent in Boston’s lower-income neighborhoods, especially those with substantial African-American and Hispanic populations” (Smith). These signs that are not only in colored communities but, speak specially to colored people. An R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Executive said, “We don’t smoke that sh**. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the black and stupid.” (Bach,1) their stance on their cigarettes are that of distaste, calling their own product “sh**”, yet, the company and its executives somehow believe it is appropriate to sell this dangerous drug to underprivileged communities, claiming that they must be inept.

The power of a skillfully crafted advertisement can sometimes be lost on consumers, who tend to implicitly feed into the narrative manufactures create for their products. Advertisements can draw people in using images that one can relate to, or flashy sponsors that people admire. Big Tobacco markets directly to poor neighborhoods using their unfortunate situations for capital gain.Within areas like Dorchester and Mattapan the culture of smoking is becoming increasing popular. A study observed that “...heavy smokers also do not believe that other remedies for reduction of stress are available, they also believe (more than nonsmokers) that smoking has an effect on mood and stress experience” (Wetter et al., 1992). Within these regions of increased smoking, poor residents use nicotine as an escape from their problems. Literally buying into the myth that cigarettes will help one cope with life. Once, addicted to the drug there is an reliance on the feeling nicotine gives someone who uses it, and due to the heavy promotion of the drug it is becoming more likely that cigarette use will become standard within these neighborhoods. “The approaches from social psychology are usually concerned with the start of the smoking career, the age of adolescents when habits are acquired...Smoking is explained as a learned behavior determined by the social environment (Wetterer & Troschke, 1986)” (Lujic, et al, 10).In these lower-income communities the fact that smoking is becoming more prevalent, causes generations to be influenced by the influx of advertising within these areas. As children watch the adults in their neighborhood continuously smoking and spending money on packs of cigarettes they are inadvertently being encouraged to smoke we they become adults. Sadly, the reality is that many children pick up the habit years before adulthood, not realizing that they are becoming prey to R.J. Reynolds and Philips Morris and Imperial Tobacco group.

There are countless campaigns against smoking currently being fought, however, these campaigns focus on the health issues, ignoring the social consequences that smoking causes in improvised neighborhoods. Throughout the years the government has solely paid attention to what cigarettes would do to the overall health of Americans; starting “Tips, the first federally funded anti-smoking paid media campaign, features former smokers talking about their smoking-related illnesses”. This made it clear what the White House was only concerned with, preventing diseases that were caused by smoking. So, the awareness campaigns that begun from this era were fixated on the health of a cigarette smoker. However, there were no in-depth discussions about who these smokes were, and the demographics, hypothetical people and situations were exclusively discussed. When these campaigns started there was no consideration of how specific groups were affected by cigarettes, and there is still little discourse about the plethora of effects smoking has the lower class. Even Ash, an anti-smoking company, stands for Action on Smoking and Health with the slogan “Global action for everyone’s health” (Ash). Even though they combat cigarette smoking, Ash completely ignores the economic and societal effects of smoking. These slogans and commercials, that depict what cigarettes do to one’s body. are a scare tactic showing the nasty effects of smoking. This overly simplified solution does not help the complex problem.

Although the health effects of cigarettes are significant it is not the only problematic result of smoking cigarettes in a lower-income community. There are also economic deterrences manufactured by smoking aside from the adverse societal and health apects Increased government regulation on big tobacco companies, have not necessarily benefited anyone within inner-city neighborhoods, “… increasing taxes on cigarettes has provided a powerful disincentive to consumers of cigarettes.”(Hirshbein). Policy creators, however, tend to forget about the fact that many poor people smoke to relieve themselves of their daily stress.. Additionally, this tax on cigarettes then becomes an added strain on  poor people’s household income when they purchase daily packs of Pleasure. Although, some argue that the increased tax helps discourage smokers and nonsmokers from purchasing these dangerous drugs, the issue is that mainly nicotine-addicted people will be affected by this tax law. Due to their addiction it would be hardest for them to stop buying daily or weekly pack of Pleasure so, addicted smokers would primarily be affected by the tobacco taxes. Since 72% of smokers come from low-income neighborhoods (The truth), the tax results in poor people getting heavily taxed more than someone from an upper-class community, creating a disproportionate effect within the anti-smoking efforts. However, the use of this money can combat the high number of ads in these unprivileged areas. If the taxes were geared back towards the community by either creating programs that would allow people to know the economic dangers as well as the health risks involved in smoking then the increased tax might be a force of power that could help poor minorities.

Even though, it is not customary to consider the economic and social implications of smoking within a community it is vital that this becomes more common. It is not only important to study the physical hazards of drugs but, all of its consequences in order to realize the damage that it can have within an area. Since, there are specific tactics that can be employed to combat the popularity of smoking indoctrinated into the people in these communities it is necessary to recognize and encourage the creation of specific programs. Furthermore, noticing the agendas of Big Tobacco, allows for more restrictions to be put on their marketing and product development. Instead of being complicit with cigarette brands that direct special attention towards poor people of color, the government needs to crack down on this industry, creating programs and legislation that promote a nicotine- free household rather than perpetuate their improvised lifestyle. Developing institutions that work to help cigarette addicted residents and, beforehand, free programs could be created to help to alleviate the stress of people in these neighborhoods

Creating a perfect commercial, or poster or print ad can be crucial to a company's success, depicting certain images and selling a brand whether it is true or false is necessary for a company to prosper. Yet, certain powerful brands are detrimental to today’s society and their advertising only continue to grow the brands recognition and power. Cigarette companies, are an example of these companies, and since their conception they have manipulated the public’s perception of cigarettes through ads. These companies, however, target certain demographics directing their advertisements to specific groups of people: usually adolescents, minorities and lower-income communities. Cigarette companies are targeting whom they consider receptacle consumers, promoting poison to lucky consumers. In the scientific modern society of today, the health aspects are heavily discussed and focused on when discussions about cigarettes ever arise. Sometimes even focuses on what illegal drugs do to communities, rather than something so seemingly simple as cigarettes. Yet, the general public ignores the economic and mental health issues that arise from legal drugs, like cigarettes, being overly marketed in lower- income communities and minority groups.

There are disproportionate levels of tobacco advertising in lower-income communities, especially ones that have minority residents. Because Tobacco companies faced more restrictions from the government, on advertising, they have pursued minorities and lower income communities in their marketing schemes. Since the 1970’s “Tobacco companies were focusing campaigns on women and minority communities…” (Vaknin,105). In the past decades, major cigarette companies like Phillip Morris or R.J Reynolds have targeted previously considered weaker communities. Either being the female community or the minority cigarette brands believed these groups were the perfect buyers for their company. Currently they tend to heavily focus mainly on poor minority neighborhoods rather than females and colored people. It has been noted that “Certain brands…were marketed specifically to the Hispanic market in the United States” (Vaknin,90). Either targeting specific communities or using different cultural references to spark interest from specific groups of people. In Boston, “...signs remain prolific and prominent in Boston’s lower-income neighborhoods, especially those with substantial African-American and Hispanic populations” (Smith). These signs that are not only in colored communities but, speak specially to colored people. An R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company Executive said, “We don’t smoke that sh**. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the black and stupid.” (Bach,1) their stance on their cigarettes are that of distaste, calling their own product “sh**”, yet, the company and its executives somehow believe it is appropriate to sell this dangerous drug to underprivileged communities, claiming that they must be inept.

The power of a skillfully crafted advertisement can sometimes be lost on consumers, who tend to implicitly feed into the narrative manufactures create for there products. Advertisements can draw people in using images that they relate to or sponsors that people admire. There is a newer stigma towards smokers that exists outside of lower income neighborhoods, creates even more division between classes. Poorer communities are already considered inferior and the growing advertising of tobacco within these areas help preserve the status that people in these communities hold in society. Meanwhile, within areas like Dorchester and Mattapan the culture of smoking is becoming increasing popular. A study observed that “...heavy smokers also do not believe that other remedies for reduction of stress are available, they also believe (more than nonsmokers) that smoking has an effect on mood and stress experience” (Wetter et al., 1992). Within these regions of increased smoking, poor residents use nicotine as an escape from their problems. Literally buying into the myth that cigarettes will help one cope with life. Once, addicted to the drug there is an reliance on the feeling nicotine gives someone who uses it, and due to the heavy promotion of the drug it is becoming more likely that cigarette use will become standard within these neighborhoods. “The approaches from social psychology are usually concerned with the start of the smoking career, the age of adolescents when habits are acquired...Smoking is explained as a learned behavior determined by the social environment (Wetterer & Troschke, 1986)” (Lujic, et al, 10).In these lower-income communities the fact that smoking is becoming more prevalent, causes generations to be influenced by the influx of advertising within these areas. As children watch the adults in their neighborhood continuously smoking and spending money on packs of cigarettes they are inadvertently being encouraged to smoke we they become adults. Sadly, the reality is that many children pick up the habit years before adulthood, not realizing that they are becoming prey to R.J. Reynolds and Philips Morris and Imperial Tobacco group. “Overall, 85 percent of all African-American smokers smoke menthol cigarettes, compared to 29 percent of all Caucasian smokers.” This insane static qualifies that the use of cigarettes is standardized within the minority community, especially compared to the Caucasians. This allows different ideas of smoking to develop within these colored neighborhoods, as kids are raised into a community where smoking is common practice. Thus, making it even harder to stop smoking for these people. “A rise in the number of cigarette billboards in Black or Latino communities and specific targeting in magazines resulted in a rise in the number of Afro-American smokers.” (Vaknin, 90). This is because adults also influence their peers in the same way, “This relatively small and often tightly knit community can work B&W’s, cigarette company, advantage… peer pressure is important in black communities” (Slovic). The point is that within these communities it is considered strange not to smoke, so someone might start off as a social smoker then, slowly becoming someone who is more dependent of nicotine.

There are countless campaigns against smoking currently being fought, however, these campaigns focus on the health issues, ignoring the social consequences that smoking causes in other neighborhoods. Throughout the years the government has solely paid attention to what cigarettes would do to the overall health of Americans; starting, “Tips, the first federally funded anti-smoking paid media campaign, features former smokers talking about their smoking-related illnesses.” This made it clear what the White House was concerned with, preventing diseases that were caused by smoking. So, the awareness campaigns that begun from this era were fixated on the health of a cigarette smoker. Even Ash, an anti-smoking company, stands for Action on Smoking and Health with the slogan “Global action for everyone’s health.” Even though they combat cigarette smoking Ash completely ignores the economic and societal effects of smoking. These slogans and commercials (showing what cigarettes do to your body) is only a scare tactic to show people the nasty side to smoking. It is an overly simplified issue to a complex problem, these organizations don’t tend to focus on where and who constantly smokes, rather they present the masses with generalized information with hopes of getting people to make a change. However, this quixotic outlook cannot be remedied unless these organizations realize what they are doing wrong.

Although the health effects of cigarettes are significant yet, they aren’t the only problematic results of smoking cigarettes in a lower-income community. There are also economic deterrences manufactured by smoking aside from the adverse societal, and psychological aspects. Increased government regulation on big tobacco companies, have not necessarily benefited anyone within these neighborhoods, “… increasing taxes on cigarettes has provided a powerful disincentive to consumers of cigarettes.”(Hirshbein)Policy creators, however, tend to forget about the fact that many poor people smoke to relieve themselves of the stress, and hardships one deals with daily, and in a low-income community paying bills may be one of the hardships people have to face. But, with this tax on cigarettes underprivileged people have an added strain on their household income when they purchase daily packs of Pleasure. Although, some argue that the increased tax helps discourage smokers and nonsmokers from purchasing these dangerous drugs, the issue is, that mainly nicotine addicted people will be affected by this tax law. Due to their addiction it would be hardest for them to stop buying daily or weekly pack so, the addicted smokers would be the people who are truly affected by this tobacco tax. Since 72% of smokers come from low-income neighborhoods (The truth), the tax results in poor people getting tax more heavily than someone from an upper-class community creating a disproportionately within the anti-smoking efforts. If the taxes were geared back towards the community by either creating programs that would allow people to know the social dangers as well as the economic ones involved in smoking then the increased tax might be a force of power that could help these people. Using the tax to also combat the high number of ads in these unprivileged areas. People also deal with, “Some workplaces decide to not hire smokers. Yet while these changes are laudable, they have unintended consequences…”(Hirshbein) Hirshbein addresses the audience to another issue within the anti-smoking policies, in trying to discourage smoking they ignore a key group of people. Forgetting about the poor residents that may have begun this bad habit. Not hiring them, now creates a cycle of poverty they may only help fuel their addiction rather than help it.

Smith, Tobacco signs still target city’s poorer areas, 2010, Boston Globe

Smith, Stephen. “Tobacco Signs Still Target City's Poorer Areas.” Boston.com, The Boston Globe, 30 Aug. 2010, archive.boston.com/news/health/articles/2010/08/30/tobacco_signs_still_target_citys_poorer_areas/?page=1.

Google Search, cigarette ads in black neighborhoods

This article talks about the lower-income communities in Boston and how they are targeted by tobacco companies with their obsessive advertising

“Across Dorchester, Mattapan, and other city neighborhoods, big signs and little signs, vertical signs and horizontal signs trumpet the availability of cigarettes at corner stores and gas stations. They are plastered on…”

----The language that he uses allows the audience to realize the how excess the advertising is in these communities.  

------What is the average income in Mattapan?

---“...signs remain prolific and prominent in Boston’s lower-income neighborhoods, especially those with substantial African-American and Hispanic populations.”

---“A representative of the nation’s leading tobacco maker, Philip Morris USA, defended storefront ads, citing free speech rights under the First Amendment.”

Breakdown:

Focus on health issues

The economic issues are important

Societal problems that arise

Over marketing in lower-income communities

Topics:

Focus on health issues

Major anti-smoking companies focus on the various types of cancer caused by cigarette smoking.

Most of the statics available to the public on smoking are about the death toll smoking has and not about the cost of cigarettes.

Many conversions about combating smoking, urge people to quit with nicotine patches or gum forgetting about the additional cost of those resources.

Ash, an anti-smoking company, stands for Action on Smoking and Health with the slogan “Global action for everyone’s health.”

Even though this company combats cigarette smoke they completely ignore the economic and societal effects of smoking

These statics and commercials showing  what cigarettes do to your body is only a scare tactic.Since websites like Ash force on only providing health reasons and statics on why to stop smoking they are only providing half an argument.

Urging consumers to buy more nicotine based products to rid them of a tar based addiction, only works for a select group of people will to give up more money to rid this addiction.

The economic issues are important

The cost of cigarettes in an issue for household that struggle to avoid groceries, and pay necessary bills.

Tactics used to deter people from buying cigarettes are mainly focused on money and thus, it disproportionately affect poor people.

People in underprivileged neighborhoods who smoke can have lifelong consequences other than cancer that help perpetuate their poverty.

Comparing cigarette prices to household incomes in poor communities would allow me to create statics and show how much of a household's income would be affected by purchasing weekly or daily cigarettes

“And increasing taxes on cigarettes has provided a powerful disincentive to consumers of cigarettes”(Hirshbein).

“Some workplaces decide to not hire smokers. Yet while these changes are laudable, they have unintended consequences…”(Hirshbein).

There maybe a possibility to split these paragraphs into two.

Societal problems that arise  

In these communities it creates a culture of smoking that is thought to be normal. The increased advertising normalizes the use of the drug.

Since, smoking is what is known to be normal it causes more people to fall into the trap of picking of the practice.

“Overall, 85 percent of all African-American smokers smoke menthol cigarettes, compared to 29 percent of all Caucasian smokers.”

This isane static qualifies that the use of cigarettes is standardized within the minority community, especially compared to the Caucasians. This allows different ideas of smoking to develop within these colored neighborhoods, as kids are raised into a community where smoking is common practice. Thus, making it more likely that they will pick up the practice when they get older.

“This relatively small and often tightly knit community can work B&W’s, cigarette company, avantage… peer pressure is important in black communities” (Slovic).

Over marketing in lower-income communities

Tobacco companies specifically  target poor people in communities rich in poverty.

These cigarette companies set advertisements in specific neighborhoods to appeal to a certain demographics .

Tobacco companies also use images and other brands associated with colored communities to try to direct their advertising to these groups.

“We don’t smoke that sh**. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the black and stupid”(Bach)

Their stance on their cigarettes are that of distaste, calling their own product “sh**”, yet,the company and its executives somehow believe it is appropriate to sell this dangerous drug to underprivileged communities, claiming that they must be inept.

“A rise in the number of cigarette billboards in Black or Latino communities…” (Vaknin)

Advertising in magazines commonly read by African American increased from 13% in 1998 to 76% in 2006 (Bach)

Possible Essay Organization:

2. Lujic, Claudia, et al. “Psychobiological Theories of Smoking and Smoking Motivation.”European Psychologist, vol. 10, no. 1, 2005, pp. 1–24. ProQuest , doi:10.1027/1016-9040.10.1.1.

3. USC Libraries, ProQuest, Social Effects of Smoking

4. This Journal being mostly medical covers issues of neuroscience and why people smoke. But, at the same tie it discusses the societal factors of smoking a cigarette, and how psychological smoking is and how that affect people.

5.”The approaches from social psychology are usually concerned with the start of the smoking career, the age of adolescents when habits are acquired . They would serve as suitable explanations for psychosocial smoking. Smoking is explained as a learned behavior determined by the social environment (Wetterer & Troschke, 1986).”

“...since heavy smokers also do not believe that other remedies for reduction of stress are available, they also believe (more than nonsmokers) that smoking has an effect on mood and stress experience (Wetter et al., 1992). Nicotine could reduce negative affect by eliminating withdrawal symptoms, but irrespective of withdrawal it has a sedating effect (Gilbert & Welser, 1989).”

---In poor families the stress of bills can be cause for adults in the household to become smokers due to the misconception that it may relieve their stress

---But aside from their stress levels still being the same they would also have addition factor of stress on their income and thus stress on themselves.

Bach , Laura. “TOBACCO COMPANY MARKETING TO AFRICAN AMERICANS.” 7 Mar. 2018, pp. 1–6., www.tobaccofreekids.org/assets/factsheets/0208.pdf.

Google Search, Smoking in underprivileged neighborhoods

This talks about the intersectionality of tobacco companies focusing advertising on young, poor, black people. Looking at major company statements and print ads that aim to target a very specific audience. This paper talks about all the different tactics used by companies and the effect t has on poor black communities.

“Disparities in advertising of tobacco products are particularly evident for menthol cigarette brands, which African Americans use more than any other racial or ethnic group:‘The 2011 California Tobacco Advertising Survey reports that there were significantly more menthol advertisements at stores in neighborhoods with a higher proportion of African-American residents and in low-income neighborhoods.’” (2)

“‘We don’t smoke that sh**. We just sell it. We reserve the right to smoke for the young, the poor, the black and stupid.’”(1)

----Their stance on their cigarettes are that of distaste, calling their own product “sh**”, yet,the company and its executives somehow believe it is appropriate to sell this dangerous drug to underprivileged communities, claiming that they must be inept.

“The tobacco industry is relentless in its promotion of menthol cigarettes to minorities. Expenditures for magazine advertising of mentholated cigarettes, popular with African Americans, increased from 13 percent of total ad expenditures in 1998 to 76 percent in 2006” (3)

Vaknin, Smoke Signals: 100 years of tobacco advertising

Vaknin, Judy. Smoke Signals: 100 Years of Tobacco Advertising. Middlesex University Press, 2007.

     4)  Smoke signals maps out the cigarette advertising in America. The book discusses the history of cigarette restrictions and different advertising strategies used throughout America and Britain before these restrictions and then to circumvent them. The book goes through every decade in the 20th century, mentioning all famous cigarettes, a and what methods they used in their advertising, showing pictures as examples.  

     5) “Despite the fact that lung cancer had increased at five times the rate of other forms of cancer between 1938 and 1948 in America, the link with smoking was still not being made.” (59)

“Governments were slow to respond and instigate public health education and awareness campaigns, despite lobbying from influential medics, until the mid-1960s.” (62)

“A rise in the number of cigarette billboards in Black or Latino communities and specific targeting in magazines resulted in a rise in the number of Afro-American smokers.” (90)

“Certain brands...were marketed specifically to the Hispanic market in the United States.” (90)

Slovic, Paul. Smoking: Risk, Perception, and Policy. Sage Publications, 2001.

Book: USC Libraries, Smoking

This chapter talks about the faulty advertising that cigarettes companies use. Also, the people who aid in creating these myths about cigarettes.

“There have been several studies of the remarkable campaign of manipulation conducted by tobacco manufacturers over the past century.”

           “Silencing critics through such tactics as employment discharge and spurious litigation”

Hirshbein, Laura D. Smoking Privileges: Psychiatry, the Mentally Ill, and the Tobacco Industry in America. Rutgers University Press, 2015.

USC Libraries, Cigarette Smoking  

This book doesn’t necessarily discuss my exact topic but it mentions important information about smoking. The book discusses the effects of smoking on mentally ill people and how it can be a source of dependency for some people. It also talks about how nicotine becomes an addiction and thus a new illness.

“Tobacco-control activists often talk about smoking as though it were a mindless activity which patients need to be educated for its dangers.”

“And increasing taxes on cigarettes has provided a powerful disincentive to consumers of cigarettes.”