Views from the Health Sector on Generic Cigarette Packaging - Essay Example

Generic Packaging Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Lecturer Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 19th May, 2012. Introduction Cigarettes smoking has been associated with the development of numerous non-communicable health conditions. Many measures have been put in place by the government to reduce the prevalence of health conditions associated with smoking. Media depictions of the smoking and smokers plays a large role in determining the number of young people who take up smoking or continue smoking and consequently the number of people diagnosed with non-communicable diseases associated to smoking. In Gruber and Grube( 2000) it was shown teenagers sexuality is easily influenced and teenagers may take up smoking because the images on the pack depict smoking as sexy. Plain packaging of Cigarettes is one of the approaches taken by a number of governments to fight the health scourge that is the outcome of years of smoking and exposure to secondary tobacco smoke. Legislative efforts to force tobacco companies to pack their products in plain wrapping first started in Canada in 1990 and later New Zealand passed its own laws on the issue. Recently, Australian Tobacco control Act was granted loyal assent to become part of the Australian Law. The issue of generic packaging of Tobacco elicits a lot of debate from various quarters whose line of work touches on cigarette related issues. Different views on the debate have tried to sway the issue their way by either supporting or differing with plain packaging, or generally analyzing the issue. The tobacco industry has opposed the new laws very actively urging against its implementation as it is one of the few options for advertising that is left for these companies. However, Medical practitioners maintain that the new regulations will assist in fighting the health issues related to smoking. The Canadian Paediatric Society (2003) argues that continuous exposure of children to a media issue can affect their phschological development and their future perceptions of the issue. The Media has been accused of playing a negative role in the behavioural development of teenagers by depicting an issue in a negative or positive perspective including the debate on smoking. Various sectors of the Australian economy are directly or indirectly affected by the issue of the generic packaging of Cigarettes, these sectors include the health sector, the advertising sector, the business sector, the agricultural sector, the packaging sector and the environmental sector. This paper will look at the various opinions from interest groups mostly touched by the issue of generic packaging of Cigarettes and how the media has depicted the issue at various stages. Views from the Health Sector on Generic Cigarette Packaging Doctors support the idea that plain packaging would lower cigarette consumption among teenagers. An article by Harvey (1995) titled Doctors ‘Plan to put Cigarettes in Plain Wraps fails’ was published on the Sydney Morning Herald; it reported the federal government refusal to adopt Australian Medical Associations proposal to have cigarettes packaged in dull looking generic packs. Dr Lawrence a Ministry of Health spokesperson when she communicated the government decision made the following comment “unfortunately, it is not feasible,” referring to the trading rights of the cigarette companies (Harvey 1995, p.2). In the article Action on Smoking and Health Director supported the doctor’s proposals saying it would lessen the 70,000 teenage Australian who are addicted to smoking every year (Harvey 1995, p.2). The health Sector led by the World Health Organization (WHO) has been at the fore front in urging nations to resist attempts by Tobacco companies to have plain packaging laws scrapped. Jordan (2012) in the Sydney Morning Herald’s article: ‘WHO slams Tobacco firms for harassment’; Jordan depicts Phil Morrison’s Lawsuits hours after the generic packaging laws were passed as one of the methods used by the Big Tobacco companies to manipulate governments to drop the new laws. WHO alleged cigarettes were the only consumer products worldwide where a person spends money to purchase a product that harms their health instead of improving their lives. Jordan also cites a lawsuit in the US against government efforts as another example of the tobacco companies bid to influence government policy decisions on the graphical content of cigarette packs. Health experts from other countries also welcomed Australia’s efforts to introduce compulsory generic packaging. A Reuters’ article on January 22 2012 reported calls by the British heart foundation proposing the British government to ban attractive cigarette packs. In the text the author focuses debate on the reference of the new packaging as plain by placing the word plain in quotes. Reuters reported BHF’s support for the plain packaging saying BHF had release survey results showing 50% of young cigarette consumers were mislead by their interpretation of messages or images on the cigarette pack. Health Professionals and famous Australian also joined hands in supporting the new plain packaging laws (ABC 2011). In an article published the Australian Associated Press (2012), Four recipients of the Australian of the Year award together with 260 health practitioners in Australia welcomed the move saying it would reduce smoking uptake especially among teenagers and young Adults. The professionals in the interview with AAP through professor Daube said 20 years of evidence showed the effect of cigarette package content on manipulating people’s attitudes towards cigarettes. The author of the article takes a neutral stand on the issue and merely reports the health professional’s view of the plain packaging legislation. The Business Sector View of the Generic Packaging Laws According to press reports cigarette manufacturers played down the role the new generic packaging legislation plays in reducing smoking habits. The tobacco industry also made claims that the new Packaging laws interfere with fair trade rules and their intellectual property rights. The international business sector through the World Trade Organization (WTO) supports the claim that Australia will be violating the TRIPS (trade-related aspects of intellectual property rights agreement) by imposing the new regulations on cigarette packaging. Some retailers also have come up to back the tobacco companies’ view against Plain packaging. Ross (2011) in an article in the Business Daily criticizes the Big Tobacco argument that the measures are untested no measure of effectiveness of application of generic packaging laws. Ross takes a very critical stance on the debate saying big Tobacco companies are taking Australia as fools by presenting this simple argument. Ross notes the determination of the companies to pursue the matters legally noting they have little legal ground to pursue protection of their intellectual property rights in court. Ross points out that the industry is crying foul as the major players will lose the pricing advantage gained from branding; he reports findings by the Australia institute that put premium pricing profits of tobacco at $ 500 million every year. In The article the industry also objects the new regulations saying removal of distinctive branding will drive the prices of undifferentiated cigarette brands low leading to higher consumption. Ross (2011) views are shared by Corderoy (2012) in an article for the Sydney Morning Herald who accuses big tobacco of presenting evidence from a survey of just six retailers to support their argument that the packaging regulations would lead to losses of up to $460 million for small entrepreneurs. Ross says a retailer’s alliance supported by three Tobacco companies had commissioned consultancy Deloitte to carry out the study. The article mocks the attempts to show that the increase of the time period for selecting the preferred cigarette brand by consumers would lead to the massive losses claimed by the survey. The article discredits the results of the survey as they only featured what the author calls guesses by six retail store owners. Another argument put forward by cigarette manufacturers is that the new laws would cause a national tobacco shortage. Lester (2011) analyzes the argument in an article published in The Age. In the article the author quotes British American Tobacco regard of the plain-packaging timetable as too tight. An executive at BAT in submissions to a federal parliament inquiry into the issue claims the shortage resulting from the implementation of the new laws would see Australia flooded by cheap counterfeit cigarette. The author depicts the comments by the company as an attempt to seek sympathy from the public. Legal Sector’s View of the Plain packaging Debate The legal sector view on the new packaging laws are divided with most legal experts supporting the law while others see it as a continuation of the government practice of bullying Cigarette Companies. The big cigarette company have filed suit saying the laws contravene international trade agreement and trademark laws. The government legal arm defended the new laws saying they were constitutional and did not contravene any international trade agreement. In an article by Connors (2012) the attorney general expressed confidence that the government would defeat the legal suits filed by Australian tobacco companies blocking the new law; she said the laws do not confer any unjust commercial advantage to any party. In the article the author noted that Judges had ruled in earlier cases that “just” terms were not needed to make laws constitutional, the ground the tobacco company used to file the suit. However the Tobacco producers have received support from the libertarian Institute of Public Affairs who are concerned about protection of private property. Gittins (2012) however notes that the libertarian institute is very cautious when it comes to issues of intellectual property as their violation is harder to prove in court. The author noted that the Tobacco companies’ suit against the Australian government was very weak and he believed they would lose. Australia has also faced legal challenges from Malaysia and Honduras who argue the packaging laws break the WTO organizations trade. There have being media accusations that tobacco companies are paying countries to block the Australian tobacco packaging laws at TRIPS and WTO legal consultation meetings. Conclusion The Media plays a large role in determining the public opinion on a particular issue. The bias used in reporting a particular issue reflects on the attitude the recipient of the information will form on the particular issue. The issue of generic packaging has led to the rise and re-emergence of debates surrounding the issue smoking and its harmful effects on those exposed to cigarette smoke. On multiple occasions the Tobacco industry has tried to shape public opinion through the media and doctored research findings. The Media sector has an obligation to remain ethical and objective in reporting issues touching on smoking including plain packaging of cigarettes. In the discussion above the health sector has been very vocal calling for compulsory plain packaging of all cigarettes in Australia. The media have covered the concerns of this sector favourably sometimes lending a hand to their argument. The health sector in conjunction with the media has thus been able to show the influence of cigarette branding as a type of advertising that easily influences teenagers to start smoking. The ministry of health has also taken a firm stand on the issue fully supporting the plain packaging law. The business sector has taken up various stands on the issue but the response of the tobacco companies has been the one most widely reported with the media. The media reports the companies’ argument in a cynically, mocking the companies occasionally indicating they support generic packaging. The legal sector has dismissed the chances of the tobacco companies in winning their suit against the Australian government saying they do not have sufficient grounds to suffice their argument in a court of law. The media’s coverage of the issue has set the agenda on generic packaging of tobacco. The coverage shows ethical practice in the media protecting the interest of the masses against an assault by the advertising practices of tobacco firms References AAP 2011,’Leading Australians back plain packaging’, the Australian 24 August 2011, viewed 19 May 2012 , ABC 2011, ‘Cigarette packet proposal lauded’, ABC News 8 April 2011, viewed 26 nay 2012, http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/04/08/3185876.htm Canadian Pediatric Society 2003, Impact of media use on children and youth, Journal of Paediatrics and Child Health, vol 8(5), viewed 19 may 2012, Connors, E ‘Tobacco case plain but not simple’Financial Review 17 April 2012, Viewed 19th May 2012, Gittins, R 2011. ‘Under fire, big tobacco rolls out the poor little stupid nation argument’, Business Day 30 May 2011 , Gruber, E. & Grube J. W. 2000, Adolescent sexuality and the media: a review of current knowledge and implications, Western journal of medicine 172(3), pp.210-214. Viewed 26 march 2012, Harvey, A 1995, ‘Doctors plan to put cigarettes in plain wrap fails’, The Sydney Morning Herald 24 July 1995, viewed 19 May 2012< http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/btn63a99/pdf> Jordans, F. 2011. ‘WHO slams tobacco firms for 'harassment’, Sydney Morning Herald 24 November 2011,viewed 19 May 2012, Kelland, K 2012,’British heart group calls for plain tobacco packs’, Reuters 22 January 2012, viewed 19 May 2012, WTO 2011, Members debate cigarette plain-packaging’s impact on trademark rights, viewed 19 May 2012, < http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news11_e/trip_07jun11_e.htm> Read More