Tobacco Companies Hide Dangers of Smoking
To no surprise of many, tobacco companies were finally found guilty of creating a smoke screen to hide the inherent health risks of cigarettes.
In August of 2006, a federal judge ruled that the tobacco industry had actually engaged in racketeering practices, stating that the industry had engaged in a decades-long conspiracy to hide the dangers of smoking from their users. Tobacco companies were actually ordered to take out newspaper ads detailing smoking’s health effects.
Hiding The Dangers of Smoking
The judge stated that the conspiracy dated back to 1953, when a group of tobacco companies met together at the Plaza Hotel in New York City and devised a public relations plan to counter health concerns associated with smoking. The judge also ruled that even after the 1964 Surgeon General’s report linked smoking to lung cancer, tobacco companies continued to deny and purposely distort many serious dangers of smoking their products.
It was also found that the tobacco industry marketed their product to youth groups; that even though the industry claims it does not want children to smoke, the companies were caught tracking youth behavior and preferences, thereby ensuring that “marketing and promotion reaches youth,” even hiding from them the serious dangers of smoking while their young bodies were still developing.
Ending The Denial of Smoking Dangers
The industry was also faulted for denying publicly that second-hand smoke is dangerous, the judge citing internal acknowledgement that this was in fact true.
In 1999, the Clinton administration accused the tobacco industry of racketeering as part of a coordinated plan to deceive the public about the dangers of smoking, and to cover up the knowledge they had to the contrary.
Under the ruling, the tobacco companies were also ordered to stop using such descriptions as “low tar,” “light,” “ultra light,” “mild,” or “natural,” or any other descriptions that might seem as if these cigarettes posed less of a health hazard or in any way were an attempt to downplay the dangers of smoking them.
While this ruling was a victory for many anti-smoking and anti-tobacco campaigns, many commented on how long it took for the government to respond to tobacco’s use and on how long the actual case itself took as well. Others felt that perhaps the court was not punitive enough with the industry. “We are pleased with the court’s finding of liability on the part of the defendants, but disappointed that the court did not impose all of the remedies sought by the government,” the Justice Department said in a written statement. “Nevertheless, we are hopeful that the remedies that were imposed by the court can have a significant, positive impact on the health of the American public.”
The power of the tobacco industry held off the US Justice Department for much longer than the knowing public wanted, but were eventually outed. However, it seemed to many to be a hollow victory, but still did some good in highlighting the real dangers of smoking that even the tobacco industry itself could not – or was no longer allowed to – deny.
With the help of stop smoking aids and new legislation, hopefully the tobacco industry will continue to act more responsibly in the battle of reducing dangers of smoking.
