In recognition of the global health crisis caused by smoking, in 2008 the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control recommended that cigarettes come in standardized or plain packaging. These means that all packages would be the same color, with the same font and no logos or other distinguishing features apart from the brand name. Australia was the first country to implement these guidelines in 2012. The idea was that bright colors and interesting logos – think Joe Camel – attract new smokers and young people in general. As with any product, a design that appeals to the eye will increase sales. In the case of cigarettes, by packaging them to look fun and enjoyable, manufacturers were misleading the public about the dangers of smoking. As of October 2017, at least 113 countries went a step beyond plain packaging and required pictorial health warnings on cigarette packages, such as showing a photograph of someone with mouth cancer or rotted teeth.
In Australia, consumers reported viewing the cigarettes in plain packaging as lower quality and less appealing. They were also more likely to notice the health warnings when they weren’t distracted by package design, and many attributed a desire to quit smoking to the graphic warnings. It was estimated that estimates that the 2012 changes led to a 0.55 percent decline over 34 months, which was equivalent to 118,000 fewer people smoking.
The tobacco industry has brought an unsuccessful legal action against some of the countries with these regulations, including Australia and the United Kingdom. In the United States, however, five tobacco companies claimed that the 2009 Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, which contained packaging regulations requiring large or graphic warnings, violated their First Amendment rights by compelling speech. A district court judge agreed with them, saying that the government failed to provide any factual information or evidence on the labels and was attempting to interfere with sales of a legal product.
Critics argue that plain packaging regulations are ineffective at best and illegal at worst. Similar to claims that the “this is your brain on drugs” campaigns failed by only increasing the desire of young people to buck authority, they say that the shock value of the graphic images does nothing to actually help people quit smoking. Others say it is a violation of intellectual property rights to remove branding from the packages. A group calling itself the Property Rights Alliance called on the Worth Health Organization to rescind its recommendation, citing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Specifically: Article 17, the right to ownership, Article 19, the right to freedom of expression, and article 27, the right to protection of material interests. Strong intellectual property rights, they argue, limits the ability of governments to interfere in the marketplace.
If you or a loved one need help with quitting drugs or alcohol, consider Asana Recovery. We offer medical detox, along with both residential and outpatient programs, and you’ll be supervised by a highly trained staff of medical professionals, counselors, and therapists. Call us any time at (949) 438-4504.
