Good Lord! Is it actually a requirement to be gullible and ignorant about issues to be a writer for the Australian? (As well as onside with Rupert's view of the world?)
I had not noticed til today that long time Australian media writer Errol Simper wrote a couple of days ago about why he thought plain packaging of tobacco was not working. The funny thing is, (and to be bitchy for a moment), Simper's ghost like photo used by the Oz for years has always had an "unhealthy, prematurely aged smoker" vibe about it, and in this column he confirms he has long had issues with giving up the habit.
But Simper's article contains all the lack of insight you expect from the ideologically motivated smoker or ex-smoker - no skepticism about tobacco company supplied figures or how to properly interpret them, and (most importantly) a complete ignorance of the fact that there has been considerable research on how people respond to ugly packaging, and that the view was always that a long term reduction in smoking involves discouraging young people from ever starting.
As those who post at Catallaxy have shown, smokers (or ex smokers who delighted in the habit and bear ongoing resentment that they no longer do it) are about the last people to have objective ideas or understanding of anti smoking tactics. But do they have to embarrass themselves by showing that off in the media?
8 comments:
if you compare tobacco consumption with Overall consumption then tobacco consumption is clearly growing at a much slower rate and it was before the excise duty rise.
Basic microeconomics tells you that it is mainly price rises which will cut consumption not non price measures.
I don't discount the rapid effect of price rises at all - but as I have been arguing, plain packaging is a subtle effect that works on psychological response and is aimed at discouraging starting. You cannot reasonably expect to measure the results of such a strategy over a short time timeframe.
What if plain packaging encourages fake brands (which arguably it has). Bootleg tobacco sellers have no motivation to conform to any of the other numerous regulations placed on tobacco consumption, and now plain packaging has given them a pretty obvious way to make themselves seem more attractive and glamorous than the legal alternatives.
What good is a law that over time encourages people to not respect the law? IMO plain packaging policy has been a complete failure.
Tim, where's the evidence that bootleg tobacco is following that strategy? At Catallaxy, people claim that there is more "chop chop" being sold at pubs etc, but the appeal of that is probably due to the price rise, not avoidance of an ugly packet.
In fact, even Sinclair posted in April about one study which indicated undercover buyers last year had not had any great success in getting illicit tobacco from small tobacconist retailer - so fake branded cigs are not coming from there. So if you are buying it at the pub from a man in the corner, would you care about packaging?
(Of course, Sinclair had to try to discredit that study, because it doesn't suit him, via pretty pathetic suggestion that of course these fake buyers must have looked like undercover cops or something.)
http://catallaxyfiles.com/2014/04/15/are-criminals-dumb/
At least he did post about it, though, and otherwise it would have not come to my attention.
My evidence is this - you can see fake brands of cigarettes wherever you go! Manchester cigarettes, for instance, a completely illegitimate brand that is all over my suburb - so handsome that I've begun collecting some of the better-worn packets myself.
If they are on display in a shop, they are inviting easy prosecution, surely.
I am sure you will do your civic duty and contact the authorities to investigate whenever you see them on sale in your somewhat disreputable sounding suburb.
I should've added a smiley, I think!
And anyhow - my point remains - the increase in popularity of illegal cigarettes (and the cheaper brands of which I presume are not as good quality as their "normal" brand) is more likely to be due to excise increase, not the plain packaging.
That's not to deny that plain packaging can work in the long term - but immediate switching to cheaper, poorer quality is likely to be due to the cost.
Post a Comment