Here’s What it Looks Like When a Tobacco Company Says ‘I’m Sorry’

Get ready for a full-page New York Times ad-apology from tobacco companies.

National Journal
Clara Ritger
See more stories about...
Clara Ritger
Jan. 13, 2014, 8:11 a.m.

After 15 years of fight­ing the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment over lies to the pub­lic about the health risks of smoking, the na­tion’s biggest to­bacco com­pan­ies are ready to apo­lo­gize.

Philip Mor­ris USA, R.J. Reyn­olds, Lor­il­lard, and Al­tria are pre­par­ing full-page ads to run in the Sunday edi­tions of the coun­try’s top 35 news­pa­pers, as well as on­line ads for those pa­pers’ web­sites and prime-time tele­vi­sion spots to run for a full year on CBS, ABC, and NBC. The cor­por­a­tions are also re­quired to run cor­rect­ive state­ments on their web­sites and ci­gar­ette pack­ages.

The self-fla­gel­la­tion stems from a 2006 fed­er­al court de­cision or­der­ing the to­bacco com­pan­ies to cor­rect the re­cord on state­ments they made about the health ef­fects of smoking. On Fri­day, the com­pan­ies’ law­yers and the Justice De­part­ment struck a deal on how they will is­sue the apo­logy.

A mock-up of an ad­vert­ise­ment that could pub­lish as a full-page ad in The New York Times reads, “A Fed­er­al Court has ruled that Philip Mor­ris USA, R.J. Reyn­olds To­bacco, Lor­il­lard, and Al­tria de­lib­er­ately de­ceived the Amer­ic­an pub­lic about design­ing ci­gar­ettes to en­hance the de­liv­ery of nicot­ine and has ordered those com­pan­ies to make this state­ment.”

It goes on to say that the in­dustry “in­ten­tion­ally de­signed ci­gar­ettes to make them more ad­dict­ive,” and that nicot­ine “changes the brain,” mak­ing it harder to quit.

The to­bacco com­pan­ies could ap­peal the lan­guage of the ads. But first, U.S. Dis­trict Judge Gladys Kessler is sched­uled to re­view the agree­ment about how to is­sue the cor­rect­ive state­ments on Wed­nes­day, Jan. 22, at 10 a.m. in Courtroom 26A of the U.S. Dis­trict Court of D.C.

The Justice De­part­ment first brought the case against the to­bacco in­dustry in 1999, ar­guing that they know­ingly and in­ten­tion­ally mis­in­formed the pub­lic about the neg­at­ive health con­sequences of smoking.

Kessler ordered the in­dustry in 2006 to is­sue the state­ments after she found them guilty of vi­ol­at­ing civil rack­et­eer­ing laws and ly­ing to the pub­lic about the dangers of smoking.

The judge re­quired the state­ments to ap­pear on tele­vi­sion and in news­pa­pers, as well as on the com­pan­ies’ web­sites and ci­gar­ette pack­ages, and to con­tain lan­guage that the court had ruled that the com­pan­ies “de­lib­er­ately de­ceived the Amer­ic­an pub­lic.”

In find­ing the in­dustry guilty, Kessler wrote, “[This case] is about an in­dustry, and in par­tic­u­lar these De­fend­ants, that sur­vives, and profits, from selling a highly ad­dict­ive product which causes dis­eases that lead to a stag­ger­ing num­ber of deaths per year, an im­meas­ur­able amount of hu­man suf­fer­ing and eco­nom­ic loss, and a pro­found bur­den on our na­tion­al health care sys­tem. De­fend­ants have known many of these facts for at least 50 years or more. Des­pite that know­ledge, they have con­sist­ently, re­peatedly and with enorm­ous skill and soph­ist­ic­a­tion, denied these facts to the pub­lic, the Gov­ern­ment, and to the pub­lic health com­munity.”

Philip Mor­ris de­clined to of­fer a com­ment for the story.

The state­ments would cor­rect mis­in­form­a­tion about “the health ef­fects of smoking, the ad­dict­ive­ness of smoking and nicot­ine, the false ad­vert­ising of low-tar and light ci­gar­ettes as less harm­ful than reg­u­lar ci­gar­ettes, the design­ing of ci­gar­ettes to en­hance the de­liv­ery of nicot­ine and the health ef­fects of second­hand smoke,” ac­cord­ing to a press re­lease from the Amer­ic­an Can­cer So­ci­ety Ac­tion Net­work, one of the pub­lic in­ter­ven­ors that joined the case in 2005. The oth­er na­tion­al med­ic­al and ad­vocacy or­gan­iz­a­tions that joined the case are the Amer­ic­an Heart As­so­ci­ation, the Amer­ic­an Lung As­so­ci­ation, Amer­ic­ans for Nonsmokers’ Rights, the Na­tion­al Afric­an Amer­ic­an To­bacco Pre­ven­tion Net­work and the To­bacco-Free Kids Ac­tion Fund.

AC­SCAN’s as­so­ci­ate dir­ect­or of fed­er­al re­la­tions, Gregg Haif­ley, called the case “a long leg­al battle” that has been “dragged out” by the in­dustry.

“Mil­lions of people who oth­er­wise might have quit con­tin­ued smoking be­cause of blatant mis­rep­res­ent­a­tions of the harm to their health,” Haif­ley said. “The to­bacco in­dustry is an in­dustry that nev­er gives up. But we’re one step closer to a fi­nal con­clu­sion.”

The agree­ment falls on the 50th an­niversary of the sur­geon gen­er­al’s first re­port de­tail­ing the pub­lic-health con­sequences of smoking. The land­mark study promp­ted an­t­i­s­moking groups to pur­sue more-strin­gent pub­lic policy meas­ures reg­u­lat­ing the use of to­bacco, which res­ul­ted in 8 mil­lion lives saved since 1964, ac­cord­ing to a study pub­lished last week in the Journ­al of the Amer­ic­an Med­ic­al As­so­ci­ation.

Roughly 44 mil­lion adults and 3.6 mil­lion chil­dren in the United States smoke, ac­cord­ing to num­bers from the Cen­ters for Dis­ease Con­trol and Pre­ven­tion. Smoking costs the U.S. roughly $193 bil­lion an­nu­ally in health care ex­pendit­ures and lost pro­ductiv­ity, the CDC re­ports. Each year, an es­tim­ated 443,000 people die pre­ma­turely from a smoking-re­lated dis­ease.

What We're Following See More »
1.5 MILLION MORE TUNED IN FOR TRUMP
More People Watched Trump’s Acceptance Speech
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

Hillary Clinton hopes that television ratings for the candidates' acceptance speeches at their respective conventions aren't foreshadowing of similar results at the polls in November. Preliminary results from the networks and cable channels show that 34.9 million people tuned in for Donald Trump's acceptance speech while 33.3 million watched Clinton accept the Democratic nomination. However, it is still possible that the numbers are closer than these ratings suggest: the numbers don't include ratings from PBS or CSPAN, which tend to attract more Democratic viewers.

Source:
×