Skip to main content

Advertising "Vice" Products

Advertising is protected under the freedom of speech, but receives less protection from the government than noncommercial speech. This is how that federal and state government is allowed to regulated products that would be deemed as a negative influence on children, which would include advertisements for tobacco, alcohol and gambling. “The perplexing problem,” law professor Rodney A. Smolla writes, “is whether the First Amendment should permit controls on the speech of adults to adults in the general market place merely because children may be exposed to the message (Tedford)”.
Alcohol is limited to many restrictions when it comes to advertising. The state cannot limit their freedom of speech, but they can make tight restrictions to try and steer people away from becoming heavy alcohol buyers and marketing it as “glamorous”. But what about the new drug of choice, marijuana? In Canada, there are even stricter laws when it comes to alcohol advertising. In Canadian ads, alcohol cannot be shown to enliven an otherwise dull party. Celebrities, athletes, or anyone who might be a role model to minors, are out. “Actors can't be shown actually drinking the product, or even holding a half-empty glass. A game of "spin the bottle" is not acceptable. Ditto parties on a public beach. A couple at dinner cannot have a bottle of wine on the table – that would imply they are having more than one drink each (ROBERTSON).”
 Since there has been a push to legal marijuana in Canada, alcohol companies want the same restrictions on marijuana advertising as there is on alcohol. Since they are competing in a very similar market, they want the regulations to be the same for marijuana, so it’s fair game. Keep in mind, these rules and regulations are different because this scenario is in Canada. The First Amendment, has the obligation to protect advertising to an extent but it not obligated to do so because it doesn’t serve the greater good of the people.

ROBERTSON, SUSAN KRASHINSKY. Marijuana marketing: Alcohol industry calls for restrictions. n.d. <https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/marketing/legalized-marijuana-should-face-marketing-restrictions-alcohol-sector-says/article34622796/?ref=http://www.theglobeandmail.com&>.
Tedford, Thomas L. Freedom of Speech in the United States. Strata Publishing, Inc., n.d.


Comments

  1. AnonymousOctober 18, 2017 at 10:06 AM

    One thing I have always found interesting about advertising vice products is the way those advertisements are regulated not only by the government, but also by the TV networks that air them. It's a fairly common misconception that the FCC has rules preventing advertisers from showing people drinking beer during commercials, but in fact, those restrictions have largely been set by the major networks (Politifact). Private companies have far more latitude on restricting speech than the government does, and I think it's good for them to draw a line in the sand as far as what they will allow to be shown on TV. Extra regulation is especially necessary in the case of commercial speech. Capitalism doesn't exactly encourage ethical behavior, especially if more money can be made by completely ignoring your moral obligation (see: tobacco & oil companies, gun manufacturers). Private companies should always be encouraged to contribute to the welfare of society by not engaging in unethical marketing practices that target vulnerable populations.

    http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2014/aug/20/heineken/neil-patrick-harris-heineken-ad-we-cant-drink-tv/

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Gamifying Citizenship

The historical context of freedom of speech is an extremely interesting one. Why is it that the concept of free speech has been an undying one and has span the history of human communication. Breaking free speech in to three traditional rationals makes the concept easier to understand and definitely makes sense. These three modes of freedom of speech are philosophical, political and individual. They are easy to distinct from one another and function in completely different ways. From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supp...
1 comment
Read more

Wedding Cake Court Case (make-up post)

Wedding cake court case involving a gay couple, Charlie Craig & David Mullins, and a cake baker, Jack Phillips, who refused to bake a wedding cake for the couple. Just all around, it's a tricky debate with many different angles due to the baker arguing on the grounds of the First Amendment---its protections for free speech and the free exercise of religion. In the end, I think it comes down to whether we consider baking a cake qualifies an exercise of freedom of expression. I would say that it depends on the situation/context of baking. If Mr. Phillips wants his cake baking to be categorized artistic expression that falls under free expression, he can just go bake a cake on his own. Only then when he's on his own private time does it qualify, but as soon as he offered his skills as a public service via his business, I'd argue he gave that right to expression up. Also, what's stopping other artisans/professional services to deny services? By Mr. Phillip's logic...
Post a Comment
Read more

Why is Freedom of Speech Important in a Democracy

While reading Chapter 15, I got the sense that the book was really coming full circle. In the first week of class, we established a meaning for freedom of speech and that shared meaning allowed us to navigate the classroom together as a classroom and a collective group. Creating a space that also involved mutual respect of opinons but encouraging difference in them as well. This brings me to an article I found about the importance of Freedom of Speech in a democracy. It is a basic human right to be able to express opinions and beliefs in our country. Although that is the main component, just like we established in class the first few weeks, in a government and democracy, Freedom of Speech also consists of the ability to listen to people with difference in opinions. In the article , editor Rachael  Jolly says, “ We are going through a time where people don’t want to be on a panel with people they disagree with. But we should feel comfortable being in a room with people who disagree ...
4 comments
Read more