2017 Tobacco Company Ad-buy For YouTube

My YouTube viewing on TV was interrupted by an ad. I uncharacteristically watched it because it seemed political. It was an astroturf ad by what looked like JTI-Macdonald Corp. in the disclaimer flashed at the end of the ad, and it had a spiky haired older guy going by “Mike” (I think), who said he quit smoking on his own (unlikely, but that’s what Tobacco companies want you to believe is possible), and plain packaging is the government interfering in personal decisions. And the result, he claimed, is that illegal tobacco trade will only increase, which is at least six year old nonsense, of course. He wanted people to visit his website to write MPs and Senators.

Laughably, their Twitter bio states:

“We don’t advertise or promote our tobacco brands.”

I thought I’d mention this, since others may see the ad where JTI are surreptitiously arguing they should have the right to promote their tobacco brands. The intention is for people to not realize it’s paid for by Big Tobacco, but shot to look like a home video by a wealthy-libertarian/concerned former smoker.

This is another ad by the same astroturf campaign:

bothsidesoftheargument[dot]ca/open-fact-based-discussion-7

Yep, JTI is going to need all the money they have, for the lawsuits against tobacco companies.

Can we stamp out the tobacco threat to our health? Can we convince Regina to catch up to other municipalities?

#JeffWeCan!

First tweet was at the end of August:

bothsides-tobacco-astroturf

In conclusion, why is Big Tobacco fighting plain packaging?

Advertisements

If Earth Was A Restaurant From The 1990s

One of the big problems with climate change, is even if Europe and Asia manage to create low carbon infrastructure and societies, it’s like a non-smoking section of a restaurant. Remember those? Saskatchewan banned smoking in restaurants by about 2005, so we got out of the habit of asking, “Non-smoking table for two, please.”

We need a non-smoking section, only for climate change. Deniers get the part that floods, & burns.
“Non-smoking continent for 4 Billion please.”

Except as with a non-smoking section in restaurants, the symbolic barrier doesn’t actually work, & everyone ends up dying from pollution. C’est la vie. Or rather, c’est la mort. (I don’t actually speak French.)

#OldNews about Alcohol and Planes

Roughly, it says:
“Alcohol makes lumps. Whoever is not satisfied, can see it in this photo, which was acquired last night after a driver who was under the influence of liquor, first drove to the gate of the High Sluis and then ended up at the motor line 7. The driver himself was a lucky escape, but one occupant and the tram driver were slightly injured.”

Alcohol maakt brokken. Wie daar nog niet van overtuigd is, kan het op deze foto zien, die genomen werd nadat gisteravond een autobestuurder, die onder invloed van sterke drank verkeerde, eerst tegen het hek van de Hoge Sluis reed en daarna terechtkwam tegen de motorwagen van lijn 7. De bestuurder zelf kwam met de schrik vrij, doch een inzittende en de bestuurder van de tram werden licht gewond.

Why The Drug War Is Inherently Racist and Pro-War

Richard Nixon was not a good man. The people around him weren’t good either. They intentionally lied about the harm of hard drugs (and ‘soft’ drugs too), in order to concoct a reason for law enforcement officers to harass and jail African Americans and anti-war protesters.

“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”

So if you wonder why laws regarding pot differ so much from cigarettes that cause far more health harm, you have Nixon to partially thank for that lunacy.


Not unrelated:
It’s 2016, and carding of Blacks in Ontario is still going on, despite its obvious racist motivation.

Rona Ambrose – Smoke From The Ears

Anyone else smell pants burning? Maybe it’s something else.

Hold on, you’re about to get whiplash. I guess having an empty head is a biological advantage since your brain doesn’t rattle around when you change direction this quickly.

Not even Google can keep up with her position.

June 11, 2015 10:19PM EDT

Health Minister Rona Ambrose says she is “outraged” by the Supreme Court of Canada decision that expands the definition of medical marijuana beyond dried leaves, to include cannabis oils, teas, brownies and other forms of the drug.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2015/08/01/marijuana-canada_n_7918280.html

 

and now…

“In the news

As Health Minister Rona Ambrose made it clear that the Harper Government was not going to legalize marijuana, much less support …”

I used to be fairly anti-marijuana. I’ve since learned that the regulation of it, far beyond that provided for tobacco, makes no sense. Every week that passes without a legislation change, causes more injustice in our country.

Climate Change AKA Global Warming Denial History

Here the case is made that “global warming” was supplanted by “climate change” because it sounded less urgent, (much as tarsands became oilsands), and other history is presented about the Denial movement infesting political discourse.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2015/mar/05/doubt-over-climate-science-is-a-product-with-an-industry-behind-it

Bad Science: A Resource Book – described in Merchants of Doubt as a “how-to handbook for fact fighters”.

Produced by the tobacco industry to help any industry fight any legislation that responded to scientific findings, this was a representation of big tobacco’s playbook in written form.

The book provided soundbites and ready-made talking points to arm any industry fighting regulation. Among the talking points the book suggested should be pushed home were:

Too often, science is manipulated to fulfil a political agenda.

Government agencies, too often, betray the public trust by violating principles of good science in a desire to achieve a political goal.

Public policy decisions that are based on bad science impose enormous economic costs on all aspects of society.


Continue reading