3 ms·

While we're on the topic of ethics, I recently decided to completely abandon Vice and all of its sister sites (Noisey, Motherboard, Thump, Vice News, etc) becau

by nefitty 11y ago

While we're on the topic of ethics, I recently decided to completely abandon Vice and all of its sister sites (Noisey, Motherboard, Thump, Vice News, etc) because one of its subsidiaries is creating advertising content for Philip Morris. http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/mar/17/vice-media-attacked-for-making-tobacco-adverts-for-philip-morris http://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/mar/17/vice-media-atta... I emailed Motherboard's editor about this and didn't get so much as a frowny face in response. I am bummed out about Vice Media's blatant hypocrisy. They're worth $4b, so they start tossing kids into the thresher to continue printing money.

bcook 11y ago
I only saw that they were tasked with creating general advertisements, not targetted ads for kids, though, I suppose kids are included if a country allows tobacco advertisements in public. Still, the article implies that they are marketing directly towards children... which seems inaccurate.
- legulere 11y ago
  Tobacco advertisement always is about kids/teenagers, because that's where you get new customers. Getting smokers to switch brands is harder and not really worth it. Here in Germany tobacco advertisements for instance isn't banned yet (planned for 2020). I very often see Marlboro advertisement in public. They show good looking young people living the good life (as in at a concert, not something you can only reach with lots of money). The slogan is: Don't be a maybe, be marlboro paired with some sentence telling you that maybe is bad.
  - nefitty 11y ago
    Thanks for sharing that. When I say "kids" I mean young people. That Vice is using its knowledge and leverage with youth for the tobacco industry is what angers me. My original post is getting downvoted, but maybe your comment will shed some light on what is happening.
  - thaumasiotes 11y ago
    > Getting smokers to switch brands is harder and not really worth it. What I read about this (which dates from the 80s or so) said that elasticity of demand for smoking is very low (no surprise; that's why we call it addictive) and that brand loyalty is also very low. Which means it's easy to get smokers to switch brands; you just need to charge a lower price. In practice, this market structure means that price competition is rather pointless, since all your sales are cannibalized from other cigarette vendors, and if they return the favor you've just lost a bunch of money for no reason. So cigarette companies really like to charge "whatever the other companies charge". This supports the idea that getting smokers to switch brands isn't worth it, but definitely doesn't support the idea that it's hard. (This comes from a Straight Dope question as to why the price of a pack of cigarettes is so uniform across companies.)
dmix 11y ago
Vice isn't a website for children. Do you have another tangible argument to back up this position? Or is that it simply "won't someone please think of the children"?
- nefitty 11y ago
  If you're not convinced that the tobacco industry isn't one of the worst that's ever emerged in the world, then I can do nothing for you.
  - Ntrails 11y ago
    Then work to have your government legislate, don't get all morally outraged when everyone behaves in a perfectly legal fashion that happens to offend your sense of decency.
    - function_seven 11y ago
      Please no. I don't want people attempting to legislate morals. OP's personal outrage is preferable to lobbying for legal enshrinement of their morals.
    - nefitty 11y ago
      I'll just stay away from Vice and their products and share my position with people.
- MaulingMonkey 11y ago
  > Vice isn't a website for children. Vice isn't running the ads: "The ads will not carry Vice branding and will not run on Vice properties. They won’t be shown to people in the US or UK as both countries have strict rules prohibiting tobacco advertising."

by nefitty 11y ago

bcook 11y ago

I only saw that they were tasked with creating general advertisements, not targetted ads for kids, though, I suppose kids are included if a country allows tobacco advertisements in public. Still, the article implies that they are marketing directly towards children... which seems inaccurate.

legulere 11y ago
Tobacco advertisement always is about kids/teenagers, because that's where you get new customers. Getting smokers to switch brands is harder and not really worth it. Here in Germany tobacco advertisements for instance isn't banned yet (planned for 2020). I very often see Marlboro advertisement in public. They show good looking young people living the good life (as in at a concert, not something you can only reach with lots of money). The slogan is: Don't be a maybe, be marlboro paired with some sentence telling you that maybe is bad.
- nefitty 11y ago
  Thanks for sharing that. When I say "kids" I mean young people. That Vice is using its knowledge and leverage with youth for the tobacco industry is what angers me. My original post is getting downvoted, but maybe your comment will shed some light on what is happening.
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  > Getting smokers to switch brands is harder and not really worth it. What I read about this (which dates from the 80s or so) said that elasticity of demand for smoking is very low (no surprise; that's why we call it addictive) and that brand loyalty is also very low. Which means it's easy to get smokers to switch brands; you just need to charge a lower price. In practice, this market structure means that price competition is rather pointless, since all your sales are cannibalized from other cigarette vendors, and if they return the favor you've just lost a bunch of money for no reason. So cigarette companies really like to charge "whatever the other companies charge". This supports the idea that getting smokers to switch brands isn't worth it, but definitely doesn't support the idea that it's hard. (This comes from a Straight Dope question as to why the price of a pack of cigarettes is so uniform across companies.)

dmix 11y ago

Vice isn't a website for children. Do you have another tangible argument to back up this position? Or is that it simply "won't someone please think of the children"?

nefitty 11y ago
If you're not convinced that the tobacco industry isn't one of the worst that's ever emerged in the world, then I can do nothing for you.
- Ntrails 11y ago
  Then work to have your government legislate, don't get all morally outraged when everyone behaves in a perfectly legal fashion that happens to offend your sense of decency.
  - function_seven 11y ago
    Please no. I don't want people attempting to legislate morals. OP's personal outrage is preferable to lobbying for legal enshrinement of their morals.
  - nefitty 11y ago
    I'll just stay away from Vice and their products and share my position with people.
MaulingMonkey 11y ago
> Vice isn't a website for children. Vice isn't running the ads: "The ads will not carry Vice branding and will not run on Vice properties. They won’t be shown to people in the US or UK as both countries have strict rules prohibiting tobacco advertising."