3 ms·

> But I'm totally OK with the FDA's aggressive stance on e.g. Juul marketing to teenagers, because that seems to me to be all about getting somebody to start th

> But I'm totally OK with the FDA's aggressive stance on e.g. Juul marketing to teenagers, because that seems to me to be all about getting somebody to start the habit when they're least likely to make wise decisions. is there any evidence that juul is marketing to teenagers? genuinely asking, as I receive their promotional emails and they never strike me as targeting underage users.

rspeele 8y ago
Good question. I took too firm a stance on it for something I don't know enough about. From what I can gather, the reported issues are mostly with their early advertising, showing a lot of vaguely 20ish people looking cool and having fun. They also did a lot of social media marketing and some music events. I can see the argument that, hey, say your goal is purely to help people transition from cigarettes to a less harmful nicotine vehicle. Won't using the marketing techniques of other successful startups be the best way to accomplish that goal? People aren't going to want to switch from cigarettes to something that has the social image of "desperate addict trying to quit". It helps if it looks like something normal people enjoy socially, and hey, maybe makes them feel a bit more youthful. That makes perfect sense. But is it possible to succeed in that, without also appealing to teenagers? If not, is it worth it? Those aren't rhetorical questions, I genuinely don't know the answers to them. It's a complex area to think about.
ceejayoz 8y ago
Trying to get their "anti-vaping" curriculum in schools (aping what the tobacco industry did): https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/27/science/juul-vaping-teen-marketing.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/27/science/juul-vaping-teen-... > Five days later, Carrie Yantzer, the principal at Nederland Middle-Senior High School, received an email that immediately struck her as suspicious. The writer introduced himself as Bruce Harter, a former educator working with Juul to develop an anti-vaping curriculum for schools. > “I read about the challenges you’re having with Juul,” Mr. Harter wrote. He offered a free, three-hour curriculum provided by Juul to discourage teens from using e-cigarettes by teaching them about their brains and giving them mindfulness exercises. The "cool flavors" thing was a (now banned) tobacco industry trick, too: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/electronic-cigarettes-millennial-appeal-ushers-next-generation-nicotine-addicts-180968747/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/electronic-cigarettes... > Other efforts from Big Tobacco to target children were eventually stymied by the government as well. In the late '90s, the Federal Trade Commission banned the indelible Joe Camel, and the Food and Drug Administration banned kid-friendly flavors like strawberry, grape, and chocolate from traditional, or combustible, cigarettes in 2009.
- leetcrew 8y ago
  > Trying to get their "anti-vaping" curriculum in schools I can agree, that seems suspicious. > The "cool flavors" thing was a (now banned) tobacco industry trick, too this is more along the lines of what I expected, and I strongly object to this argument for two reasons. the first is just that, as an adult, I don't accept that I should be prohibited from buying something that tastes good to me just because a child might also enjoy the flavor. the second is that having vape flavors that actually taste good makes it a much more effective harm reduction tool; after a giving it a chance, many smokers actually end up preferring the experience of vaping. if you ban all the good flavors, a good chunk of these people are just going to switch back to smoking. also, I notice there are a lot of people that support the flavored cigarette ban of the 90s and are now railing against vape flavors. I never hear these people complain about sweet, fruity liquors. if strawberry vape juice is targeting children, who is strawberry vodka for? do we also need to think about banning sweet wines?

rspeele 8y ago

Good question. I took too firm a stance on it for something I don't know enough about. From what I can gather, the reported issues are mostly with their early advertising, showing a lot of vaguely 20ish people looking cool and having fun. They also did a lot of social media marketing and some music events. I can see the argument that, hey, say your goal is purely to help people transition from cigarettes to a less harmful nicotine vehicle. Won't using the marketing techniques of other successful startups be the best way to accomplish that goal? People aren't going to want to switch from cigarettes to something that has the social image of "desperate addict trying to quit". It helps if it looks like something normal people enjoy socially, and hey, maybe makes them feel a bit more youthful. That makes perfect sense. But is it possible to succeed in that, without also appealing to teenagers? If not, is it worth it? Those aren't rhetorical questions, I genuinely don't know the answers to them. It's a complex area to think about.

ceejayoz 8y ago

Trying to get their "anti-vaping" curriculum in schools (aping what the tobacco industry did): https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/27/science/juul-vaping-teen-marketing.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/27/science/juul-vaping-teen-... > Five days later, Carrie Yantzer, the principal at Nederland Middle-Senior High School, received an email that immediately struck her as suspicious. The writer introduced himself as Bruce Harter, a former educator working with Juul to develop an anti-vaping curriculum for schools. > “I read about the challenges you’re having with Juul,” Mr. Harter wrote. He offered a free, three-hour curriculum provided by Juul to discourage teens from using e-cigarettes by teaching them about their brains and giving them mindfulness exercises. The "cool flavors" thing was a (now banned) tobacco industry trick, too: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/electronic-cigarettes-millennial-appeal-ushers-next-generation-nicotine-addicts-180968747/ https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/electronic-cigarettes... > Other efforts from Big Tobacco to target children were eventually stymied by the government as well. In the late '90s, the Federal Trade Commission banned the indelible Joe Camel, and the Food and Drug Administration banned kid-friendly flavors like strawberry, grape, and chocolate from traditional, or combustible, cigarettes in 2009.

leetcrew 8y ago
> Trying to get their "anti-vaping" curriculum in schools I can agree, that seems suspicious. > The "cool flavors" thing was a (now banned) tobacco industry trick, too this is more along the lines of what I expected, and I strongly object to this argument for two reasons. the first is just that, as an adult, I don't accept that I should be prohibited from buying something that tastes good to me just because a child might also enjoy the flavor. the second is that having vape flavors that actually taste good makes it a much more effective harm reduction tool; after a giving it a chance, many smokers actually end up preferring the experience of vaping. if you ban all the good flavors, a good chunk of these people are just going to switch back to smoking. also, I notice there are a lot of people that support the flavored cigarette ban of the 90s and are now railing against vape flavors. I never hear these people complain about sweet, fruity liquors. if strawberry vape juice is targeting children, who is strawberry vodka for? do we also need to think about banning sweet wines?