California Run A-muck LETS SUE against these lies!!!!!!

Status
Not open for further replies.

turnforward

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 30, 2010
260
229
San Diego
This has been talked about for the last couple of days and I am really surprised I couldn't find any posts on the front page of today's posts.
Stanton Glantz is getting READY to roll out commercials like this:



Their website:
Still Blowing Smoke #stillblowingsmoke

I am ready to financially support any org willing to SUE These UKnowWhats.
 

Oliver

ECF Founder, formerly SmokeyJoe
Admin
Verified Member

Alto101

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 19, 2012
216
399
45
North Carolina
What would you sue them for; use of free speech?

Taking public dollars and spreading lies that will endanger the public health would be one reason. Taking public dollars and spreading lies that will cause economic harm to legal businesses would be a second reason, I am sure there are more reasons but I know that you will just dismiss them all given your posting history.
 

caramel

Vaping Master
Dec 23, 2014
3,492
10,735
Well if anyone is seriously considering opposing this advert, there are a few angles of attack possible.

A) One could sue for:

1) financial mischief; if they misused funds, didn't go through all required approvals, selected the advertising company without following proper process etc. If this is the case, then a few ANTZ would get a slap on the wrist and they will be more careful next time. Not worth pursuing IMHO.

2) form; I can see some racial stereotypes there and one could sue for that; however this would go only as far as the advertising company that prepared the clip; they would redo the clip and it would be a wack-a-mole game;

3) content; now here's the interesting part as this could lead to the ANTZ. There are a few false or unproven allegations there, direct or indirect. Most notable one is the allegation that the tobacco companies invented and developed the e-cig; then you go to the "addictiveness" of nicotine when ingested other then through smoking etc. One probably wouldn't get very far through that venue since there's no particular law preventing them to do that. And here is a very important conclusion one can draw:

The individuals or organizations involved in negotiating e-cigarette legislation, when faced with the "e cig vendors cannot make unproven claims regarding e cig merits" clause, should push either for the removal of such clause (difficult) or having it as "no person can make any kind of claims regarding e cigs unless they are scientifically based" (easy to argue for). This gives symmetry to the law and allows to equally combat all unproven claims.

B) Counter-advertising:

Of course from the underdog/underfunded position you cannot go to "domination" tactics and drown them in longer, better, more frequent adverts on your side. But if anyone is willing to engage, judo tactics (where you try to deflect not oppose the opponent's force) can work. I can definitely see how a shorter advert, posing as a conclusion to the ANTZ's work, would say "Tobacco companies should be prevented from manufacturing and marketing e-cigarettes". :p
 

stevegmu

Moved On
ECF Veteran
May 10, 2013
11,630
12,348
6992 kilometers from home...
Taking public dollars and spreading lies that will endanger the public health would be one reason. Taking public dollars and spreading lies that will cause economic harm to legal businesses would be a second reason, I am sure there are more reasons but I know that you will just dismiss them all given your posting history.

I dismiss them because they have no foundation in law...
 

caramel

Vaping Master
Dec 23, 2014
3,492
10,735
Predictable response, at least you are consistent......

I would like to hear opinions from people who are well versed in the law about this issue.

I'm not versed in US law but you can start with California Consumers Legal Remedies Act:

"(8) Disparaging the goods, services, or business of another by
false or misleading representation of fact."
 

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,927
Wisconsin
This has been talked about for the last couple of days and I am really surprised I couldn't find any posts on the front page of today's posts.
Stanton Glantz is getting READY to roll out commercials like this:



Their website:
Still Blowing Smoke #stillblowingsmoke

I am ready to financially support any org willing to SUE These UKnowWhats.


I see this vid promoting eCigs. For sure to teens.

A google search on "what is the ecigarette industry not telling us" has counter propaganda at the top, and most of the other links on top 2 pages are countering the antis rhetoric. Thus, to make this sort of campaign work, they need to engage in more propaganda, and more lies, and yadda, yadda, yadda, their undoing is being had by their lack of patience for ANTZ studies to plausibly swing things a little bit their way.

These propagandists act like they have no real opposition, when reality shows they are under prepared to debate us and won't do so when the opportunity arises. Awww, all your anti-tobacco rhetoric stands to lose ground.

I say good riddance.
 

Jman8

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Jan 15, 2013
6,419
12,927
Wisconsin
I'm led to believe that this project has been funded to the tune of approximately $75 million dollars which comes from tobacco taxes.

But, there's been a good start - if you google "still blowing smoke" you'll find this website in the number 1 spot: NOT Blowing Smoke - Why the California Department of Public Health LIES about electronic cigarettes, e-cigarettes, vaping, and vapor products

Have a good read of that site and please share it widely

This is the link that comes up first when googling what I just mentioned in previous post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread