How many times do I have to explain that the advertising restrictions have nothing to do with e-cigs in particular?
e-cigarette tv ad giving a bad image to considerate vapers?
- Thread starter Merryhellion
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
How many times do I have to explain that the advertising restrictions have nothing to do with e-cigs in particular?
This is best understood in context; it's a bit of a catch-22. In a nutshell, in order to prevent ecigs from falling under (fatal) regulation, manufacturers had to prove that they were recreational tobacco products and not cessation devices. A victory, but between the devil and the deep blue sea.
This from wiki does it nicely:
"The FDA classified electronic cigarettes as drug delivery devices and subject to regulation under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) before importation and sale in the United States. The classification was challenged in court, and overruled in January 2010 by Federal District Court Judge Richard J. Leon, citing that "the devices should be regulated as tobacco products rather than drug or medical products."[100][101] As of April 2014, the FDA plans on making new regulations for electronic cigarettes.[3][102]
In March 2010, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia stayed the injunction pending an appeal, during which the FDA argued the right to regulate electronic cigarettes based on their previous ability to regulate nicotine replacement therapies such as nicotine gum or patches. Further, the agency argued that tobacco legislation enacted the previous year "expressly excludes from the definition of 'tobacco product' any article that is a drug, device or combination product under the FDCA, and provides that such articles shall be subject to regulation under the pre-existing FDCA provisions."[103] On 7 December 2010, the appeals court ruled against the FDA in a 3–0 unanimous decision, ruling the FDA can only regulate electronic cigarettes as tobacco products, and thus cannot block their import.[104] The judges ruled that such devices would only be subject to drug legislation if they are marketed for therapeutic use – E-cigarette manufacturers had successfully proven that their products were targeted at smokers and not at those seeking to quit. The District Columbia Circuit appeals court, on 24 January 2011, declined to review the decision en banc, blocking the products from FDA regulation as medical devices."
Last edited:
On a frivolous note ...
This is also an extremely funny ad. The title has a bad word in it, which is spelled with a replaced vowel, (That word could not appear on this forum even with the replaced vowel, which is why I've turned off the URL parsing feature. However the bad word is not actually used in the ad, which I think makes this link legit):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO5fRcaRbg0
[BTW this ad would be illegal now. The FDA will not even let vaping manufacturers say that the product contains no tobacco.]
I collect vaping ad videos. Also images. Why? Well, perhaps because I'm a little nuts
It could be that after all these years of being a "de-normalized" (read: demonized) tobacco cigarette smoker, there's a part of me that cheers when I see a vaping ad, even if it's for a cigAlike made by BT. I guess it's a bit like having your home team lose in the semifinals to a team from your school's district. You still root for the rivals who beat your school in the finals, over a team from the other side of the state (as it were). In other words, I'd rather have BT running vaping ads, than have vaping ads banned, so there's some pleasure in that "yeah, we're stickin' it to em!" feeling. (Irrational, I know.)
On a serious note ...
While these ads - and in particular, the term e-cigarette - have done our cause a great deal of damage, they have also undoubtedly encouraged a lot of tobacco cigarette smokers to try vaping, and many of them have eventually quit as a result. There would be many fewer vapers in the world without those ads, and without the term "e-cigarette". I just don't know how we can have the benefits without the disadvantages.
Maybe it will be a good thing if the ads were discontinued now voluntarily by the industry, because the point has been made. But I will vehemently oppose mandating that result, on the grounds that it's yet another piece of territory that the ANTZ will take from us. That said, I wouldn't have a problem with restricting them to certain times of the day, certain publications, etc. Even if there was a risk that these restrctions would be extended to a complete prohibition. Kids shouldn't vape. And they shouldn't be encouraged to vape unless they're older teens who are already addicted to tobacco cigarette smokers.
I also don't have a problem with that particular Blu "freedom" ad with Jenny McCarthy. Is it misleading to the extent that it implies that she can vape "anywher?" Yes, perhaps. But it dates back to early 2013, I believe. And it shows her vaping in a bar - not a Chuck E. Cheese.
It's not illlegal to vape anywhere here in virtually all parts of Indiana. (Not yet, anyway. Although I'm quite sure that it will be, in the next year or two.) I still stealth vape in public, and will probably continue to do so. It's not worth the hassle of freaking nonsmokers out. (I use a smoktech e-pipe mech. to do this - it's easy to palm with a vivi.) And I don't have a problem being outside with smokers ... I still empathize with them greatly, and think of myself as a member of the "demonized" segment of society. Just because I might eventually be able to - what's the word? - "pass" ... doesn't mean that I look down on them. I don't particularly care for the smell, but the last thing I want to be is an intolerant ex-smoker. Smokers are perfectly wlecome to smoke in my car and my house, so long as they do not cause disomfort to any nonsmokers who might be present. I even keep ashtrays and lighters for them (well, those are the ones I used to use - but I haven't discarded them is my point).
This is also an extremely funny ad. The title has a bad word in it, which is spelled with a replaced vowel, (That word could not appear on this forum even with the replaced vowel, which is why I've turned off the URL parsing feature. However the bad word is not actually used in the ad, which I think makes this link legit):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JO5fRcaRbg0
[BTW this ad would be illegal now. The FDA will not even let vaping manufacturers say that the product contains no tobacco.]
I collect vaping ad videos. Also images. Why? Well, perhaps because I'm a little nuts
It could be that after all these years of being a "de-normalized" (read: demonized) tobacco cigarette smoker, there's a part of me that cheers when I see a vaping ad, even if it's for a cigAlike made by BT. I guess it's a bit like having your home team lose in the semifinals to a team from your school's district. You still root for the rivals who beat your school in the finals, over a team from the other side of the state (as it were). In other words, I'd rather have BT running vaping ads, than have vaping ads banned, so there's some pleasure in that "yeah, we're stickin' it to em!" feeling. (Irrational, I know.)On a serious note ...
While these ads - and in particular, the term e-cigarette - have done our cause a great deal of damage, they have also undoubtedly encouraged a lot of tobacco cigarette smokers to try vaping, and many of them have eventually quit as a result. There would be many fewer vapers in the world without those ads, and without the term "e-cigarette". I just don't know how we can have the benefits without the disadvantages.
Maybe it will be a good thing if the ads were discontinued now voluntarily by the industry, because the point has been made. But I will vehemently oppose mandating that result, on the grounds that it's yet another piece of territory that the ANTZ will take from us. That said, I wouldn't have a problem with restricting them to certain times of the day, certain publications, etc. Even if there was a risk that these restrctions would be extended to a complete prohibition. Kids shouldn't vape. And they shouldn't be encouraged to vape unless they're older teens who are already addicted to tobacco cigarette smokers.
I also don't have a problem with that particular Blu "freedom" ad with Jenny McCarthy. Is it misleading to the extent that it implies that she can vape "anywher?" Yes, perhaps. But it dates back to early 2013, I believe. And it shows her vaping in a bar - not a Chuck E. Cheese.
It's not illlegal to vape anywhere here in virtually all parts of Indiana. (Not yet, anyway. Although I'm quite sure that it will be, in the next year or two.) I still stealth vape in public, and will probably continue to do so. It's not worth the hassle of freaking nonsmokers out. (I use a smoktech e-pipe mech. to do this - it's easy to palm with a vivi.) And I don't have a problem being outside with smokers ... I still empathize with them greatly, and think of myself as a member of the "demonized" segment of society. Just because I might eventually be able to - what's the word? - "pass" ... doesn't mean that I look down on them. I don't particularly care for the smell, but the last thing I want to be is an intolerant ex-smoker. Smokers are perfectly wlecome to smoke in my car and my house, so long as they do not cause disomfort to any nonsmokers who might be present. I even keep ashtrays and lighters for them (well, those are the ones I used to use - but I haven't discarded them is my point).
Last edited:
See this is how de normalization works. We are trained to be 'sensitive' to the appearance of smoke. We get uneasy if we see what appears to be smoke. It works so well that when we see what we know isn't smoke we get uneasy.
Fup that! I vape anywhere I used to smoke. I'm old enough to have lived long before the smoke ban and I am not going to apologise for not smoking. If people are so touchy they get upset at the appearance of smoking that's their problem.
No I won't ruin it for everyone because that will happen anyway. Do you really think if we are polite and reasonable that vaping bans wont happen? Think again.
Enjoy the small window of freedom while it lasts, it won't last long.
Fup that! I vape anywhere I used to smoke. I'm old enough to have lived long before the smoke ban and I am not going to apologise for not smoking. If people are so touchy they get upset at the appearance of smoking that's their problem.
No I won't ruin it for everyone because that will happen anyway. Do you really think if we are polite and reasonable that vaping bans wont happen? Think again.
Enjoy the small window of freedom while it lasts, it won't last long.
I put vaping and smoking on the job in the same category as iPhones with or with out headphones.Theres no place for it until lunch or break time.When you run your own business you will understand.You run it not your employees.
I have not had a real cig in one year,and two toots is all i need for hours while working.Disposables and prefilled carts do not work for me.Why vape and smoke real cigs?I see this a lot,and try to guide them,but its like talking to a brick wall.
I have not had a real cig in one year,and two toots is all i need for hours while working.Disposables and prefilled carts do not work for me.Why vape and smoke real cigs?I see this a lot,and try to guide them,but its like talking to a brick wall.
It bothers me that they can't say vaping can help you to quit smoking. It's like saying that drinking O'Doul's can help you from drinking beer. Smoking is not any more of a disease than drinking beer. The results of drinking beer or smoking can lead to health issues, but smoking and drinking beer are not diseases. If they were, they'd be covered by the ADA and if there was ever a drug that should be covered it's nicotine, "one of the most addicting drugs know to man". <sarcasm alert>
It's the same with incense, potpourri, or air fresheners. Not everybody enjoys every smell and based on their past experience, they mentally know they're going to smell your vape, because they don't know any better and people are reluctant to learn something new.
It bothers me that it's illegal to say anything, however accurate and truthful, that might damage the tobacco industry's sales numbers.
Excellent points, and I am now less peeved when I see the ad; even amused to an extent
. Sure, I don't like it, but it doesn't wind me up the way it did. Desperate times/desperate measures reaction; the lizard brain sees everything as a threat now that laws are being created, and the FDA is preparing to gain control over what helped me walk away from cigs without much struggle.
The salad days of vaping...being able to order whatever strikes my fancy online to try and enjoy, cheering small business owners on by becoming a patron of their shops and the liquids they create, not having a law make me an outlaw if I let my creative beast out to romp among the wide variety of equipment with which I enjoy my juice.
If they make me an outlaw for vaping, I will still enjoy it in my car, in my home, and on my horse. After all, these are the places I enjoy it already.
. Sure, I don't like it, but it doesn't wind me up the way it did. Desperate times/desperate measures reaction; the lizard brain sees everything as a threat now that laws are being created, and the FDA is preparing to gain control over what helped me walk away from cigs without much struggle. The salad days of vaping...being able to order whatever strikes my fancy online to try and enjoy, cheering small business owners on by becoming a patron of their shops and the liquids they create, not having a law make me an outlaw if I let my creative beast out to romp among the wide variety of equipment with which I enjoy my juice.
If they make me an outlaw for vaping, I will still enjoy it in my car, in my home, and on my horse. After all, these are the places I enjoy it already.
Nothing to be bothered about.
Lots of commercials on tv make no claims about the product; they just put customer on and let them say it.
"I tried x and in 7 days I lost weight! Yay!"
Now you can see what real Analog Cigs did to you.More then meets the eye.Keep up the good work.
As long as we're going to discuss it, you might as well tell us which one it is. Your description makes it sounds like the now-infamous Jenny McCarthy Blu ad:
blu eCigs 2013 TV Commercial: "Freedom" featuring Jenny McCarthy for blu Electronic Cigarettes - YouTube
(Except there's no voiceover)
"NJOY Presents: Relax...It's Courtney Love!" is also amusing to Google on Youtube. I can't post the link here because a bad word is used. (It's rather funny though
She has man hands and give me the creeps. I don't trust her.
gotta love the brits
the blu ad is ok I guess, maybe it doesn't mention quitting smoking in order to remain a "general product" and not some sort of pharmaceutical. it has to be a legal issue
the blu ad is ok I guess, maybe it doesn't mention quitting smoking in order to remain a "general product" and not some sort of pharmaceutical. it has to be a legal issue
gotta love the brits
the blu ad is ok I guess, maybe it doesn't mention quitting smoking in order to remain a "general product" and not some sort of pharmaceutical. it has to be a legal issue
Blu doesn't want you to stop smoking. It's owned by a tobacco company
They want dual users. For those who do quit- and people are quitting in droves, they want people to use BLU. They aren't stupid...
When speaking of advertising, lets not forget the Class Action Suit filed against Njoy a few months ago. Its gotta be a tough balancing act, when taking everything into consideration, being such a controversial product.
I'm just happy I was alive when vaping advertisements were legally allowed.
I'm yet to see a vaping video ad that I didn't like, though admittedly some are better than others, and all of them are better than every car commercial or an ad for a lawyer, and about 15 times better than Chantix commercials. Though the Chantix ones always make me laugh. I always think they're kidding about the side effects. That they aren't humors me a little more.
I'm yet to see a vaping video ad that I didn't like, though admittedly some are better than others, and all of them are better than every car commercial or an ad for a lawyer, and about 15 times better than Chantix commercials. Though the Chantix ones always make me laugh. I always think they're kidding about the side effects. That they aren't humors me a little more.
- Status
Similar threads
