PSA Offer!
- Thread starter RyGuy
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Simple imagery? Familiar comparison? Few words? How about this?
A guy walks on camera reading the report of the levels of TSNs, etc... in the PV; he is holding a green apple to eat. He looks at the camera and says "This says an e-cig has carcinogens in it." He holds the apple up and looks at it.
"If this is ONE e-cig, how much is in ONE cigarette?"
He tosses the apple into a huge pile of oranges.
"Now how can you compare those two?"
or "Well, you know what they say"
Fade to black, with a web address.
In a companion PSA, the same guy could squat down by the huge pile of oranges (with the one green apple) and pull a red apple out.
"Seems fair to compare it to gum, or the patch..."
Fade to black, web address.
A guy walks on camera reading the report of the levels of TSNs, etc... in the PV; he is holding a green apple to eat. He looks at the camera and says "This says an e-cig has carcinogens in it." He holds the apple up and looks at it.
"If this is ONE e-cig, how much is in ONE cigarette?"
He tosses the apple into a huge pile of oranges.
"Now how can you compare those two?"
or "Well, you know what they say"
Fade to black, with a web address.
In a companion PSA, the same guy could squat down by the huge pile of oranges (with the one green apple) and pull a red apple out.
"Seems fair to compare it to gum, or the patch..."
Fade to black, web address.
...unless you live in one of the increasing number of states that have indoor smoking bans...then your choice is to either vape and get dirty looks, or go outside and get some secondhand smoke.
...unless you live in one of the increasing number of states that have indoor smoking bans...then your choice is to either vape and get dirty looks, or go outside and get some secondhand smoke.
It's a travesty. An absolute travesty that we have allowed this to happen.
We are very close to also having full smoking bans in homes, on streets, etc. Pretty soon, you won't be able to smoke anywhere... and that is their goal.
This is not free by any means. Not free at all.
I do know that a local town near Indy just passed a smoking ban and it is for establishments who serve to anyone under the age of 21. I think smoking bans are ridiculous but at least... this one has some reality embedded in it.
nice one, renderwerks...
didn't see the apples to oranges thing coming... definitely rememberable.
didn't see the apples to oranges thing coming... definitely rememberable.
Just for argument's sake... would you use a charcoal grill in the middle of Walmart?
Heavens no. Why? Because there is a time and a place for everything and grilling out is better on the deck
In a bar though... with other adults who also smoke... no children around... and the market dictates the bar should be smoking... (and the owner of the establishment would be able to determine this, not the government)... then smoke 'em if you got em. And if the bar owner believes that using a charcoal grill is appropriate, then so be it...
If things keep going the way they are, unchecked, pretty soon charcoal will be outlawed.
Did you know you have to be 18 to buy super glue? Yep. I did not know that until I went to buy super glue for a crappy craft and was asked for ID! I could barely believe it.
I like the idea of visual imagery and an easy to remember phrase.
Two people are sitting at a table in a room. Behind each person is a window covered with white curtains. One person is smoking the other is vaping. (His PV should definitely not resemble a cigarette. A black penstyle w/ a blue LED would work.) The vaporer is telling the smoker the of why he switched.
Follow this with your tag line. Perhaps, "The Cleaner, Better Alternative to Smoking." I'm sure someone can come up with something better, though.
Stay away from explicit health claims, but the lack of tar, few chemicals, and lower levels of carcinogens are facts and the viewer can come to his own conclusion. Avoid claims of smoking cessation and do not mention NRT.
Avoid smoking bans, because then all that has to be done to neutralize that point is to legislate that vaping is included in the ban.
Avoid mentioning lower cost, since that is mainly due to the lack of taxation. We want these things approved and once they are approved they will be taxed, like it or not.
I've debated whether it should be two people of the same gender v a couple. I decided that the two people should be very similar, same race, gender, age, body image. Don't want to imply that one group of people isn't as smart because they smoke rather than vape. It also must be evident that the two leave the room together as friends.
Edit: Further fleshing out of the scene. The two middle-aged men are sitting in a lounge (no drinks, as this would detract from the image) at a theatre. They are formally dressed, waiting for the show, a ballet, an opera, to start. Implication could be that they are attending at request of their wives, but they don't really mind being there. They are intelligent and cultured, but not sissies. They are well to do professionals, but not blue-bloods. Clothing should not be cheap, but not outrageously rich either. The smoker lights up, the vaporer gets out his PV. The smoker is intrigued, allowing the vaporer to explain what it is. After the conversation is over, the lights flick off then on, signalling the show's about to start. The smoker snuffs out his cig and states, "Showtime". The vaporer puts the PV in his coat pocket, replying, "Let's go." They get up, meet up w/ their wives and leave.
Two people are sitting at a table in a room. Behind each person is a window covered with white curtains. One person is smoking the other is vaping. (His PV should definitely not resemble a cigarette. A black penstyle w/ a blue LED would work.) The vaporer is telling the smoker the of why he switched.
- no flames
- no odor on hair and clothes
- no lingering second hand smoke in house/car
- no tar
- much fewer chemicals
- lower levels of carcinogens
- etc
Follow this with your tag line. Perhaps, "The Cleaner, Better Alternative to Smoking." I'm sure someone can come up with something better, though.
Stay away from explicit health claims, but the lack of tar, few chemicals, and lower levels of carcinogens are facts and the viewer can come to his own conclusion. Avoid claims of smoking cessation and do not mention NRT.
Avoid smoking bans, because then all that has to be done to neutralize that point is to legislate that vaping is included in the ban.
Avoid mentioning lower cost, since that is mainly due to the lack of taxation. We want these things approved and once they are approved they will be taxed, like it or not.
I've debated whether it should be two people of the same gender v a couple. I decided that the two people should be very similar, same race, gender, age, body image. Don't want to imply that one group of people isn't as smart because they smoke rather than vape. It also must be evident that the two leave the room together as friends.
Edit: Further fleshing out of the scene. The two middle-aged men are sitting in a lounge (no drinks, as this would detract from the image) at a theatre. They are formally dressed, waiting for the show, a ballet, an opera, to start. Implication could be that they are attending at request of their wives, but they don't really mind being there. They are intelligent and cultured, but not sissies. They are well to do professionals, but not blue-bloods. Clothing should not be cheap, but not outrageously rich either. The smoker lights up, the vaporer gets out his PV. The smoker is intrigued, allowing the vaporer to explain what it is. After the conversation is over, the lights flick off then on, signalling the show's about to start. The smoker snuffs out his cig and states, "Showtime". The vaporer puts the PV in his coat pocket, replying, "Let's go." They get up, meet up w/ their wives and leave.
Last edited:
I like it, Teritoo..
The way the environment puts the two outside their comfort zone easily translates to how many of us feel about smoking/vaping in unfamiliar public places.
I wonder if it is permissible to show a person smoking a cigarette on a television Ad even if it isn't an Ad for cigarettes.
Last edited:
I got carded today for buying fuel injector cleaner for my car
it really is bizarreI guess 16 year olds can only use fuel additives under close adult supervision!
Gee, my aunt used to send my cousin and me up to the corner grocery when we were 11
to buy her a pack of cigs. How times have changed. Back then, it was up to our parents to make sure we didn't actually smoke the things.
to buy her a pack of cigs. How times have changed. Back then, it was up to our parents to make sure we didn't actually smoke the things.
One thing I think the creators of the PSA needs to keep in mind is that not all ecig users have quit smoking (and not all ecig users intend to quit). For many of my customers, the ecig is simply a way to get nicotine at the workplace without having to go outside (or in some cases without having to leave the property because of no smoking on property rules).
I guess what I'm trying to say is to be careful about showing it as a smoking cessation product. That would play right into the FDA's hands, as well as other groups who are saying it should be banned until proven safe and effective as a cessation product. Even though there is a difference between smoking cessation and nicotine useage cessation, the FDA has yet to seem to comprehend this.
I guess what I'm trying to say is to be careful about showing it as a smoking cessation product. That would play right into the FDA's hands, as well as other groups who are saying it should be banned until proven safe and effective as a cessation product. Even though there is a difference between smoking cessation and nicotine useage cessation, the FDA has yet to seem to comprehend this.
Agreed. Many of the anti groups will not be happy until smoking and vaping are in the same class as illicit drugs. My personal opinion is that as long as tobacco continues to be legal, the consumption of it should be up to the property owner, not the government. The only place the government should have the right to ban smoking or vaping is on government property. The most they should be allowed to enforce is signage at the entrance that warns the public of any allowed use.
Smoking Replacement
A series of PSA's that follow a particular pattern (along the lines of the "Real Men Of Genius" series of jokes/beer ads mashed with the "My Anti Drug" series of PSAs) the "I'm not smoking." could be series of "scenes" first played with one (outrageous) smoking alternative, and replayed at the end with a PV or e-cig as the reason "I'm not smoking."
Each scene would show a person (real or acted) in an everyday setting that would commonly present a craving challenge for someone trying to quit smoking (designated work breaks, after a meal, while driving, at a bar or club, even after sex) suddenly engaging in some unconventional behavior. This could be anything from reading a book or chewing on something to outrageous dances, exercises, or even singing. Anyone who wanted to be involved could actually use this as a way to showcase a hidden talent--the more like "Stupid Human Tricks" the better. The behavior would be interrupted by someone confused at the outrageous behavior asks what they are doing to which they answer, "I'm not smoking."
After one or more of these scenes play out in montage, the scene is re-done probably with someone pointing at a "No Smoking" sign and then the same person is shown using a PV and also saying "I'm not smoking." Then, in a nod to Fight Club or the Sixth Sense, previously played scenes flash back with the subjects each using a PV or e-cig instead.
As a series of ads, each PSA could be used to highlight a different point of interest in the closing. The first (or only if need be) should end with one of the subjects saying "Smoking Replacement means I don't have to feel like a quitter when I choose to not smoke." Subsequent PSAs should emphasize the other benefits of not smoking or Smoking Replacement.
In this way we aren't making any specific claims about the safety or health benefits or hazards of e-cigarettes, instead we are emphasizing the benefits of not smoking thanks to Smoking Replacement devices like PVs.
Last edited:
Although I understand your point, the indoor smoking bans for public spaces have some merit. When you consider the deadliness of secondhand smoke in confined spaces, allowing smoking indoors can legitimately constitute a hazardous workplace. Although I fully support the right to choose, I'm not certain that right supersedes the right to clean air in public spaces.
But that logic does not apply to PV's. Vapor does not present a significant health hazard and therefore "clean air" indoor smoking bans do not apply. What does apply is a private business' right to establish rules such as "No cell phone use", as the same basis for banning perfumes or products containing peanuts could be applied to personal vaporizers.
This is why I'm promoting the concept of Smoking Replacement in contrast to nicotine replacement. Smoking Replacement is the homeopathic theory that rather than being forced with the bleak prospects of quitting, there are inherent health benefits to replacing the physical act of smoking with a virtual activity.
Perhaps if we can convince the FDA (or at least Judge Leon) that the intended use of e-cigarettes is to be used as a homeopathic Smoking Replacement (with optional pharmacologically active ingredients) device rather than a "drug/delivery combo" we could get a ruling in our favor.
I looked into this awhile back and this route... must be approved by the HPCUS (another route of FDA approval)
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
