Should I initiate a news story about e-smoking?

[Dale]

I addressed this in another thread, but I wanted to put it to a vote.

I work for one of the largest NPR (National Public Radio) affiliates in the US. If I pitched a story about e-smoking technology and culture, it would very likely get done and broadcast, and even possibly get picked up by the national network. If that happened, it could then end up being reported on television as NPR is frequently a source of inspiration for other news organizations, and gadgets + vapor = great visuals.

My dilemma is this: on the one hand I'd love to share with the world this breakthrough in nicotine consumption we've all stumbled upon, but on the other I am very wary of attracting the attention of governments and the taxation and/or regulation that could follow. I'd hate to see a bunch of new laws descending on e-smoking making it more difficult for us to continue this practice. Considering the toxicity of concentrated nicotine, it could even be prohibited or allowed only by prescription. Thus far we as practitioners and our suppliers as a fledgling industry have been flying under the radar.

So my question is: do I pitch the story and seek to share the good news of e-smoking with the world, or do I keep my head down and keep quietly vaping away?

I'd appreciate knowing the reasoning behind your answer as well.

 

[CaSHMeRe]

No ... because esmoking isn't yet a science. BETA testing is great, but if it gets too much attention, nothing good can happen IMO. Until you have great equipment, months/years of independent research and testing, and chinese/usa liquid/carts/etc... that can withstand some very critical tests, its best to just let it ride in a gray area...

The time will indeed come when its ready, you just have to be 110% prepared, instead of the current 10-20% we are at currently ...

as always, just my $.02 cents ...

 

[SMILIN]

Dale,

I have tried EVERYTHING to quit smoking, and I was smoking 100 kools a day. My first "real"day of esmoking, I cut down 80%, and have been kool free for 15 days. That's frikin kool, huh? It works, plain, and simple, it helps, I feel so much better, it's silly. Maybe bigass tobacco will get into it too, uhoh, maybe they will just try to shut us down, uummmm, people need to know.

Patch-SUCKS
Gum-Sucks
Chantrix-Sucks
Welbutrin-Sucks
Hypnosis-Sucks
Acupuncture-Sucks

Get the picture, e.cigs are a frikin Godsend.

 

[Mr.Darcy]

No...the way things stand with ecigs at the moment mass attention can do no good...but it can do lots of harm...

keep it quiet,and enjoy your current freedom to esmoke-it'll disappear soon enough...

 

[dc2k08]

as great as npr is, it doesnt seem to get alot of main-stream attention in the states. i would say you could probably pitch a story with them and e-cigs would still remain relatively under the radar.

there is a worry that anti-tobacco fundies will catch on and start their meddling, but they are going to be doing it sooner or later. it might be better to get a positve story out before all the slander starts.

 

[KatyS]

As a supplier I am torn. I am mainly selling so people can get a e-cig not to get rich. When they are at the local store I can close mine, which will be fine, I can go back to retirement, but until they are available locally I have to be here for my customers. I would hate someone to shut me down and leave my folks in the lurch. I don't know what will happen when the goverment gets involved, could get ugly.

 

[Dale]

as great as npr is, it doesnt seem to get alot of main-stream attention in the states. i would say you could probably pitch a story with them and e-cigs would still remain relatively under the radar.

there is a worry that anti-tobacco fundies will catch on and start their meddling, but they are going to be doing it sooner or later. it might be better to get a positve story out before all the slander starts.

Admittedly, our audience is specialized, but it's still nearly a million listeners in Los Angeles (where my station is located), and as I mentioned mainstream news organizations often take their cue from NPR stories.

The voting is running 2-to-1 against doing a story so far, but at least one of the arguments in favor of publicity is rather compelling. I'll wait for some more votes before I make up my mind.

 

[PeteMcArthur]

To be honest, I really don't know. When I heard that the BBC were going to to a story on it, my heart sank. I really thought that there would be a backlash against e-cigs. As it turned out the response was quite positive, a few members here learned about e-cigs from that report. However there were no follow ups on the BBC or any other media, a nightmare scenario is of the tabloids running a "New e-cigs make your genitals disappear!!" type story, don't laugh the UK tabloids would run anything that sold a few more copies.

 

[Smokin]

I voted no.

I feel that this is the greatest aid for smokers to ever be available, I have only just started and I beieve that this is the way for me to win the battle with cigarettes and I want everyone to be able to have the chance to experiment with this product; however:

Testing has not been carried out on humans; I believe that sooner, rather than later the devices will be banned until thoroughly tested and thereafter, taxed to the hilt.

This is only my personal opinion and I will most definately be recommending esmoking to all my smoking friends who show an interest; however I believe that mainstream publicity of any kind without the product undergoing further testing is not a great idea and is inviting unwelcome scrutiny at this stage in it's development.

 

[edisme518123]

Unfortunately there isn't much at this point you could run with without sounding like an ad or a sales campaign. They don't look like cigarettes, don't feel like cigarettes, don't work like cigarettes, and require more work than cigarettes. Really, they're not all that appealing to the Average Joe that smokes cigarettes for any other reason than the supposed "lessened health risk." Unfortunately we have very little proof that e-cigs actually do propose a lessened health risk aside from the fact that there is no combustion or copious amounts of unknown chemicals... and we're not even 100% sure of the latter.

For these reasons, I vote no. If you'd like to earn some exposure though, take a few to the mall or flea market and give demonstrations. That way the user can decide for him/herself if it is right for him/her.

 

[Marvelbeast]

I'd say "No" until there are enough of us to be able to fight off a ban and when more proof is available of it's benefits.

As at the moment it's a "viral product" and most people are picking up the new habit from seeing friends and family use an e-cig, I think it will continue to grow in use.

When the governments of the World start to see their revenue from tobacco taxes affected then they will pretend that they care about the people and say that they have to ban its use.

If you could get paid to go to China and report on it there it'd be better because you could interview people who have been e-smoking for 4 or 5 years. Plus you could pick up some supplies

 

[trog100]

the vote will be a no vote dale.. but once an idea is there its hard not to push it thru.. he he

i doubt it will do much good but then again it wont do much harm..

trog

 

[Denni]

For these reasons, I vote no. If you'd like to earn some exposure though, take a few to the mall or flea market and give demonstrations. That way the user can decide for him/herself if it is right for him/her.

Don't do that--you get trading standards/inspectors on your back! That would be far worse than a (positive) local news story.

The pros and cons have been discussed on several occassions, but it's good to summarize the debate. We've had stories run in the UK both on local and national level for the past year or so, and it hasn't yet resulted in a backlash. Here it may well mean that we'll build up enough positive energy for a rational debate. Even doctors seem to be in favour of the things.

(On the other hand, I'm nervous about getting the NHS stop smoking service involved because big pharma may roll out its anti-campaign if they see their NRT crap threatened in any way. So I haven't shown the thing to my doc yet. Not that I have any intention of stopping smoking anyway)

If you go with the story, it's important to have the right balance. I think the BBC interviewed both medics and a WHO representative and suppliers/e-smokers, so that all bases were covered. A gushing endorsement followed up with a few anecdotes will likely backfire.

I haven't voted one way or the other, but thank you for asking

 

[Kate]

I don't think I'll vote either, I can't decide.

On one hand there is the risk of bringing unproven products to the attention of authorities.

However, I feel really lucky to have found esmoking even with all its problems and wish all smokers could have an opportunity to benefit. While we're waiting for tests and developments smokers are wrecking their health and spending more.

It's not easy for me in the UK to gauge the situation and potential problems in the US either. The BBC broadcast an article about esmoking recently and a couple of broadsheet newspapers followed. There doesn't seem to have been any negative result so far from the exposure and lots of people found their way here because of it.

If you were in the UK I'd say go for it, all news is good news.

 

[karenwest1961]

No, it's not in our best interest right now.

 

[bribri]

Wait two months, maybe three while more kinks and model upgrades get cleaned up, then it is nearly your duty, and honor to do so. Think of how many lives you might be saving, factually. The reason I say wait a couple is because there is just so many malfunctions, defects, sloppy business practices, misinformation, and unproven theories that it is not time just yet - it potentially could hurt the industry more then help it along. Make no mistake though business practices and product quality are tightening up daily in the industry as we funnel more money and interest into it. In other words, be prepared to back up your argument. Forget about the regulations and prohibition issue that is urban myth IMO. Nothing about the ecig we couldnt do ourselves. you can extract nic easily and fast (though dangerously if not properly done) from cigs, we know the liquid is just silly food flavorings, the batteries and chargers will always be there, the so called "atomizor" is really just a heated coil, and you dont really need the "microprocessor" and LED lights to smoke a basic model.

 

[smokindeuce]

I'm going to go negative on this one.. Like Cash, I think the industry is still far too much in its infancy - there are still too many problems with devices that need ironing out and other issues with liquid safety etc that all need to be sorted before the products can be properly opened up to the mainstream.

For now we can only be very patient guinea pigs for an industry that can and will improve given the chance.

Here's a random analogy to the dilemna:

A new amazing band have recently got together and worked out an album's worth of tunes - their songs are magical, but their live performances aren't very polished.

After a few rehearsals they get a call from there manager: they've been asked to play a 3hr set at Wembley stadium to fill in for U2 who have cancelled last minute. After lots of umming and uhhhring they decide to go for it...

On the night they play their 10 songs to a crowd of over 80,000 people and improvise the rest of the 3 hours set, struggling at times and look completely out of their depth on the whole.... The question is, have they won any new fans over or have they damaged their reputation immeasurably by not honing their skills a little more before playing such a big event?

The band by the way can now be seen playing at their now regular haunt in an underground bar down a back alley in Shanghai doing dodgy cover versions... hard to find and very expensive to see...

 

[Grenage]

I voted no; my reasons being that there is simply no useful data regarding the harm vapourising does or does not do. When and if we have data that could back up claims that it's healthier, sure.

 

[Dale]

Just read a story posted by Mommyshann that the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in the US are already on the case thanks to SmokingEverywhere's alleged health/stop-smoking aid claims.

That tears it... I'm not going to antagonize the .......s. I'll keep my head down and keep quiet... and in the meantime learn how to home-brew juice....

I guess the good news will have to spread person-to-person for now.

Verdict: No story. Thanks for voting.

 

[TropicalBob]

Dale: If it's news, air it. News must ignore consequences. It must. I spent my entire career in news and it would have been hell if I'd had to consider the consequences of everything I wrote. Is it new? Is it true? It is worthy of reader attention? That's all you need to consider.

In fact, a story I wrote ran in the October issue of Smokeshop. This is an industry/trade magazine read by tobacco retailers, Big Tobacco and tobacco growers. Unfortunately, the story cannot be read online, but you can see it in ShokeShop's table of contents: SMOKESHOP 10/08 - Table of Contents

It is a VERY long read, about 20 minutes, covering four pages of the magazine. I interviewed virtually everyone who has anything to do with e-smoking research, including our Dr. Loi and Dr. Laugesen, plus Dr. Brad Radu. It's a positive article, for the most part, leaving open questions of health and legality.

When the BBC does it, when trade magazines have featured it, when numerous local TV stations have demo'ed it on the 5 o'clock news, you should certainly let your news judgment be your guide.

News doesn't poll, by the way. You probably know that. Popularity of opinion isn't a concern. Newsworthiness, accuracy, fairness alone are issues. You should suggest your station do the e-smoking news story and offer it to NPR nationwide.