Bean Heather at Stuff reports:
A tobacco giant is being accused of illegally advertising cigarettes under the guise of a “public awareness campaign”.
The Health Ministry has received 14 complaints against British American Tobacco New Zealand’s “agree/disagree” campaign opposing plain packaging.
The complainants say the company’s campaign – which has included television, radio and print ads – breaches the tobacco advertising ban.
But the ministry has disagreed, with chief legal adviser Phil Knipe claiming that there were “insufficient grounds to support enforcement action at this time”.
Of course the complaints went nowhere. The ban on advertising of tobacco is designed to stop marketing of cigarettes – not designed to stop a company from voicing its opinion on a regulatory issue. I suspect those who complained know that.
As it happens I think the BAT campaign is stupid, and in fact likely to be counter-productive to their cause. So don’t think I am defending the campaign. But BAT have the right to voice their concerns over a proposed law.
The name of the company is very different to the name of a cigarette brand. I doubt 99% of those who smoke a BAT cigarette know whom BAT is.
Advertising Standards Authority chief executive Hilary Souter said she had also received complaints calling the campaign illegal, all of which had been referred to the ministry.
“Whether or not the ad is a tobacco ad is outside our mandate,” she said.
On Friday, the authority also dismissed five complaints against British American Tobacco (BAT) regarding other aspects of its campaign. Most complainants felt the campaign was misleading, confusing facts with opinions.
One complainant called it “an attack on the sovereignty of political discourse in New Zealand”.
Actually those trying to suppress the rights of free speech are the real attack on the sovereignty of political discourse.