The Problem

There is strong scientific data indicating a direct correlation between the depiction of smoking in motion pictures and the initiation of smoking by adolescents.

Four recent studies have provided the impetus for shareholders to act.  

• The most important evidence has been provided by a Dartmouth Medical School study, released last year, which found that teens who viewed movies with smoking are three times more likely to start smoking. Controlling for all other factors, the study found that those teens who saw the most smoking in movies over that period were three times more likely to start smoking than those who saw the least.   (For the pdf text of this study, click here) 

• A second study, released in July in the journal Pediatrics, found that 14% of the teens free to watch tobacco-intensive R-rated movies took up smoking, compared to 3% of teens whose parents barred them from viewing R-rated fare.   (For the abstract of this study, click here. The full text can be obtained for a fee)

• A third study done by the University of California , San Diego demonstrated that girls whose favorite stars smoke are more likely to begin smoking. It also documented an 80% increase in the share of estimated tobacco impressions delivered to theater audiences by youth-rated as opposed to R-rated movies between 1999 and 2003.   (For the full version of this study, click here)

• A fourth recent study released in July by the Harvard School of Public Health reports a decade of “ratings creep,” finding that content once concentrated in R-rated films, including smoking, is increasingly found in films rated PG and PG-13. (For the full version of this study, click here. The article requires free registration)

It is now apparent that Hollywood is a powerful channel for promoting tobacco addiction to adolescents, whether done consciously or not. In a commentary accompanying the Dartmouth study, a public health expert estimates that at least half of all new young smokers — 390,000 every year — are recruited by portrayals of smoking in films. Ultimately, 100,000 of each year’s recruits will die from tobacco-related disease. This toll from kids’ exposure to smoking on screen will exceed all current annual U.S. deaths from murder, suicide, illegal drug use, drunk driving and HIV/AIDS combined.

The Solution

We are not calling for any censorship of movie content.  We are proposing four actions to help to resolve this problem:

• Rate any movie with smoking “R.”
• Run anti-smoking ads before screening movies with smoking in theaters.
• Certify in movie credits that no one in the production received payments or anything of value from tobaccos companies or their agents.
• Stop identifying specific brands on screen.

Rate any movie with smoking “R.”

Our main recommendation is for movie studios to utilize the current ratings system implemented by The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) to provide parents the opportunity to exercise control over what their children view.  In short, we are asking studios to change the rating, not the content.

The most effective and most sustainable way to reduce youth exposure to on screen smoking is to rate movies R that depict smoking—with a couple of important exceptions.  The MPAA administers this voluntary system on behalf of the studios and companies that own them; the government is not involved.  James D. Sargent, M.D., co-author of the Pediatrics study cited above, has concluded  "If you combined parental R-rated movie restriction with an R-rating for smoking you could have a particularly powerful means of preventing teens from trying smoking.”

Major health organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and the World Health Organization have all urged the MPAA to rate future on-screen smoking “R,” as it now rates offensive language, excessive violence or explicit sexual content.

The tobacco industry tells us smoking should be an adult choice.  This option allows parents to decide how much to expose children to on-screen smoking until they reach 17 years of age.

Run anti-smoking ads before screening movies with smoking in theaters

Screening anti-smoking trailers before films depicting smoking has shown to have a demonstrated deterrent effect. These should be spots developed by anti-smoking groups or states, not tobacco companies.

Certify in movie credits that no one in the production received payoffs

For many years paid tobacco placement in films were routine. The 1998 Master Settlement Agreement between tobacco companies and the government bars tobacco firms from paid brand product placement. But unbranded smoking (the bulk of smoking on screen) is a gray area and offshore and in-kind arrangements are as hard to prove as to disprove. It is unclear that any government agency is taking steps to clearly enforce this ban. Going on record in a movie’s credits would make movie producers accountable for any continuing collusion within their production companies.

Stop identifying specific brands on screen

Tobacco brands on screen convey nothing except a star endorsement. Signage and other brand collateral were significant parts of explicit brand placement in the 1970s and 1980s. At the urging of state attorneys general, some tobacco firms have publicly stated that they do not condone use of their trademarks in movies. But they have also signaled studios that they will take no legal action. From magazine ads to transit posters to stockcars, all U.S. media are now largely free of tobacco branding where young people would encounter it. G, PG and PG-13 movies are a glaring exception. If movie producers are not getting compensated to display specific brands, there should be no reason to display a specific brand.