ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE INDUSTRY : HINDSIGHT, OVERSIGHT, ANO INSIGHT . 1 M. o. Bernacchi, University of Detroit

ABSTRACT~~~~~---,,--~~~ According to CSPI documents, more than 90% of the _O_v_e_r~th~e~l-a_s_t~d~e-c-a~d~e-, there has been growing con- total Anheuser-Busch advertising expenditure in cern about the adverti sing of a l coholic beverages. the measured media was for broadcast ads. (1 , p. 1). This concern increasingly has become more vocal By its own admission, Villa Banfi spent 90% of its and intense and has culmi nated in an attempt to advertising for Riunite on television (8, p. 350). ban a l coholic beverage advertis ing from tele­ vision. Charges and counter-charges have been Old Wine in a New Fl ask l evel ed by both s ides. Neo-prohibitionists c l aim that the effects of advertising are a major con­ "Fitness in a Bottle." tributor to alcohol abuse, alcoholism, a nd a cat­ astrophic increase i n per capita consumption from Alcohol beverage marketing and advertising have 1970 to 1980. Industry spokespeople respond by found new direction since the late 1960 ' s a nd ear ­ saying that they only want to encourage moderate ly 1970 ' s. As the country shifted from one dom­ drinking, have no intention of market expansion, inated by sedentary white males to one which em­ that drinking is on the decline, that there is no phasized the physically fit, racial minorities good evidence concerning the effects of alcoholic and females , so has its alcoholic beverage market­ beverage advertising, and that they have a first ing and advertising. amendment right to advertise, regardless. This paper will examine the issues and data concerning Alcohol marketers are cashing in on the fitness alcohol consumption, abuse, and advertising, the trend in advertising, as ·~ell as in their new pro­ alcohol ad ban proposition and its opposition, duct introductions. Liquor ads show young healthy and the alcoholic beverage industry's varied re­ attractive people enjoying their products. Ron­ action to the ban. Finally, recommendations will rico Rum even shows a shapely young woman enjoying be made concerning the advertising of alcoholic a mixed drink after a workout (6, p . 138). An ad beverages . from the House of Seagrams shows that servings of distilled spirits, beer and wine contain the same amount of alcohol (14 , p. 32) . This is an obvious ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ADVERTISING: ITS STATUS appeal to attract consumers who feel that beer and wine are l ighter and therefore healthier choices How Much Advertising?: More is Better of a l coholi c beverages. Even the scenery used in liquor advertisements is designed to attract the The basic thrust for alcohol marketers has most newly health conscious consumer. Canadian Mist, recently been that more is better. According to for example, uses image advertising which features the center for Science in the Publi c Interest a bottle of the product superimposed over a beaut­ (CSPI) , "the alcoholic beverage industry spends iful scene with water cascading down through the over $1 billion a year encouraging Americans to mountains. Canadian Mist, one of the few com­ drink" (1 , p . 1). CSPI also alleges that "be­ panies in the distilled spirits category to im­ tween 1970 and 1981, the amount spent on alcohol prove its sales, is like other Canadian whiskies, advertising more than tripled, far outdistancing lighter in color and taste. This has allowed a inflation" (1, p. 1) . In addition, individual tie-in to the "light" trend in the alcohol market companies openly admit to spending large amounts (36, pp. 101, 102). of money to advertise just one product. B & B Liquor has spent an estimated 6 to 7 million dol­ Beer and wine advertising pursue the health con­ lars since last year in an effort to bring charm scious consumer with even more vigor. Beer to the brands staid image (28, p. 1). In 1981, commercials show men being "rewarded" with that Miller spent almost $21 million on advertising for special beer if t hey are members of the winning Lowenbrau , and Anheuser-Busch, not to be outdone, team, or after a hard day ' s work (3, p . 348). spent $22 . 4 million promoting Michelob, its ver­ There is even a TV commercial that shows the best sion of the super premium beer (8, p. 350). Villa beer bellies in America. Of course, the "bellies " Banfi spent about $17 million in order to insure are all flat and trim. New light beer and white brand loyalty for Riunite wine (4 2, p. 86) . The wine products with fewer calories and/or lower al­ largest and most successful alcohol marketers are cohol content are flooding the marketplace. These the ones who are spending the most on advertising. products promise not to fill you, while encour­ As a matter of necessity, their competitors are aging consumers to drink more . There are two following suit. Beer and wine advertisers who are problems with this fitness oriented marketing: allowed by most states and professional organiza­ (1) consumers see beautiful people in the ads and tions to advertise on tel evision and radio make the n tend to forget about all of the negative side extensive use of such media. Large portions of effects associated with alcohol consumption; (2) advertising dollars are spent on staying within the ads project a n unspoken promise that if you the sight and hearing of the American consumer. drink this product, you can be like the actors in the ads , attractive, popular, healthy winners . Young people are particularly vulnerable to this 1Associate Professor, Marketing type of adve~tis ing .

143 "You ' ve Come a Long Wax Baby : Women & Minorities;.• 30% between 1970 and 1980" (1, p. 1) . On the other hand, industry sources tell a different story. A Alcohol advert ising is increasing in publications recent Wall Street Journal article quoting industry targeted to reach women and minorities. More and our ces stated that, ';>er capita consumption of more alcohol advertisements are showing up in Work­ most alcoholic beverages, after rising steadily ing Woman (56, p. 80), Jet (53, p. 36), and Ebony during the seventies, has either dropped or leveled (26, p. 35) magazines, for example. It is now more off during the past few years" (30, p. 1). The socially acceptable for women to drink. In addi­ same article makes a specific case for the decline, tion to traditional alcohol, the new light bever­ or, at best, lagging growth of each of the major ages and fruity creamy (III, p. 36) drinks encour­ domponents of the alcoholic beverage industry age women, as well as non-drinkers, to indulge. (beer, wine and clistilled spirits) through the Canadian Mist hired a black-owned advertising agen­ 1980's (30, p . 1). cy to tailor an ad campaign for the black market. The mountains and streams were replaced by a well­ In its petition to the F.T.C. (39, p. 13), the dressed couple next to a bottle of Canadian Mist. CSP! links industry advertising to increased alco­ The caption reads ''Misting is settling for nothing hol consumption, without the support of scientific but the best" (49, p. 103). Spanish language tele­ research. Industry spokesmen and others contend vision and radio, as well as Spanish billboards in that no causal relationship between advertising heavily Latin neighborhoods, attempt to court the and consumption, let alone abuse, has been estab­ Spanish speaking community. lished (21, p. 74). Duncan Cameron, of the Dis­ tilled Spirits Council of the United States "Something Old and Something New." (DISCUS) accuses the CSP! of presenting unsubstan­ tiated opinions on the effects of alcohol adver­ By far the biggest complaint from critics of the tising (25, p. 1). Donald Strictland, a sociology alcohol industry is that advertising targets to professor at Washington University, St. Louis, who vulnerable groups of consumers, namely, young peo­ has conducted extensive research into the question, ple and heavy drinkers (2, 12, 54, 41). Anyone who some of it funded by the U.S. Brewers Association, has ever been on a college campus can attest to the says his studies suggest that alcohol advertising fact that alcoholic beverage advertising, particu­ has had little effect on total consumption. "And larly by brewers, is a daily fact of life. Even I don't see any connection at all between adver­ some in the industry realize that this is a problem. tising and alcohol abuse. " He says further that In a recent speech before the National Soft Drink ~Merchants "has absolutely no scientific merit Association, William Coors of the Adolph Coors Com­ at all. It's simply a case of using selective evi­ pany said, "We should not be on campus. " His com­ dence to support an already-formed opinion" (21, pany would not be, he added , if it weren't a matter p. 74). of survival (41, p. 1). Of course, the majority of brewers would claim that they are not encouraging A recent s tudy attempted to analyze the effects of youth to drink ~· but to drink their particular alcohol advertising on subsequent consumption. brand. However, the fact that some in the industry Consumers in a shopping mall were shown beer adver­ recognize that there is a problem, speaks for it­ tisements, or asked questions about the mall. self. There are some industry programs on campus They were paid with a gift certificate that had to that encourage alcohol awareness, but according to be used immediately for dinner. Their alcohol con­ George Hacker of the CSP!, compared to advertising sumption at the restaurant was then monitored, and and marketing efforts, these programs are only win­ a follow-up telephone interview occurred six to dow dressing (41, p. 2). twelve weeks later. According to this study, the results showed no evidence that the advertising had In its News Release, the CSP! charges t hat the al ­ any immediate or delayed effect on alcohol consump­ cohol beverage industry purposefully targets the tion (52, p. 34). problem drinker in its advertising, aided by life style research into the various attitudes associated Perhaps the intensity, if not the absurdity, of the with problem drinking (25, p. 1). Much industry ad­ r esearch conducted in this area is exemplified by vertising promises to help to reduce stress and a study showing that animals in a lab situation help to reduce stress and help the drinker cope with can learn to relieve stress by drinking, therefore the pressures of life. This type of advertising ex­ demonstrating that stress may contribute to (ani­ ploits the vulnerabilities of the alcohol abuser, mal) alcoholism (4, pp. 300 , 301) without the con­ and tends to reduce the incentive to control con­ tribution of advertising. The underlying theme of sumption (54, p. 2). One response by the industry this research is, of course, that the consumption to this type of charge of irresponsibility is that of alcoholic beverages is a more "national occur­ advertising encourages responsible consumption (31, rence" than previously assumed. p. 12). ALCOHOL : ITS USE , ABUSE, AND EFFECTS These data concerni ng the quantity and quality of alcoholic beverage advertising clearly beg the Consumption Data question as to whether or not and then, if so, to what extent the American purchasing and consuming Data generally support the finding that alcoholic habits of alcoholi c beverages are affected by ad­ beverage consumption grew remarkably fast during vertising. The answer differs depending upon whom the decade of the 1970 ' s from about 21 gallons per is asked. The CSP! reports that, "Sales have fol­ person in 1970 to about 28 gallons in 1980 . Data lowed advertising trends, and that per capita con­ also support the findings that this growth was sumption of alcoholic beverages increased over largely attributable to wine and beer increases

144 both of which have had relatively flat sales on a D.C . organization known as Consumer Sc~ence in the per capita basis since 1980. Light beers and whi~ e Public Interest (CSPI), which has mounted a nation­ wines accounted for a major portion of t he growth al campaign, and has gathered the support of such during the 1970's . groups as Mother s Against Drunk Driving (MADD) ( 21 , p. 74) and Students Against Drunk Driving Incidence of Abuse & Effects (SADD ) . Bills th at would restrict advertising in some manner have been introduced in at least 10 Many author ities consider alcohol to be the number states and the U.S. House of Representatives since one drug problem and number two public health January, and this is a movement that was presumed problem in the United States (22, p. 1). Approxi­ dead just a few years ago ( 21, pp. 72, 1). All mately 14. 7 million Americans abuse or are proposed l egislation is on the presumed relation­ addicted t o alcohol, with one of five t eenagers ship between alcoholic beverage advertising and (14-17) having a drinking problem (32, p. xi). consumption. According to CSP I's George Hacker, Drunk driving causes a pproximatel y 25,000 deaths, "Only a very naive person would argue that the one-half of the traffic fatalities each year (22 , massive amounts of sophisticated and expensive pp. 1, 27, 2), while other alcohol-rel ated acci­ marketing efforts do not tend to whitewash the dents cl aim another 30,000 lives (22, p. 1) . There dangers of alcohol by imbuing alcoholic beverages is increasing evidence that pregnant women should with an image of total harmlessness and by rein­ not drink any alcoholic beverages at all, espe ~ forcing drinking as a social norm. The reaction cially in the early stages of pregnancy, when even of the liquor industry has been one of recognizing small amounts can cause s pontaneous abortion or that they've got problems in this area of marketing low birth weight (35, p. 53). Fetal Alcohol Syn­ and also of denying that their advertising or mar­ drome, found in about 2 percent of babies born to keting has anything to do with al cohol abuse" (23, alcoholic mothers, r esults in defects such as p . 4) . facial abnormalities, growth deficiencies, mental retardation, as we l l as central nervous system di s­ The alcoholic beverage industry, of course, feels orders (3, pp. 354, 17, 53). that the proposed ban is far too restrictive . Al ­ ternatively, they suggest that f urther voluntary The total economic costs to our societ y are stag­ standar ds shoul d be developed and instituted by gering. For exampl e, it has been estimated that and within the alcohol industry (11). There in 1983, the costs for treating alcohol abuse and currently exists a voluntary code; however, this the support (resear ch , etc.) needed to provide only concerns hard liquor broadcast advertising. treatment, exceeded $10 billion with another esti­ It has been stated that either strong adherence to mated $61 billion being consumed by the indirect this standard i s missing or that sel f-regulation costs of alcoholism (premature death and l ost pr o­ fails where an industr y is very competitive. It ductivity) . Other rel ated costs (motor vehicle may also be suggested that besides what s eems to cr ashes, criminal justice, social welfare , those be t he inherent flaws i n self-regulation, is the relat ed to fire, etc.) are est imated t o have ex­ l ikelihood t ha t the standard is no longer appli­ ceeded $10 billion. In totality, these estimates cable. exceed $81 billion f or 1983 (18, p. 27). Still, industry asserts that voluntar y standards can work regarding the marketing and advert ising of THE BAN alcoholic beverages. Indus try proposes the fol low­ ing alternatives: 1 ) Retain the current restric­ Proposition & Opposition: The Issues tions on hard liquor advertising , whi l e restricting remaining product ads to late night hours. 2) With the total costs of, and concerns about, alco­ Change the tone and direction of s ubseuqent adver­ hol consumption being so high, ther e i s an in­ tisements so that drinking i s not portrayed as an creasing number of peopl e and organizations demand­ i ntegral part of a happy self-fulfill ing lifestyle . ing act ion. The re i s general agreement about the Also, mor e emphas i s would be placed on moderation severity of t he probl em. But there is much dis­ messages . agr eement and confusion about the proper solution. The most extreme proposal is the absol ute ban of Most in the industry f eel that such a restri ctive all alcoholic beverage advertising and other pro­ measure as a comprehensive ban is a threat t o their motional efforts f rom television and radio , r emi­ l?irst Amendment right t o use media advertising "as niscent of the tel evision ban of cigarette adver ­ a marke t ing tool for brand selection" ( 37) . En­ tis ing (40 , p. 1) . Thi s sort of ban i s not as for cement of t hese proposed measures , if left t o farfetched as it sounds . The state of Oklahoma voluntary cooperation may , as bef ore , prove rat her currently bans advertising of alcohol i c beve r ages difficult. But as John DeLuca (former direc tor of with more than 3.2% alcohol conten t (this does the N. I.A. A.A.)points out, "It ' s a discu ssi on that allow beer advertisements) on television, radio and needs to get going" (37). print media. In a recent s ui t filed by t he Okla­ homa Telecasters Association, the U. S. Court of Industry Response Appeals, 10th circuit, rul ed in favor of the s t a t es right t o res trict alcohol advertisi ng ( 21 , p. 74). The al cohol i c bever age industry has specifically National ly, only beer and wine producers advertise responsed to t he proposed ban i n one of four ways : on radio and televis ion; dis t illers are l imi ted t o 1) Ignori ng it as being absurd. 2) Denying the print through an industry agreement (30, p. 12) . existence of the cause and effect r el ations hip between advertising and drinking. 3) I mplicit ad­ The strongest proponent of the ban is a Washington , mission of either t he problem of drinking or the

145 existence of the pro-banners by altering marketing nature. The liquor i ndustry views them in a very and/or advertising approaches and themes . 4) Ex­ favorable way because. af ter all , they insist that plicit admission of either the pr oblem of drinking their presence within the h alls of academia is not and/or the pro-ban movement followed by either to encourage non-drinking students to indulge , but funding of alcoholism study and/or suppor ting ed­ rather to influence those of l egal drinking age ucational programs concerning drinking or aggres­ who have made the decision to drink, to use their sively and combatively l obbying against such a ban. product (52, p. 18) .

The four ways in which industry has responded to The aggressive combative response is t ypified by the propos ed ban is almost a phased approa ch with lvilliam Howell, president of Miller Brewing Com­ the initia l phase being a no- public- r esponse phase pany, who has stated that the threat t o ban alco­ (30, p. 12), followed by the deni al phase as wit­ hol advertising i s r eal and tha t the industry must nes s ed in the initial r espons es of industry-wide s t i ck toeether to combat the threa t by lobby ing spokespeople (21). against it at sta t e and l ocal l evels (46, pp . 35 , 55, 12; 43, p.l). Other responses include a modif ica tion of the mar­ keting and advertis ing of al coholic beverages on Other proposed remedies college campus es and the Bacardi Rum b i llboard, There have been sever al l ess extreme alterna tives which has been particularly aggr essive us ing this suggested in lieu of a total ban on television and implicit r ecogniti on s tra t egy . Exampl es of their r adio advertising of alcoholic beverages. Some effort s include: The suppor t of the public ' s alterna tives focus on advertising t o thos e of t he outrage over the carnage caused by dr unk driv ers, most v ulnerable groups of consumers, namely, young as displayed by Seagrams , Bar car di , James B. Beam people and problem drinkers . This str ategy may and Heublein. Par t of their efforts are r efl ected invol ve: 1) banning all adver tisin g that tar gets i n t he holiday ads warning about drinking and these t wo gr oups; 2) r egulating t he content of driv ing ( 20, p. 20) . - $1 milli on worth of air t hese ads ; 3) banning pr omot ional activities on time has been spent by the "Fr iends Don 't Let college campuses . Ther e is some scientifi c evi ­ Friends Drive Drunk" . Mor e than 3,000 bi llboards dence tha t liquor advertis ing i ncreases a l cohol have been posted as well (44, p. 48). -The Times consumption among adol escents (37, p. 45). I n­ Square-New Year ' s Eve neon sign whcih says, "Don't creasing anti - alcohol advertising i s another less drive after drinki ng" (37, p . 21) . - Ad spots in ext reme a lternative. (In t he ar ea of cigarette conj unction with the NFL featuring , for example, advertising "anti-smoking commer cials tended to Drew Pearson, who i nvites parents and their chil­ reduce per capita consumpti on approximately two dren to sign a contr act for life t hat t hey will t imes as much as cigaret t e advertising tended t o neither dr ive when drunk nor be a passenger with a increase it" (7, p . 49) . Compulsory health warn­ driver who has been drinki ng (20) . i ngs on t he l abels of alcoholic beverages would presumably a l so be benefici al (21, p. 74) . Supporting the study of alcoholism and/or educa­ tional programs about drinking appear to be the Th is last group of alternati ves woul d attack the most popular at t he present t i me . Some examples r esults of alcohol-r elated problems , rather than of t hese t ypes of explicit admission r esponses t he presumed cause (adver t i sing). I t has also been foll ow: suggested t hat alcoholi c bev er age t axes be in­ creased (38, p. 74 ) with t he resultant money being - Adolph Coor is financiall y backing a test pro­ made availabl e to study, as well as combat , t he gram at the Colorado School Mines in Colorado that problems of alcohol consumption. Secondly, t he emphasizes wellness activities. The reasoning be­ i ncreased pri ce would hopefully decrease sales. hi nd it is that if students exerci se and eat the Finally , a concentrated movemen t to t oughen penal­ r i ght foods, t hey will not be likely to abuse a t ies for drunk dr iving, in addition t o r aising the pr oduct l ike beer (52, p. 18). - The St roh Brewery nation' s dr i nking age to 21 , would redu ce t hat par­ is financing a Miami (0. ) Univer sity project that ticular problem. involves putting together an alcohol abuse program (52, p. 18) . - Complete support for campus organ­ izations (like BACCHUS) t hat are working on guide­ DISCUSSION/RECOMMENDATIONS l ines to ensure t hat campus alcohol standards wil l be upheld, whi le at the same time allowing beer The Reality of t he Ban: An Evaluation companies their right to market t heir product in a free societ y. These quidelines will s uggest that Generally speaking, ad bans have not worked very campus adver tising not por tray drinking as a solu­ well regard less of t he legisl at ive-enforcemen t­ t ion t o personal or academic problems for stud ents , politi cal system. There is s1.1bs t antial evidence or as necessar y t o soci al, sexual or a cademic suc­ that Ea s tern European coutries which have banned cess (52, p . 18). ~ The Stroh Brewery has been an alcohol advertising have not exper ienced a con­ ins trumental con tribut or and s uppor ter of a pro­ commi t ant reduc tion i n al coholism or alcohol misuse/ gram to educat e Michigan bartender s to determine abuse. when a pa tron has had t oo much to drink and how to bes t deny patrons further drinks when they have Similarly, the evidence i s very persuas ive that had too much , without damaging their patronage (SO, bans have not worked well in our political sys tem. p. 12). We are a society that cherishes both pers onal and collective freedom. At.tempts to ban books and "the Whether these programs are viewed as genuine in bombs " have not been very successful, and the track effort or just cosmetic , is purely subject ive in record of actual bans as exemplified by Prohibition

146 and the cigarette advertising ban, is very poor. eluding alcohol abu~e experts and maybe even re­ covering alcoholics as gate keepers, with the pur­ pose of the.JI) being a con$cienee regardtng the ad­ Our political system favors industry because of its powerful lobbying potential. Secondly, there advertising of their products. This recommenda­ is not nearly enough scientific proof that clearly tion is based on the severity of this country's establishes any type of real cause and effect re­ alcohol problem, as well as the enormity of its lationship between advertising and alcoholic bev­ economic and social costs. erage consumption. Thirdly, if only television or the electronic media were involved, advertisers - The industry should be conscious of prime alco­ would likely shift their ad expenditures to the holic beverage consumption seasons (holidays, for print media. (Also, see discussion of cigarette example), and allocate a certain proportion of the ad ban below.) They would likely get their message ad dollars towards aggressively advertising moder­ across even if they had to go door to door. There ation. (Some efforts have been made in this---are;;\). is always some way to circumvent any restrictions. For example, Seagrams gets television exposure - The industry must selectively demarket (i.e., whenever it advertises its non-alcoholic mixers known abusers, pregnant women, and the underaged) (42, p. 70). And finally, there is evidence that by making certain that their ads are neither di­ alcohol consumption is decreasing without benefit rected to, nor disproportionately appeal to, those of the ban (35, p . 110). segments and/or counter-advertise to those markets. (Some of these efforts have been initiated. ) Perhaps, the most persuasive argument against the alcoholic beverage ad ban is our most recent ex­ - The industry should continue its alcohol abuse perience with the cigarette ad ban. and/or alcoholism research efforts.

Cigarette Advertising: A Lesson Learned or - The industry should become very involved in ed­ Spurned? ucating all segments of the public concerning alcoholic beverages and their consumption. The effects of the ban on cigarette advertising offers useful insight as to the possible outcome The key to the aforementioned "joint responsibility" of an alcohol advertising ban. That ban was ex­ is the educational recommendation. Consumers must pected to have a beneficial effect for the anti­ b~ taught to become responsible drinkers and to be­ smoking movement; however, per capita consumption come involved in assuring that all earlier recom­ of cigarettes increased immediately following the mendations are activated. Their active involvement ban and generally continued upward during the dec­ and participation should provide a healthier envir­ ade of the 1970's (43, p. 46). Additionally, the onment for both themselves and the alcoholic bev­ anti-smoking movement lost both its agressiveness erage industry. and the powerful forum of television. After the industry invoked the ban in 1971 , the number of Th e success of this educa tional r ecommendation and anti-smoking television spots fell dramatically joint responsibility depends on the willingness of (43 , p. 47). the alcoholic beverage industry to match their advertising intensity and r esources with similar Finally, the ban caused a re-allocation of media educationa l intensity and r esources. expenditures for the advertising of cigarettes. This re-allocation meant greater usage of print media with its greater t ar geting potential and a REFERENCES much enhanced cost efficiency for cigarette adver­ tising (43, p. 48) . At the v ery least, these re­ 1 . ''Alcohol Advertising and Marketing Fact Sheet." s ults suggest that a total ad ban might be counter­ Center for Science in the Public Interest, productive to those who most desire it. At the (alcohol promotion). most, they suggest a possible boomerang or back­ lash effect. 2. "Alcoholic Beverage Advertising FTC Activity." Center for Science in the Public Interest, Selective Demarketing , Education, Research and (targeting problem drinkers). Common Sense: A Matter of Joint Responsibility 3. "Alcohol in Perspective. " Consumer Reports , Since the middle 1960's, many volumes have been July, 1983. Vol. 48, No. 7, (beer as a reward). written concerning social corporate responsibility, pp. 348-51. but not much has been written about joint responsi­ bility between the corporation and the consumer. 4. ''Alcoholics as Social Drinkers: Benchmark The area of alcoholic beverage advertising demands Study Attacked as Fraud." Science News, July this focus. 10. 1982 . Vol. 122, No. 2, p . 20 .

The alcoholic beverage industry must consider 5. "Alcohol Researchers Cleared of Fraud. " becoming an industry which is able to speak with Science News, Nov. 13, 1982. Vol. 122, No. 20, one voice as opposed to the voices of its autono­ (still a faulty theory). p. 311. m~us components (beer, wine and distilled spirits) 1 1 with each having its own set of ethical rules and 6. 'A Long Race for Fitness Marketers. ' Marketing standards. & Media Decisions, March 1984. Vol. 19, No. 3, (the fitness appeal). pp. 60, 61, 138. - The industry and/or its firms must consider in-

147 7. "Americans Drink Less and Makers of Alcohol 26. "I could go for something Gordon's." Ebony, Feel a Little Woozy . " The Wall Street Journal, August, 1974. p. 35 . Wednesday, March 14, 1984. pp. 1, 12. 27. Jervey, Gay . "Moosehead Charges Ahead. " 8. "Beer Advertising: Coming Through for You? " Advertising Age, April 23, 1984. Vol. 55, Consumer Reports, July, 1983. Vol. 48, No. 7. No . 18 . pp . 1, 115 . pp . 348-51. 28. Jervey, Gay . "Liquor Tries Charm." Adver­ 9. "Before the Federal Trade Conunission United tising Age, May 3, 1984. Vol. 55, No~ States of America." P · 1.

10. "Call Goo d Taste by its First Name." Jet, 29. "Letter from George A. Hacker." Center for June 4, 1984. Vol. 66, No. 13. p. 36-.~ Science in the Public Interest .

11. "Can Brewers Mobilize in Time Against TV Ban? " 30. "Make 21 the Nationwide Legal Age for Drink­ Advertising Age, Oct. 3, 1983. p. 1. ing." U. S. News & World Report, Jan. 30, 1984. Vol. 96, p. 54. 12. "Consumer Group Charges Industry Aims Alcoho­ lic Beverage Ads at Problem Drinkers. " Center 31 . "Maybe You're Teaching Them More Than You for Science in the Public Interest. Realize." Maclean's, Aug. 15, 1983. Vol. 96, No. 33. p . 12. 13. Dawson, Kitty. "Seagrams Soft Drinks: A New Media Mixer. " Marketing & Media Decisions, 32. "National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Al­ April, 1983. pp . 70-1, 114. coholism. " Third Special Report. p. xi.

14. Co llins, William. "Definition of Alcohol." 33. "National Organizations Demand Restrictions Webster's New World Dictionary. World Pub­ on Alcohol Ads. " lishing Co., Inc., 1974. p. 32. 34. "No Social Drinking for Pregnant Women. " 15. "Distill ers Must Cope with a Sobering Future. " Science News, July 25, 1981. Vol. 120, No. 4. Business Week, May 2, 1983. No. 2788. pp . 110, p . 53 . 112. 35. "Not Everybody Drinks Rum , White Wine or 16. "Drinking and Driving: A Serious Public Perrier. " Marketing & Media Decisions, Spring Health Problem." Consumer Reports , July, 1984 , Special Issue. pp. 101-4. 1983. Vol. 48, No. 7. p. 353 . 36. "Officials As k Broadcast Ban on Liquor Ads ." 17. Eisler, D. "A Lifting of a Liquor Ban. " Bever age Industry, Oct. 1981. MaCleans ' , October 3, 1983. Vol. 96, No. 40. p. 45. 37. "Paralyzed Teen Asks Reagan to Combat Drunken Driving ." Detroit Free Press, Thurs., June 18. Fein, R. Alcohol in America:, The Price We Pay, 21, 1984. Vol. 154, No. 48. p. lA, 6A. Care Institute, 1984. p. 27 . 38. "Petition to the Federal Trade Commission." 19. Gay, Verne. "Media. " Marketing & Media De­ Nov. 21, 1983 . pp. 1-2. cisions, Spring, 1984, Special Issues. 39. Popcorn, Faith. "The New Femininity. " Mar­ 20 . Gay, Jerry. "Alcoholism Ad Support on the keting Communi cations, May 1984. Vo l . 9-,~ Rocks. " Ad Age, J une 1983. p. 21. No . 5. pp. 15-18.

21. Hacker, Geor ge and Michael Jacobson, Donald 40 . "Pressure Mounting to Curtail Liquor Adver­ B. Shea. "Banning Beer Ads on TV and Radio. t• tising." Advertising Age, July 18, 1983 . The Sun, Sat. August 6, 1983 . p p . 1, 74.

22. Hacker, George A. "The High Cost of Excessive 41. Reilly , I. 0. "New Insi ghts into Alcoholism. " Drinking ." The Sun, Wed. November 23, 1983. Time, Apri l 25 , 1983. Vol . 121, No . 17. p.88. 23 . Hi.ggins, Kevin. "Debate Rages Over Marketing and Alcohol Problems." Market ing News, Sept. 42 . "Riunite' s Bubb ly Rises to the Top of the Wine 30, 1983. Vol. 17, No. 20. pp. 1, 4. Market." Marketing & Media Decisions , Spring 1984, Special I ssue. pp. 85-7. 24 . Higgins, Devin. "Natural Highs in Natural Habitats. " Science News, Nov. 25, 1983. 43 . "Should You Drink if You're Pregnant?" Vol . 124, No. 19. PP• 300-1. MaClean ' s, December 12, 1983. Vo l. 96, No. 50 . p . 1. 25. Hume, Scott. "L. A. Label Starts Brewer War." Advertising Age, April 23 , 1984. Vol. 55 , 44 . Smith, Bob. "Meeting of t he Minds for Wine No. 18. p. 115 • & Spirits." Marketing Media, Feb. , 1984. p. 48.

148 45. "Side by Side Comparison of Key Provisions of USDA Dietary Guidelines for Alcoholic Bever­ age Consumption. " Center for Science in the Public Interest. 46. "Surprised?" Time, July 9, 1984. Vol. 124, No. 2. p. 35.

47. "Stay Sober." The Wall Street Journal, Mon. July 2, 1984. Vol. 64, No. 182. p . 14.

48. Stroud, Ruth. "Miller Yanks - It's 'Super"; Hudepohl Takes Chance. " Advertising Age, April 9, 1984 . Vol. 55, No. 16. p. 2.

49. "The Black Market." Marke ting & Media De­ cisions , Spring, 1984, Special Issue. p. 103.

50 . Teel, Sandra J., Jesse E. Teel and William O'Bearden. "Lessons Learned from the Broad­ cast Cigarette Advertising Ban. " Journal of Marketing, Jan. 1979. pp. 45-50.

51. "TMA Program. " Detroit Free Press, Nov. 15, 1984. p . 12.

52. "Trouble is Brewing on Campus. 11 Advertising ~. Jan. 16, 1984.

53. "Twice Light." Advertising Age, April 9, 1984. Vol. 55 , No. 16. pp. 1, 6, 63.

54. "United States Government Memorandum Investi­ gations of Anheuser-Bush, Inc. in Unfair Ad­ vertising Practices. " Sept. 3 , 1981.

55. "What Calls Itself ' Old' is Growing Rapidly, and Has a New Caring Parent?" Marketing & Media Decisions, Spring 1984, Special Issue. pp . 53 , 56.

56. "What' s a Special Evening Without a Little Magic?" Working Woman, April, 1983. p. 80 .

57. Will, G. F. "Is the ACLU Being Reasonable?" Jan. 31, 1983. Vol . 101. p. 80.

58. "Will Liquor Break the Broadcast Barrier?" Marketing & Media Decisions, Sept. 1982. Vol . 17, No. 9. pp. 66-7, 197.

149