Controlling the Tobacco Barons in South Africa Why the Framework Convention is necessary

By Peter Mann, Chief Executive, Meropa Communications World Health Organisation Change Agents for the “Don’t be Duped” campaign ------

Meropa Communications is the leading public relations consultancy in South Africa with some 50 staff and an equal number of blue-chip clients – ranging from the Merrill Lynch’s of the world to British Airways.

I say this not to be boastful but to indicate the seriousness of the issue with which we are dealing and to illustrate our company’s commitment to this cause.

We will no longer take tobacco money. It is with some embarrassment that I acknowledge that, at the behest of our then UK parent, we once did. It was an extraordinary experience. Because the UK company represented them around the world we were required to be part of the service and placed on a handsome retainer. Yet, they seldom asked us to do any work.

Only once was I asked to arrange a meeting with an editor. I am pleased to say the level of hostility I encountered was such that the meeting never took place.

Why will we no longer take tobacco money and why have we approached the WHO to become an active participant in the Don’t be Duped campaign?

We sat as an agency and watched the tobacco barons trying to undermine the South African Government’s laudable anti-smoking regulations.

We sat and watched what appeared to be deliberate campaigns aimed at various disadvantaged South African market segments – namely, blacks, women and youth.

We have termed what they are doing “apartheid advertising” and we think it is going on, on a global front.

The argument seems to be that tobacco is a lost cause in the first world, where the protest has a strong base, especially in Europe and the United States. There, the debate is about resisting the class actions, admitting a little bit of liability, trying to undermine the political will to act – a sort of “our lawyers are bigger than your lawyers” approach which will at best slow down the regulatory process while seeming to co-operate. It aims of course to drag the process out for as long as possible – allowing the lucrative market to continue.

But tobacco companies seem not to have admitted defeat in the developing world. “Apartheid Advertising” propounds a completely different strategy for Africa and I guess for parts of Asia and China as well.

Here the market is still under-developed and wide open – particularly among the emerging middle classes who are aspirational and model their lifestyle on US culture.

It is no accident that British American Tobacco published a special paid-for advertorial supplement in four centres in one of South Africa’s leading daily newspapers celebrating the first year of what they called their “hugely successful merger”. In it Jacques Kruger, the managing director, disclosed some alarming statistics about the industry in South Africa. Among them are:

estimated annual sales of cigarettes 5 500 billion;
BAT has 16% of the market share of the total cigarette market in South Africa and is neck and neck with Phillip Morris which has 17%;
BAT South Africa produces more than 28 billion cigarettes per year across the Peter Stuyvesant, Rothmans, Dunhill, Benson & Hedges and Lucky Strike brands;
Alarmingly South Africa is the second-largest contributor, behind the US to the group’s overall trading profits.
Incidentally, the annual roundtripping – smuggling back of cigarettes declared for export – of top brands, including BAT’s Rothmans, Peter Stuyvesant and B&H, is estimated at USD 300m, or 20% of the legal trade.

So, what does Mr Kruger see as his largest problem? “Demonisation” of his industry by people like you and I. He says that his products are legal and meet the highest quality control standards – “despite attempts by Government and lobbyists to somehow portray them as unacceptable”.

BAT’s South African legal advisor, Abrie du Plessis, suggests that the tobacco debate goes back to 1604 when King James I published ‘A Counterblast to Tobacco’.

His thesis is that ever since then – in one way or another some misguided activist has been whining about them. “We want to focus the tobacco debate on its essence – which is that we market a legal product which is enjoyed by millions of consumers who choose to smoke, because, for them, the pleasure they derive from smoking outweighs the health concerns associated with it,” he said.

Given that South Africa is the second largest generator of profit for BAT after the US, it is little wonder that the battle is being hard fought in our region. We saw the tobacco industry launch huge surrogate campaigns, backed by the ad industry and some media owners, under the guise of the Freedom of Commercial speech.

We saw huge, in-your-face ad campaigns aimed at making smoking “cool” particularly to the “apartheid” victims mentioned above.

Research we commissioned of the tobacco advertising spend in the local media shows, for example, a difference in advertising in so-called black and white magazines. The “black” ads all sell stronger cigarettes and very few companies show their packs with the health warning displayed – possibly an attempt to downplay health risks.

Due to Government pressures as well as a growing reluctance by print and electronic media owners to accept tobacco advertising, the total measurable advertising spending has experienced a steady decline. In 1997, the year the National Association of Broadcasters decided not to flight any more tobacco advertisements on radio, total advertising spend approximated USD 25 million and has fallen to USD 7 million for the first half of 2000. However, tobacco companies have channelled surplus funds into targeted promotions – especially addressing the youth market with in-your-face, rebellious messages through tertiary education events and sponsorships.

Yet, BAT’s Abrie du Plessis says: “We focus all our marketing activity exclusively on adult smokers. While we acknowledge that children see advertising, we do not aim advertising at children and do not believe that advertising plays a significant role in children starting to smoke.”

This flies in the face of what we know. Studies by the South African Medical Research Council have shown that South African children as young as 7 can name cigarette brands. There is a huge amount of advertising to the youth market. Apart from advertising in student and youth magazines, promotional spend has been put behind “cool” events, music, raves, Peter Stuyvesant “Space” expeditions, secret Lucky Strike bashes, attractive young people who offer and light cigarettes in clubs and so on. Presumably BAT views these youngsters as “adult’ smokers which is somewhat adventurous with reality.

This apart, all South Africans – black and white, young and old – are being deluged by a massive outdoor campaign by Benson & Hedges and lately by Peter Stuyvesant. The visibility of outdoor advertising on major transport routes has increased drastically, supported by a rise in outdoor advertising spend from USD 2.5m in 1998 to USD 1.65m for the first half of 2000 – and so, if projected for the entire current year, may reach USD 3.31m – or almost half of the total spend.

All of this has been backed by a massive lobbying campaign to try and ameliorate the regulations. Government departments representing the sports industry, the hospitality industry, agriculture, and trade and industry have been lobbied in an attempt to stop or water down the legislation.

It was for this reason that we decided to get involved. We know that it is vital to try and help shape public opinion, that we need to exhort ordinary members of the public to action, that we need to counter tobacco industry lobbying and that we need to offer our support as strategists.

So part of our work will be to help publicise the “apartheid advertising” onslaught. To make consumers aware they are being manipulated.

We will help round up the “choir” of serious opinion – the researchers, the academics, the medical experts & the business people who will support the Tobacco Products Control Act and its regulations. For example, faced with complaints that the regulations will damage the hospitality industry, we have tracked down a tavern/nightclub owner in Soweto who is doing roaring business precisely because he does not allow smoking in his establishment. We will also communicate the results of studies, which show that reducing smoking increases consumer spending in other sectors of the economy.

We will engage the media and editors to explain the purpose of the Act and the background to it.

We will continue to help Government publicise the regulations and we will, if needed, act as lobbyists against the tobacco industry. We are greatly encouraged by the news that due to the South African Department of Health decree that bans tobacco association with sport, the Rothmans brand has withdrawn its support for our Soccer Cup, while the ex-Gunston 500 surfing competition has already found a new sponsor, a trendy retail clothing chain.

So, to the 100 000 teenagers around the world, who light their first cigarette every day of the year, we say “Tobacco kills – don’t be a sucker”.