Tobacco ads must admit to lies
WASHINGTON — A federal judge on Tuesday ordered tobacco companies to publish corrective statements admitting they lied about the dangers of smoking and to disclose smoking's health effects, including the deaths of about 1,200 daily.
U.S. District Judge Gladys Kessler had said she wanted the industry to pay for corrective statements in various types of advertisements. For the first time, she laid out what the statements will say.
Each corrective ad must be prefaced by a statement that a federal court has concluded that the defendant tobacco companies “deliberately deceived the American public about the health effects of smoking.”
Among the required statements are that smoking kills more people than murders, AIDS, suicides, drugs, car crashes and alcohol combined. Ads must also include that “second-hand smoke kills over 3,000 Americans a year.”
The corrective statements are part of a case the government brought in 1999 under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations. Kessler ruled in that case in 2006 that the nation's largest cigarette makers concealed the dangers of smoking for decades and said she wanted the industry to pay for “corrective statements” in various types of ads, both broadcast and print.
The Justice Department proposed corrective statements, which Kessler used as the basis for some of the ones that she ordered Tuesday.
Tobacco companies had urged Kessler to reject the government's proposed industry-financed corrective statements. They call them “forced public confessions,” adding that the statements are designed to “shame and humiliate” them.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.