MASCOT Reviews:
Training Day with Academy Award winner Denzel Washington
Charlie's Angels featuring Cameron Diaz
Art of War starring Wesley Snipes
3000 Miles to Graceland featuring Kevin Costner
'In the Bedroom' Is Leader of the Cigarette Pack

Fans of DiCaprio, Stone and Travolta, who each smoked in three or more films, were 16 times likelier to express a favourable opinion about smoking than those who chose "non-smoking" stars. "Mass media portrayals of smoking among favoured movie stars contribute to adolescent smoking which is, in turn, a causal link in what remains the leading cause of premature death and the number one preventable public health problem in the developed world," the researchers write.

I recently watched an episode of a TV show I have enjoyed for several months. It is a medical series, well done and very interesting, but I will not watch it again. The reason? During the show, which is fictional, four of the doctors were having a conversation in a medical setting. Two of the doctors were nonchalantly smoking cigarettes. . .

What you have just described is a subtle form of "product placement." Whether or not the brand of the cigarette was shown, it was, nevertheless, a clever endorsement of smoking by someone portraying a medical professional.

This is reprehensible, to put it politely. . .

I hope others who notice this sort of product placement will write to the people who produce and sponsor the show and let them know how they feel about it.

LONDON (Reuters) - Hollywood stars who smoke in films encourage young fans to do the same, according to a new U.S. study published on Friday. And despite a ban on tobacco companies paying film-makers to place their products in the movies, there is no sign that the practice is becoming less common, according to the research published in the British medical journal, The Lancet.

Doctors led by James Sargent of the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center in Lebanon, New Hampshire, looked at the 25 top U.S. box office releases for the years 1988 to 1997 -- 250 movies in total. They found that more than 85 percent of the films featured tobacco use and specific tobacco brands appeared in 28 percent of the movies.

Tobacco brands appeared in almost as many films suitable for adolescent audiences as for adults.
Among films suitable for youngsters that featured tobacco brands the researchers singled out Ghostbusters II, Home Alone 2 (Lost in New York), Honey I Shrunk the Kids, Kindergarten Cop, Men in Black, My Best Friend's Wedding, The Nutty Professor and Volcano.

The researchers also compared films produced before the 1989 voluntary ban on paid product placement by the tobacco industry and those made afterwards. Overall, there was no change in the prevalence of tobacco brand appearances as a result of the ban and there was a "striking increase" in endorsement of brands in films by actors.

Before the ban, these actor endorsements occurred in one percent (1%) of films, while after the ban this rose to eleven percent (11%). The study suggested that despite the ban on paid product placement, "the tobacco industry might continue to pay directly or through in-kind payments for placement of its brands in films."

Four U.S. cigarette brands accounted for 80 percent of brand appearances in the movies.
"Tobacco-brand appearances are common in films and are becoming increasingly endorsed by actors," the study said.

"The most highly advertised U.S. cigarette brands account for most brand appearances, which suggests an advertising motive to this practice."

The article printed several pictures from films where actors could be seen endorsing Marlboro cigarettes, including Julia Roberts in My Best Friend's Wedding. Tobacco-control advocates are concerned about the depiction of tobacco use on screen because of the potential effect it could have on adolescents starting and carrying on smoking," the researchers said. They said that studies had shown "an association between on-screen smoking in an adolescent's favorite movie actor and his or her own smoking behavior."

Cigarettes are still prominently displayed in films, despite a voluntary ban on "product placements" a decade ago, say researchers. A study of the top 25 US box office films each year from 1988 to 1997 found the use of actors to promote cigarette brands had increased ten-fold.

The researchers say it is uncertain whether film makers are flouting the ban, or if certain brands are used to add realism to the film. Anti-smoking campaigners in the UK said they believe the tobacco companies were finding ways around the restrictions.

Researchers from Dartmouth Medical School, New Hampshire, looked at how often the brand name, logo or trademark was seen, and how often actors were seen handling or smoking certain brands.

Celluloid smoking
85% contained tobacco use
28% included tobacco brands
32% of films aimed at teenagers included brand placements compared to 35% of those for adult audiences
They appeared in 20% of children's film
Actor endorsement increased from 1 - 11% of branch appearance
Four US brands made up 80% of appearances

There are as many product placements for top tobacco brands after as before the 1990 ban. The researchers say the increasing prevalence of just a few brands suggest they are being actively advertised. The placements reach an international audience, with revenues outside the USA accounting for 49% of the total income for the films studied.

Only one previous study has involved the assessment of tobacco-brand placement. It did not report an increasing trend in tobacco brand use between 1985 and 1995.

Dr James Sargent led the research, which found a quarter of the 250 films studied featured recognisable brands. Marlboro cigarettes accounted for 40% of the brands depicted in films, including My Best Friend's Wedding, Men in Black and Volcano. The appearance of cigarette brands in films, especially when endorsed by actors, is no different from other forms of cigarette advertising.

One in five films aimed at children had some kind of "brand apppearance", including Home Alone 2 starring Macaulay Culkin, and Honey, I Shrunk the Kids. Dr Sargent said: "The appearance of cigarette brands in films, especially when endorsed by actors, is no different from other forms of cigarette advertising. "Any country that uses advertising restrictions to control tobacco use should restrict this practice."

Dr Sargent said: "Actor endorsement of a cigarette brand associates a type of person with that brand. "As viewers assimilate these attitudes towards tobacco use become more favourable." He said there was concern about the depiction of tobacco use on screen because of the potential effect it could have on teenagers' smoking habits.

Dr Sargent added: "The concern is the same for populations in countries where US tobacco products are heavily marketed, and where people are receptive to the advertising message, for whom films present a seductive, affluent, imaginary world."

Before the 1990 ban, tobacco companies paid tens of thousands of pounds to place their cigarettes in the hands of a film's star. But the code is only voluntary and does not stop films featuring cigarette brands, just payment for endorsements.

Amanda Sandford, research manager for Action on Smoking and Health (ASH) said: "Although paid product placement of cigarette brands was supposed to have ended in the late 1980s, it looks as though tobacco companies are still using actors to advertise their brands.

Amanda Sandford of ASH: "Marketing tool"
"Branded products don't just appear by accident - a lot of planning goes into what products appear in films and who will be using them. "The finger of suspicion points towards a tobacco industry campaign to get round other marketing restrictions."

She said the presence of tobacco brands in films aimed at children "makes a mockery" of the tobacco industry's claims it is not targeting the youth market. The research is published in The Lancet.

There is widespread coverage of a new report published in The Lancet. The Guardian reports that, 'Hollywood actors are increasingly endorsing cigarette brands in films, leading to allegations by medical researchers that the movie and tobacco industries might be flouting a ban on payments for "product placements" in films. The use of actors to promote the most popular tobacco brands has increased tenfold since the voluntary ban was introduced in the US in 1990.

The Guardian further reports, 'The findings have alarmed anti-smoking groups. Studies have shown that smoking by teenagers is strongly influenced by the use of tobacco by their favourite actor. "Tobacco companies know full well that kids are going to see these films and this is probably a deliberate tactic to target the youth market," said Amanda Sandford, research manager for the charity Action on Smoking and Health.

The researchers, from Dartmouth Medical School in the US, said that several possibilities could explain continued tobacco brand appearance in films, from the tobacco industry continuing to pay directly or through payments in kind, to directors using brand imagery to increase a sense of realism or to convey character traits. However, flouting the payment ban would be consistent with regular violation of the cigarette advertising code by the tobacco industry since its inception in 1964.

The article adds, 'The study looked at the top 25 US box office films for each year from 1988 to 1997. The researchers found that before 1990, 1% of the top US box office films showed actors with a recognisable brand of cigarette on screen. But in the years after the ban, 11% of the films showed actors endorsing a brand.

The four most highly advertised US cigarette brands accounted for the most on-screen appearances, including those in hits such as My Best Friend's Wedding, Men in Black and Volcano. More than a quarter of all 250 films studied featured recognisable tobacco brands, including shots of billboards, shop fronts, logos and packets.

..."I can't tell you as a scientist why we are seeing more actor endorsements but we do know that having a famous person endorse a product is effective," said M. Bridget Ahrens, one of the researchers from Dartmouth's Norris Cotton Cancer Center... "We don't have any proof of how the cigarettes got there -- be it clandestine payments, free samples to a particular set designer, or an actor who just happens to smoke that brand," Ahrens said. "But now that we see it and we know what the effect is, we need to answer the question of why it is there."

... Marlboro is the nation's leading cigarette brand, and that may play a role in its frequent use in films, said Tom Ryan, a spokesman for Philip Morris. "Philip Morris doesn't provide any payment for the placement of any cigarette package or cigarette brand advertisements in movies or on television," for at least the past 10 years, Ryan said. "We routinely decline permission when people in the entertainment industry solicit us for our products or permission to use them."

Increasing smoke clouds on the silver screen may mean more kids will be lighting up, say local anti-smoking activists after the release of a new study by Dartmouth Medical School.

"It's dangerous," said Diane Knight, coordinator of the Tobacco Free Network at Community Action in Haverhill. "So many young people go to the movies. That's part of their recreation. .... Even if they don't think they are getting the message (smoking is cool), they are."

One consequence of the frequent smoking in movies may be kids think more people smoke than actually do. Diane Pickles, program director for Health Communities Tobacco Awareness Program, finds most children believe more adults smoke than actually do. Only one in seven Massachusetts adults smokes. She thinks perceptions like that feed into the fact that 1,500 youths under 18 start smoking every day. . .

The Massachusetts Tobacco Control Program offers a video called Smoke Screeners to educators. The video teaches students to look critically at smoking messages in the media. More information is available by calling 1-888-8NO-DRAG