Examination of Witnesses (Questions 720
- 739)
THURSDAY 20 JANUARY 2000
MR M MACLENNAN,
MR C MACLEOD,
MR N MUSTOE
AND MR
P BAINSFAIR
720 Would you go out of your way particularly
to ensure that there was no association of your marketing with
the health risk of smoking?
(Mr Bainsfair) You would go out of your
way to avoid the rather obvious misjudgements of putting them
opposite health pages.
721 Would you do that out of consideration for
us, not to offend us rather than the damage it might do to your
campaign?
(Mr Bainsfair) No, you would do it because
it is common sense to do it. If you are advertising the brand,
it is common sense to avoid putting your advertisement opposite
a page talking about health.
Chairman
722 Mr Macleod are you in a position now to answer
the first point raised by Mr Austin?
(Mr Macleod) Yes; I am sorry for the
delay. These are all to do with Hamlet, which is a product which
is smoked by people, men particularly, of 40-plus. The Literary
Review is a small circulation magazine which has a bad sex award.
I think it is Auberon Waugh who publishes it. We do a long copy
ad for Hamlet and rather racily we include the word "fuck"
in that long copy. That relates to that point. The point about
Oasis we are not clear about. We think this was a tactical ad
that we were looking to do. The Hamlet campaign had a succession
of what we call topical ads, taking advantage of topical situations.
We think this may be something to do with the mention of Oasis
but that particular ad was never presented to the client. Slaphead
is a term for baldness and Hamlet ads frequently feature people
who are bald. The Style magazine is a logical place for the delivery
of men. Hamlet tends to be targeted, dare I say it, towards older
men.
Mr Austin
723 If you were to use Oasis would you think
that would fit in with the CAP rules?
(Mr Macleod) I am not sure. I do not
know what the context of this particular ad was. I doubt it. It
is about the execution; all ads have to be pre-cleared so I guess
if they did not it would not happen.
Mrs Gordon
724 I was particularly interested in the ban
on advertising when that comes along. You are going to have to
communicate your brief in other ways. I wanted to ask how important
the pack livery is to the communication of brand imagery. In one
of the documents from CDP it says, "Remember this campaign
has its origins in a very simple truth, that smokers of B&H,
when they put their pack on the pub table, will always have it
noticed by their friends. It is their badge and all we are trying
to do is celebrate it". Could I have comments from all of
you on that?
(Mr Macleod) The pack is by definition
important, a competitive element. It is the way in which you differentiate
yourself from the other brands. Benson & Hedges' pack is probably
no different in that regard.
725 How important will it be for your marketing
that that remains on display at the point of sale after the ban
on advertising comes into effect?
(Mr Bainsfair) The pack, livery as we
call it, is really the clothes that the product wears. It helps
the consumer or the smoker to distinguish between the different
products on offer and to make an easy choice from one to another.
It is important in that regard.
726 Do you intend to brand the shops as well,
the tobacconists? For instance design of the floor tiles to echo
the pack?
(Mr MacLennan) In the case of a ban?
Speaking for ourselves, if there is an advertising ban you are
not allowed to advertise so we would not be doing that and it
does not come under our particular remit.
Chairman
727 Obviously the information you have kindly
supplied has given us a fair idea of the way you are looking to
get round this ban. In the evidence we have there is an internal
CDP memorandum which says, "This is to confirm that we (B&H
account team) have asked Noel to come up with some implicit branding
options for the Jordan Team Formula 1 cars for the French Grand
Prix. The reason being that all cigarette branding must be removed
to comply with Government regulations". It talks here about
ways round it. The memorandum is from Mandy. We are not quite
sure who Mandy is and it is to David Greaves and Sam Jiggins.
Then on the next page we have a memorandum from Simon North to
Barry Jenner, again CDP, saying "We feel that if we can legally
say the words `Special F1' then we could utilise the area behind
the driver's head ... to attempt to get a little closer to more
`overtly' implying the brand on the car. Do you think we could
get this past the various legal bodies? If Rothmans can get away
with `Racing' in the brand type face, I think we may have a case".
Clearly we are concerned to look at the implications of the advertising
ban. The reason we have got you here today is because obviously
in our view you have a major role to play in the wider impact
on health. What is your response to the point Eileen raised earlier
on about the efforts you are making at this stage, which clearly
appear to completely undermine the whole basis of what the Government
are trying to achieve, what is being attempted across Europe.
(Mr Macleod) May I pick that one up as
it is CDP and poor old Mandy.
728 Yes, please do and please tell us who Mandy
is.
(Mr Macleod) That is a bit unfair. By
definition being from Mandy identifies these as internal documents.
Unless you need me to identify Mandy I will not. This is perfectly
acceptable in terms of the way in which an agency would work within
the accepted legal framework.
729 You are working hard to get round the legal
framework.
(Mr Macleod) I do not think it says that;
"... if we can legally say" is very straightforward.
If we legally cannot then we shall not. That is as simple as that.
It is an internal document. It probably has the slight exuberance
of an advertising agency in operation but that is what it is and
it never happened because we were not able to do it.
Mrs Gordon
730 We have a document from the University of
Strathclyde which talks about this indirect way of advertising.
Hard research evidence shows that the indirect strategy works
well with children. For example, when shown an advertisement for
JPS Grand Prix holidays which did not mention cigarettes or carry
a Government health warning, 91 per cent of 12 to 16-year-olds
said it advertised cigarettes. This is what you are looking for,
is it not? To be able to get the message across indirectly.
(Mr MacLennan) That is absolutely not
what we are looking for. What you seem to be implying is that
we target children, which is 100 per cent not the case. I have
worked with Gallaher for about 15 or 16 years and I have never
sat in any meeting when we have discussed targeting non-smokers
or people who are under age. You are completely wrong to come
to that conclusion.
731 Even if you do not sit there and say you
are going to appeal to 12 to 16-year-olds, the evidence is that
the messages are getting through to that younger age group. They
are attracted to it and they do identify, much more than adults
in a way, the cigarette adverts.
(Mr MacLennan) You could probably show
evidence that they see the advertisements. It is common sense
that they do. There are posters on the streets and they would
see those posters. In terms of it encouraging anyone to smoke,
there is equal as much evidence to show that it does not encourage
people to smoke as there is that it does. It is neutral on that
particular point.
732 Except that under-age smoking is increasing.
More young people are smoking and that comes from somewhere.
(Mr MacLennan) Interestingly, those figures
were going down across the last ten years. It is only in the last
two years, which coincides with this Government coming into power,
that young smokers have actually increased.
Chairman
733 That is a very interesting point. Please
give us an explanation of what your thoughts are on the reasons
for that.
(Mr MacLennan) There is an obvious reason
for it: the advertising spend has halved over those last two years.
It used to be about £50 million and is now down to under
£20 million I believe over the last two years. It has about
halved. In those two years that is when more young people are
smoking and it is a very clear reason why that is happening.
Mr Austin
734 So if we stopped advertising altogether smoking
would go up enormously.
(Mr MacLennan) It has in many countries.
Audrey Wise
735 This targeting of young adults. For instance
we have a thing here which is your area, Mr Bainsfair. The client
is Rothmans and the target "Primary: 18-24 males". I
should just like to know what you think characterises an 18-year-old
male, their aspirations and things that appeal to them which would
not also appeal to 14 and 15-year-old males?
(Mr Bainsfair) The reason we had that
on one of our pieces of paper sent to you is because we handle
Marlboro. It is a fact that Marlboro is a brand which is smoked
by younger men; they tend to be more upscale.
736 Yes, I understand that but what I am asking
is how you gear the advertising to be attractive at 18, which
is your target beginning and not include things which would also
appeal to 14 and 15-year-olds.
(Mr Bainsfair) I shall try to answer
your question, although in some ways the way you have asked it
shows that you do not really fully understand the way we work.
737 I am sure I do not, or what motivates you.
(Mr Bainsfair) I am sure you do not.
We do not ask the creative teams to work to a specific age. The
reason that the age band is given is to give them a direction
of the kinds of people we know are going to be interested in the
advertising. It is significant, I think, that it goes 18 to 24.
It does not say 18; it says 18 to 24. There is a huge difference
between the 24-year-old and the 15-year-old. The advertising we
are trying to develop, and remember that we have to stick very
much within the bounds of the code which prevents us anyway doing
anything which might be seen to be deliberately attractive to
childrennot that we would want tomeans that it is
pretty unlikely that the kind of advertising we come up with would
particularly appeal to a 15-year-old. Indeed I do not know whether
you have seen any of our advertising, but I would ask you to point
out to me if you could anything in it which would particularly
appeal to a 15-year-old.
738 I am asking the questions and I am looking
at the document which talks about how you will appeal to the 18
to 24 males. "We want to engage their aspirations and fantasiesI'd
like to be there, do that, own that". "Marlboro core
values: individuality and freedom and real and America".
You are alland the tobacco industry tooalways unanimous
that it is an unfortunate accident, as it were, if kids smoke
but you are targeting adults. All I am asking, since you are expert
communicators, is what steps you take to make your adverts attractive
to young males 18 and up and to not have them attractive to males
of 14 and 15.
(Mr Bainsfair) What I have tried to explain
is that there is a very detailed code to which we have to submit
all our ideas to make sure that we are not straying into an area
which could be seen to do the very thing you are suggesting we
might accidentally do.
739 So you are supposed not to do it. What I
am asking is how you carry out that remit, that is all.
(Mr Bainsfair) I do not quite understand
your question. We are aiming at 18 to 24-year-olds. We develop
the advertising. If our client believes it is advertising which
is likely to work, we then have to submit it to the ASA for them
to check that we have not done anything which might be seen to
be attractive to anybody younger than that group. It is a very,
very clear procedure.
Dr Brand: Is the ASA the same Advertising Standards
Authority which we did not find very effective before?
Audrey Wise: Yes; we know them quite well.
|