Quote:
Quote by: Technosoul  The lawyers showed memos where the tobacco company knew about some of the first studies done that might link smoking to cancer, but attempted to create a different impression via advertising. I recall one ad where they advertised "low tar" in their brand. And they promoted filters - etc. |
Couldn't it be argued that they advertised such things as "low tar" because it was assumed people knew some of the risks of smoking and that "low tar" was being portrayed as a reduced risk?
Quote:
|
It was the "lack of labeling their products" that nailed them and resulted in them loosing their court case and paying out fines. Not because of debates over the health hazards.
|
Just like the fast food joint that lost a lawsuit filed against it because some broad was stupid enough to try to start driving with a hot cup of coffee in her lap - after all, the cup wasn't labled (ever since then, the cups in all the fast food joints seem to be conspicuously labeled).