Introduction
Virginia Slims is a cigarette brand created in 1968 by a large U.S. tobacco manufacturer, Philip Morris. In its marketing strategies for Virginia Slims, the company targeted only the female audience by promoting cigarettes as the choice for “strong, independent, liberated women” (Stanford School of Medicine, n.d., para. 1). During the campaign of 1968-1970, Philip Morris expected to increase the demand for its products among women. However, according to the CDC statistics, the number of female smokers had slightly decreased between 1960 and 1970 (US Department of Health and Human Services [DHHS], 2002). Based on this, it is argued that the impact of the women-oriented Virginia Slims campaign on the increase in the number of female smokers was less strong than it was be expected due to the adoption of the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act (FCLAA) which entered into force in 1965. Since the publication of the US Surgeon General Luther L. Terry’s report on smoking and its influence on health in 1964 and the recognition of tobacco intake as a health hazard, the government undertook multiple legislative actions to restrict the activity and prevent its negative influence (Bailey, 2004).
Since then, warning labels, restrictions on advertising, controls of cigarette sales, and other remedial initiatives became an important requirement imposed on tobacco manufacturers by the government and allowed to assert some regulation of cigarette consumption. Considering this, through the investigation of Philip Morris’ mission which it pursued during the launch of the Virginia Slims campaign in 1968-1970 and the main regulatory actions undertaken by the Congress during this period, the paper aims to identify the factors that caused the reduction in rates of female smokers.
Research Questions
The study aims to answer the following questions:
- What are the determinants of women’s engagement in smoking?
- at specific needs does the woman-oriented cigarette advertisement attempt to target to stimulate the change in consumer behavior and increase product demand?
- What effect does the governmental smoking regulation have on tobacco market dynamics and cigarette consumption rates?
- What are the potential relationships between the observed decrease in smoking rates among women during 1960-1970, the Virginia Slims original advertising campaign of 1968-1970, and the FCLAA?
Methodology
To answer the formulated research questions, the qualitative methodology is employed. The main data collection tool applied in the study is the literature analysis. The sample of 8 studies that are in line with the research is randomly selected. The peer-reviewed articles are chosen according to the particular criteria including the research of the effectiveness of tobacco advertising regulations, messages conveyed through cigarette ads, and factors influencing female smoking behavior. The structural literature review that is conducted according to the principles of induction allows the obtainment of substantial data for the evaluation of relationships between the investigated causes and effects, identification of the specific patterns in the relationships among variables, and creation of the holistic review of the subject.
Literature Review
Any advertising campaign aims to bring out the emotional response from the targeted audience. As stated by Anderson, Glantz, and Ling (2005), when a consumer buys a certain product, he/she may feel as if purchasing a self-image. To increase product demand, marketers identify the emotional and psychological needs of potential consumers and develop the images which, as they suppose, may promote the desired behavior through assuring the audience that the consumption of the advertised product will help to resolve interpersonal concerns and will lead to self-enhancement. In this way, by exploiting the image of a strong and independent woman as a central element of the Virginia Slims campaign, Philip Morris appealed to the feminist values which are widespread among the individuals in the female market niche. Fashionableness, sex appeal, affluence, independence, and adventure are the main themes of the women-oriented cigarette ads, and they give women “a sense of equality, exclusivity, and liberation” (Anderson et al., 2005, p. 127).
Because young women tend to regard smoking as normative behavior in diverse social settings and perceive it as a means to socialization (McDermott, Dobson, & Owen, 2007), the problem of self-identity and perceived social evaluation associated with smoking gains greater importance. Social identity is subjective and is shaped by the self-evaluation of personal qualities that may cause social exclusion or acceptance. The noncompliance with the norms accepted in a particular social group may be perceived by a consumer as a risk factor for the distortion of his/her public identity as it may invite unwanted and unflattering social evaluations (Okoli, Richardson, Ratner, & Johnson, 2008).
Therefore, individuals tend to plan and perform their behaviors in the ways that comply with socially accepted norms to reduce the potential threats to their social identity and ensure a high level of acceptance. Okoli et al. (2007) also observe that sometimes there may be a significant variance in the levels of physical and mental addiction to tobacco, and the perceived smoking identity is associated with the increasing dependence and demand for cigarette products. Thus, by focusing on lifestyle preferences in the Virginia Slims campaign, marketers developed brand images that were emotionally and socially pertinent to female consumers and managed to build a strong personal relevance with product characteristics.
When the first women-oriented cigarette promotion campaigns appeared in the 1920s, the number of young women (18-25 years old) who began smoking had drastically increased (US DHHS, 2001). However, according to the report of the Surgeon General on smoking rates, the number of smokers among the female population has declined between 1965 and 1979 from 33.9 percent to 29.9 percent (US DHHS, 2002). Although the 1960-1970 decline may be regarded as insignificant comparing to the intense increase in sales provoked by Virginia Slims ads that increased the female smokers’ contribution to market by 3% (Toll & Ling, 2005), it demonstrates the role of the federal government’s efforts in the regulation of cigarette advertising and elimination of “deceptive advertising practices” which facilitated the development of the consumers’ knowledge regarding the hazardous influences of smoking and improvement of the information available to the public (McAuliffe, 1988, p. 49).
The initial governmental actions were based on the recognition of the need for smokers to decide their habits according to the principle of “informed choice” (Bailey, 2004, p. 44). It was expected that tobacco consumers might give up their activity in case they are adequately informed about all risks and health problems related to smoking, as well as its negative influences on vulnerable populations. According to the recent research data, such as consumer education initiatives as cigarette warning labels are directly related to the change in tobacco users’ behavior. In the study by Shah, Dave, and Sonaliya (2013), over 80% of respondents, who were informed about smoking-related health risks, reduced the quantity of the consumed tobacco after looking at warning labels, and over 65% of study participants said they thought of quitting tobacco use. However, it is observed that graphic information has a stronger potential in encouraging tobacco cessation among the diverse population groups (Cantrell et al., 2013).
Thus, the lack of pictorial messages in the first governmental anti-tobacco campaigns may be associated with a relatively insignificant decline in female smoking rates. Many researchers observe that the advertisement ban and anti-smoking commercials of the 1960s had reduced smoking more than cigarette advertising had increased cigarette consumption (Hamilton, 1972). However, as McAuliffe (1988) states, many of the researchers analyzed the effects of governmental smoking regulations focusing merely on cigarette demand statistics and without the consideration of product supply rates as an important study variable. Through the investigation of the factors of demand and supply, as well as the changes in cigarette technologies including filter efficiency and reduced nicotine content, the researcher concluded that the regulations adopted by the federal government did not have the effects which were initially intended (McAuliffe, 1988). Therefore, it is possible to say that labeling act and advertising ban more influenced the creation of safer cigarettes rather than the reduction of demand for tobacco products.
Summary
The conducted literature review makes it clear that the promotion campaign addressing the social-emotional needs and interests of women is positively related to the increase in the number of female smokers. Virginia Slims ads allowed the company to attract more female consumers and significantly increase cigarette sales throughout 1960-1970.
The significant controversies in the research findings regarding the effects of governmental smoking control actions were observed. While some researchers claim that warning labels and advertisement bans have a positive impact on smoking reduction rates, the others suggest that their influences are generally insignificant. Because the major purpose of the FCLAA was the promotion of public health, it is possible to assume that the 4% decline in the number of female smokers during 1965-1979 did not meet the expectations of the governmental agencies. Nevertheless, a small decrease in the percentage of tobacco users is likely related to the increased smokers’ awareness of health risks associated with tobacco intake.
References
Anderson, S. J., Glantz, S. A., & Ling, P. M. (2005). Emotions for sale: Cigarette advertising and women’s psychosocial needs. Tobacco Control, 14(2), 127. Web.
Bailey, C. (2004). From ‘‘informed choice’’ to ‘‘social hygiene’’: Government control of cigarette smoking in the US. Journal of American Studies, 38(1), 41–65.
Cantrell, J., Vallone, D. M., Thrasher, J. F., Nagler, R. H., Feirman, S. P., Muenz, L. R., … Viswanath, K. (2013). Impact of tobacco-related health warning labels across socioeconomic, race and ethnic groups: Results from a randomized web-based experiment. Web.
Hamilton, J. L. (1972). The demand for cigarettes: advertising, the health scare and the cigarette advertising ban. Review of Economics and Statistics, 54, 401-11.
McAuliffe, R. (1988). The FTC and the Effectiveness of Cigarette Advertising Regulations.Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 7, 49-64. Web.
McDermott, L., Dobson, A., & Owen, N. (2007). Occasional tobacco use among young adult women: A longitudinal analysis of smoking transitions. Tobacco Control, 16(4), 248. Web.
Okoli, C. T. C., Richardson, C. G., Ratner, P. A., & Johnson, J. L. (2008). An examination of the smoking identities and taxonomies of smoking behaviour of youth.Tobacco Control, 17(3), 151. Web.
Shah, V. R., Dave, V. R., & Sonaliya, K. N. (2013). Impact of anti-tobacco warning labels on behaviour of tobacco users in one of the cities of Gujarat, India. Journal of Preventive Medicine and Hygiene, 54(2), 109–113.
Stanford School of Medicine. (n.d.). Stanford research into the impact of tobacco advertising. Web.
Toll, B. , & Ling, P. (2005). The Virginia Slims identity crisis: An inside look at tobacco industry marketing to women. Tobacco Control, 14(3), 172-180. Web.
US Department of Health and Human Services. (2001). Surgeon General’s Report Highlights: Marketing Cigarettes to Women. Web.
US Department of Health and Human Services. (2002). Women and smoking: A report of the Surgeon General. Web.