Now This is Lit
Okay listen. So, I originally wanted to find a bunch of janky ads from like the 50s or something to exhibit how ads enforce cultural norms and standards. The 50s was a cool aesthetic no doubt, but also rigidly traditional and some of the stuff that came out of it was almost hilariously depressing. It wasn’t just limited to social structure either. The public was shockingly, even embarrassingly misinformed about many potential health hazards. For example, there was an abundance of pamphlets claiming that soda water could cure you from radioactive fallout in the case of atomic war. So, no worries right? Perhaps more lighthearted and incredibly more infamous were the smoking ads which circulated in the 50s.
They were absolutely bonkers. In fact, they were so bonkers, I got distracted almost immediately, and now all I really want to do is show you guys just a small selection of this veritable gold mine of entertainment and shame. I mean, look at this.
Do I even need to say anything? This was apparently Old Gold’s big marketing push in the 50’s after more research was being done linking smoking to lung cancer. Trying to discount any evidence that smoking was detrimental to health and instead deriding the opinions of health professionals under the pretense that they were on the level with the consumer. What a bunch of American heroes. Here’s another good one from our friends from Marlboro.
This may be one of the more well-known smoking advertisements from the 50s actually, but it’s still just like, what? Excuse me? It really goes to show how common place smoking really was back then, and the lengths cigarette companies would go to portray it as completely normal barring all potential harm it could cause to the family. If it’s shown in media as normal, why think otherwise? If the paper’s telling me that it’s cool and cute to have junior mention my smoking, why should I think it’s wrong or harmful to smoke around my very young and physically vulnerable child? Health studies were still in progress, and there was so much opposition from cigarette companies that the people really had a hard time knowing what to truly believe. This kind of advertising is pretty gross to be honest. How about a few more?
Look at those winning smiles. But I can hear all of you right now thinking, Listen ,lighting up around my baby is cool, but what if I want to light up on plane so I can force children that aren’t mine and their parents to suck up my smoke in a relatively cramped and pressurized environment? Listen, I got you.
Or more accurately, Flyer’s got
you. Look at that, they specifically made the cigarettes plane themed. And the
hostess is loving it! That is undoubtedly the face of a woman who spends all of
her time on a plane picking up fallen cigarette butts and breathing nothing but
second-hand smoke. I’m so glad this is a culturally normal thing to do!
Let's get a few words from St. Nick!
That’s right ladies and gentlemen,
Santa does indeed smoke a name brand tobacco, and it’s Edgeworth.
Or wait maybe its Pall Mall.
Or wait.
What’s wrong with his eyes? And his
face?
Listen these are slightly unrelated, but please just look at some of these ads.
Why are it's legs quivering?
Please tell me what this is and why.
What is this advertising?!
Overall, it's so strange to go back to old smoking ads. Seeing the way they portray and enforce 50's cultural smoking standards and how disdainful they were to cancer research is both entertaining and unnerving. As we all know, there is a happy ending to this story. You will never see any kind of tobacco advertisement today without a very bold and very prominent caution label, telling you how harmful smoking is to yourself and others. And you will almost certainty never have to suffer the Marlboro baby and any of his ilk ever again. Truly a win-win for everybody.
The only ads that I feel can be labeled as misleading in some contexts are political ads. Ads slandering opponents without much context or research to back up their statements. Other than that, I agree that ads are not really taken at face value anymore. I feel some ads can be very educational now, like thetruth.com smoking and vaping ads. However, seeing these old smoking ads has me thinking: is there anything that is promoted now that will turn out to be completely terrible and unhealthy? What if "BirdsEye" vegetables or Dunkin Donuts is secretly terrible but is still being promoted, only to find out these products cause cancer or something. It is a pretty crazy thing to think about.
ReplyDeleteWhat's up with cigarette companies being obsessed with babies? I found that to be reaaallly odd, in my opinion. Sure, all of the advertisements you included were a bit unique, but the overwhelming amount of ads depicting babies really caught me off guard. I wonder if that actually worked for the companies...did parents really think "oh, this ad shows me that I'll be such a cool parent if I smoke in front of my baby...I mean, if the baby on the ad loves it, then so will mine!"? It's definitely interesting. I would LOVE to see how society today would react to these ads. Maybe a bit of a social experiment...remove modern-day smoking ads and replace them with these...let's see what happens.
ReplyDeleteI never realized that old smoking advertisements included pictures of babies! It is weird to think that this type of advertisement was normal to see back then. It is nice to see that smoking advertisements now have huge caution statements across the ad. When I was in Poland, I noticed a store’s tobacco products were wrapped in graphic images of deteriorating mouths. This indicated to consumers that “sure, you can buy this product, but you may end up like this person.” It is amazing to see how far advertisements have come for these types of products, especially while comparing smoking advertisements in the 50s to my memory of the packaging in Poland in 2018. Perhaps a semi-misleading advertisement is medication commercials. This type of commercial typically portrays a happy family vacationing, spending time with each other, and/or going on walks outside while the narrator is saying this specific medication may lead to death. While the narrator in the commercial states the side effects, the screen shows people being happy.
ReplyDeleteThis was a very interesting blog post to read! I think the evolution of advertisements is fascinating to study, but I never thought to focus on the advertisements of cigarettes and such from the 50s! I cannot help but ask myself what is the main rhetorical purpose in promoting babies in a cigarette ad? It is interesting to compare smoking to the motherly love for a baby. I also think it is interesting because many times the idea of smoking is seen as a "manly" affair, so including a baby allows for the smoking idea to be opened up to the women of the family as well. We all look back at these ads and wonder what people were thinking, but I can guarantee that in a decade we will also look back at the ad campaigns from this past year and wonder what people were thinking. It is truly fascinating to see how ads evolve over time.
ReplyDeletethis was so interesting to read about! i was watching a TikTok last week about the different ads of Campbell's that involved naked women, the term "wife beaters," and women in general being called bad wives for not making soup as well as Campbell's. I guess you could try and make people associate sex with soup but it just seems so odd to me. I know that some ad agencies still believe sex sells and that is why we have Victoria's Secret Ads and whatever godforsaken hellscape Hardy's has going on in its commercials. I have friends who are/were advertising majors and they loved to do research projects where they found advertisements like these to analyze and discuss what the goals were. Back then they probably thought "oooh let's put a sexy lady on the front and call it a day." Now, there is more money spent on researching for advertisements than money spent on the actual ads. Crazy times.
ReplyDeleteI absolutely loved this post--ads and general PSAs from the 50s are a trip. Fun fact: did you know that the government used to think eggs were bad for us, so egg companies had to advertise against this by asserting their own science or telling us to disregard the government? And the thing is--the egg companies were right, so their advertising campaign was a big reason eggs are now a popular food. Unfortunately this seems to be a diamond in the rough, as one can see with the excessive and shameless cigarette ads. Hardy's comes to mind when I think of modern shameless and morally sketchy ads--I remember seeing one for the first time vividly when I was a kid and quickly turning the TV off out of fear my mom would burst into the room. I think that in the future we might also look at current ads about big gas-guzzling trucks with the same contempt; I can easily picture a group of woke teens in the 2070s going "wtf were these people on?" when watching some old Ford commercials.
ReplyDelete