The Pros And Cons Of Tobacco And Nicotine Advertising

When it comes to ethical marketing it is a blurred line when looking at alternative options of tobacco and nicotine advertising. These controversial marketing tips are addressed in the article; New Product Marketing Blurs The Line Between Nicotine Replacement Therapy And Smokeless Tobacco Products (K. Ganna, L. England, and P. Ling, 2016). The aforementioned article opens up with an intriguing thesis: “Conversely, tobacco companies are producing tobacco products such as tobacco chewing gum and lozenges that resemble pharmaceutical nicotine replacement products, including a nicotine pouch product that resembles snus pouches (K. Ganna, L. England, and P. Ling, 2016). Is it ethical marketing to advertise an item that contains nicotine as a “better option” than cigarettes or snus all while packaging it in the same manner? Many of the items packages state “each cigarette not smoked is a victory” (K. Ganna, L. England, and P. Ling, 2016).Tobacco companies take part in production and distribution of this alternative nicotine option,

Ganna, L. England, and P. Ling, 2016). Tobacco companies cut through the red tape and began to offer the cessation option in local convenience stores, packaged in smaller and deceivingly more affordable options all while maintaining a high dose of nicotine (K. Ganna, L. England, and P. Ling, 2016). The smaller option although less expensive than the product sold in pharmacies, when priced by individual units became much more expensive. However the items sold in the convenience stores were also packaged similar to the original tobacco products (K. Ganna, L. England, and P. Ling, 2016). Cessation products that are FDA approved and distributed in pharmacies have less nicotine, and clearly stated additional options to assist in