Tobacco advertising is once again front and centre following the announcement of stricter controls on tobacco sales and advertising made late last month by u.s. President Bill Clinton.

The proposals echo much of the legislative framework made public by the Canadian government last December.

In the u.s., as in Canada, many question whether such tough legislation infringes on the rights and freedoms of companies producing and selling legal products.

It is an obvious concern of the u.s. government because just days following the announcement, after quick and powerful response from u.s. tobacco manufacturers and the advertising industry, the White House was discussing the possibility of self-regulation of the guidelines rather than regulation by the Food and Drug Administration.

u.s. tobacco companies had immediately declared that they would challenge the regulations in court based on their belief that the fda does not have authority over tobacco products.

The advertising industry, which is expected to lose us$1.1 billion in yearly revenue under the proposed rules, also took action.

The Freedom to Advertise Coalition, which includes groups such as the Point-of -Purchase Advertising Institute (popai) in Washington, has filed a lawsuit in a North Carolina Court to stop the u.s. government from reassigning responsibility for marketing and advertising of tobacco products to the fda.

Last September in Canada, the federal Tobacco Products Control Act, which had been in place since 1988, was overturned following a seven-year legal battle waged by the Canadian Tobacco Manufacturers Council (ctmc), which represents Imperial Tobacco, Rothmans Benson & Hedges and RJR-Macdonald.

There has been no legislation in place governing advertising and promotion of tobacco products in Canada since then.

Key to the proposed new legislation in both countries are strong measures aimed at protecting children from being exposed to tobacco advertising and limiting access to tobacco products.

Health Canada’s ‘Tobacco Control: A Blueprint to Protect the Health of Canadians,’ released in December, states ‘The government believes that a complete ban on advertising is the most effective measure to achieve its health policy objectives.

‘The government is committed to providing the necessary evidence to support the most comprehensive prohibition on advertising possible.’

France Pegeot, assistant director of the Office of Tobacco Control, Health Canada, says because of the secrecy of the legislative process, she could not reveal at what stage the proposal is now.

In December 1995, the ctmc released self-imposed guidelines called the Tobacco Industry Voluntary Packaging and Advertising Code.

Since June of this year, the Canadian Advertising Foundation has handled preclearance of tobacco advertising.

Marie-Josee Lapointe, director of communications for the ctmc, says the industry has always wanted self-regulation but the government has been unwilling to allow it.

Tobacco companies voluntarily stopped broadcast advertising in 1972 and although the Supreme Court decision legally gives them the right to advertise on radio and television, they have restricted their efforts to newspapers, magazines and outdoor.

Brian McLean, president of Toronto-based outdoor advertising firm Mediacom, feels that even without government guidelines, tobacco advertising will be tightly controlled by other parties.

For example, he says some third-party interests from which he rents out-of-home space have required that Mediacom not sell to tobacco companies

McLean says he believes there will be all kinds of restrictions imposed over time at the retail, federal and municipal government levels, making it more difficult for tobacco companies to market their products.

Since the industry began advertising in January, there have been numerous complaints about the proximity of ads to schools, but Lapointe says software has been developed to determine proximity to schools to ensure ads are placed more than 200 metres away.

Point-of-sale advertising and sponsorship advertising are two other areas of tobacco company activity that have also been targets of complaints because of their potential appeal to the youth market.

With respect to in-store advertising, tobacco companies have been following the guidelines, except for the school proximity rule.

Lapointe says, ‘We are not willing to create two classes of retailers, especially when in any retail outlet it is illegal to sell the product to kids.’

One Toronto company has let its feelings about freedom of expression be known.

Great Outdoor Advertising, which does hand-painted murals in 10 Toronto locations, has put up a 40 x 50 ft. mural at the intersection of Bloor and Keele Streets in Toronto that states ‘Cigarette smoking is bad for your health. Cigarette advertising isn’t.’