Reinforcement of Smoking and Drinking: Tobacco
Marketing Strategies Linked With Alcohol in the United
States
Jiang, Nan; Ling, Pamela M, MD, MPH . American Journal of Public Health 101. 10 (Oct
2011): 1942-1954.
Turn on hit highlighting for speaking browsers
Turn off hit highlighting



Other formats:
Citation/Abstract
Full text - PDF (644 KB)
Abstract (summary)
Translate
We investigated tobacco companies' knowledge about concurrent use of tobacco and alcohol,
their marketing strategies linking cigarettes with alcohol, and the benefits tobacco companies
sought from these marketing activities. We performed systematic searches on previously
secret tobacco industry documents, and we summarized the themes and contexts of relevant
search results. Tobacco company research confirmed the association between tobacco use and
alcohol use. Tobacco companies explored promotional strategies linking cigarettes and
alcohol, such as jointly sponsoring special events with alcohol companies to lower the cost of
sponsorships, increase consumer appeal, reinforce brand identity, and generate increased
cigarette sales. They also pursued promotions that tied cigarette sales to alcohol purchases,
and cigarette promotional events frequently featured alcohol discounts or encouraged alcohol
use. Tobacco companies' numerous marketing strategies linking cigarettes with alcohol may
have reinforced the use of both substances. Because using tobacco and alcohol together
makes it harder to quit smoking, policies prohibiting tobacco sales and promotion in
establishments where alcohol is served and sold might mitigate this effect. Smoking cessation
programs should address the effect that alcohol consumption has on tobacco use.
Show less
Full Text


Translate
Turn on search term navigation
Headnote
Objectives. We investigated tobacco companies' knowledge about concurrent use of tobacco
and alcohol, their marketing strategies linking cigaretteswith alcohol, and the benefits
tobacco companies sought from these marketing activities.
Methods. We performed systematic searches on previously secret tobacco industry
documents, and we summarized the themes and contexts of relevant search results.
Results. Tobacco company research confirmed the association between tobacco use and
alcohol use. Tobacco companies explored promotional strategies linking cigarettes and
alcohol, such as jointly sponsoring special events with alcohol companies to lower the cost of
sponsorships, increase consumer appeal, reinforce brand identity, and generate increased
cigarette sales. They also pursued promotions that tied cigarette sales to alcohol purchases,
and cigarette promotional events frequently featured alcohol discounts or encouraged alcohol
use.
Conclusions. Tobacco companies' numerous marketing strategies linking cigarettes with
alcohol may have reinforced the use of both substances. Because using tobacco and alcohol
together makes it harder to quit smoking, policies prohibiting tobacco sales and promotion in
establishments where alcohol is served and sold might mitigate this effect. Smoking cessation
programs should address the effect that alcohol consumption has on tobacco use. (Am J
Public Health. 2011;101:1942-1954. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2011. 300157)
Smoking remains the leading preventable cause of premature mortality in the United States,
accounting for more than 440000 deaths annually.1 Alcohol consumption is the third-leading
cause of mortality in the nation.2 Each year, approximately 79000 deaths are attributable to
excessive alcohol use.3 The concurrent use of cigarettes and alcohol further increases risks
for certain cancers, such as cancer of the mouth, throat, and esophagus.4,5 In addition, the
use of both tobacco and alcohol makes it more difficult to quit either substance.6
Smoking and drinking are strongly associated behaviors.7-13 Smokers are more likely to
drink alcohol,11 drink more frequently,8,11 consume a higher quantity of alcohol,8,11,14
and demonstrate binge drinking (5 or more drinks per episode) than are nonsmokers.9,11,12
Alcohol drinkers, especially binge drinkers, are also more likely to smoke7,8,10 and are more
likely to smoke half a pack of cigarettes or more per day.10
The association between tobacco use and alcohol use becomes stronger with the heavier use
of either substance.8,15,16 Alcohol consumption increases the desire to smoke,17,18 and
nicotine consumption increases alcohol consumption. 19 Experimental studies have
demonstrated that nicotine and alcohol enhance each other's rewarding effects.16,18 Alcohol
increases the positive subjective effects of smoking,8,15,16,20 and smoking while using
alcohol is more reinforcing than is smoking without concurrent alcohol use.8 Smokers smoke
more cigarettes while drinking alcohol,8,15,18 especially during binge-drinking
episodes.8,15 This behavior has also been observed among nondaily smokers8,15 and light
smokers.17
The concurrent use of alcohol and tobacco is common among young adults,8,10,12,21
including nondaily smokers,19,22-24 nondependent smokers,8 and novice smokers.13 Young
adult smokers have reported that alcohol increases their enjoyment of and desire for
cigarettes8,25 and that tobacco enhances the effect of alcohol: it ''brings on the buzz'' or ''gave
you a double buzz.''13,23,26 Young adult nondaily smokers described the pairing of alcohol
and cigarettes as resembling ''milk and cookies'' or ''peanut butter with jelly.''24 Young adults
have also been the focus of aggressive tobacco promotional efforts in places where alcohol is
consumed, such as bars and nightclubs.27,28
Consumer products often fall into cohesive groups (sometimes referred to as ''Diderot
unities'') that may reinforce certain patterns of consumption,29 and these groupings may be
influenced by marketing activities. In the case of tobacco and alcohol, these product links
may have been further enhanced by cooperation between tobacco and alcohol companies
(e.g., cosponsorship) or corporate ownership of both tobacco and alcohol companies (e.g.,
Philip Morris's past ownership of Miller Brewing Company).
We used tobacco industry documents to explore tobacco companies' knowledge regarding
linked tobacco and alcohol use and the companies' marketing strategies that linked cigarettes
with alcohol. We were interested in 3 basic issues: (1) what tobacco companies knew about
the association between drinking and smoking, especially about smokers' drinking behaviors,
(2) how tobacco and alcohol companies developed cross promotions featuring cigarettes and
alcohol, and (3) how tobacco companies linked cigarettes with alcohol in their marketing
activities and the benefits they expected to gain from those activities.
METHODS
From July 2009 through July 2010 we used the Legacy Tobacco Document Library (http://
legacy.library.ucsf.edu) to systematically search archived internal tobacco industry
documents. Tobacco industry document research presents unique methodological
challenges,30 and we followed standard techniques to conduct document research that
combined traditional qualitative methods31 with iterative search strategies tailored for this
data set.32
Document research is typically not a hypothesis- driven experiment. Thus, we initially posed
exploratory, open-ended research questions, such as ''What did tobacco companies know
about people's preferences and patterns of alcohol use?'' or ''What did tobacco companies
understand about the relationship between alcohol use and smoking?'' Previous studies have
documented increasingly frequent tobacco promotional activities in bars during the last few
decades, 27,28,33 so exploratory research questions related to marketing activities included
such questions as ''Was it a coincidence that tobacco and alcohol companies seemed to
sponsor similar special events, or was it an intentional marketing strategy?'' and ''What
marketing activities did tobacco companies conduct featuring alcohol?''
Initial keyword searches combined terms related to:
* marketing activities, such as joint sponsorship, cosponsor, joint promotion, cross
promotion, tie in, plan, strategy, proposal, presentation, benefit, policy, guideline;
* promotional events, such as spring break, resort program, sports, soccer, softball, ski, golf,
volleyball, auto racing, ethnic sports, concert, festival, bar night, nightclub;
* marketing research, such as focus group, qualitative, quantitative, research, study,
consumer profile;
* concurrent use of tobacco and alcohol, such as co-use, cross usage, drinking, life styles,
''drinking and smoking'';
* types of alcoholic beverage, such as beer, liquor, wine, cocktail, vodka, whiskey,
champagne;
* alcohol brands, such as Miller, Budweiser, Olympia, Jack Daniel's, Canadian Mist, Coors,
Schlitz, Southern Comfort;
* alcohol companies, such as Miller, Miller Brewing Company, Anheuser-Busch, BrownForman, Olympia;
* tobacco companies, such as Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, Brown and Williamson, British
American Tobacco, American Tobacco, Lorillard; and
* cigarette brands, such as Marlboro, Virginia Slims, Benson & Hedges, Camel, Winston,
Salem, Kool, Misty, Capri, Lucky Strike, GPC, Viceroy.
Initial searches yielded thousands of documents. For example, a search of all tobacco
industry document collections on the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library for the keyword
''cosponsor'' yielded 10172 documents. Additional keywords were added to narrow searches.
For example, a search of ''cosponsor'' and ''Miller'' yielded 1734 documents, and ''cosponsor''
and ''Miller'' and ''soccer'' yielded 164 documents. Searches were narrowed until they
generally yielded fewer than 400 documents.
After we narrowed the searches, we read all the documents retrieved to determine their
relevance to the exploratory research questions. We removed duplicate documents and
documents that were clearly unrelated to our research questions (such as tobacco companies'
research on behaviors other than alcohol consumption and tobacco companies' joint
sponsorship with companies that did not sell alcohol). Documents containing the same text
but different marginalia were counted as separate documents instead of duplicates.
Both authors then reviewed the documents in detail to discern their themes and contexts, such
as the names of marketing studies, marketing promotional project titles, the time lines of
these activities, and the relations between marketing studies and promotional activities. We
wrote summary memoranda while reading the documents and listed more specific search
terms from the documents retrieved, such as study titles (e.g., Multi Marketing Inc. Lifestyle
Research, Promotional Services Center Survey, General Food Survey), marketing
promotional project titles (e.g., Marlboro Soccer Cup, Winston-Budweiser Heritage Cup
World Softball Tournament, Canadian Mist and Viceroy Rich Lights Designer Fashion
Showcase), and other important information (e.g., key individuals responsible for these
activities, third parties involved, dates of meetings, locations and dates of events).
We then asked a series of subsequent questions to guide further searches to help us better
understand the context and implications of each document, such as ''What was the purpose of
the GF study?'' ''Did the results of this study affect marketing and promotional activities?''
''What criteria did tobacco companies use to select alcohol companies and types of alcoholic
beverage for joint sponsorship and joint promotion?'' ''What benefits did tobacco companies
expect to gain from alcohol co-marketing activities, and did they obtain these benefits?'' and
''What were the job titles of the individuals mentioned in the documents, and what were the
relationships among those people?''
We followed reviews of relevant documents with ''snowball'' searches to find related
documents using additional search terms such as consecutive reference (Bates) numbers, file
locations, dates, and individuals' associates. Through iterative searches, we attempted to gain
a more comprehensive understanding of the research and marketing activities. We wrote
additional memos incorporating the newly retrieved documents, noting the theme and context
of each document, and we organized the documents in clusters by topic (e.g., research study,
promotional project, guideline for marketing activities).
We repeated the iterative search process until we reached saturation of both keywords and
documents. We based the present analysis on a final collection of 128 documents relevant to
tobacco companies' research on alcohol consumption, concurrent use of tobacco and alcohol,
and joint promotion of cigarettes and alcohol, and 358 documents related to marketing
activities that linked cigarettes with alcohol. The documents we located ranged in date from
1974 to 1999. We limited our analysis to documents describing marketing activities in the
United States.
To triangulate findings in the documents, we used additional data that we obtained from
general online search engines (e.g., Google), news coverage (e.g., Google News or LexisNexis), and advertising archives (e.g., the Trinkets and Trash archive at the School of Public
Health of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey, or the Pollay advertising
collection at http://tobaccodocuments. org). We used these adjunctive sources to validate and
contextualize the marketing activities discussed in tobacco industry documents. Triangulation
is a standard method that qualitative researchers use to check for validity and consistency of
information among various independent sources; specific triangulation strategies using
tobacco industry documents and advertising archives have been described previously.34
Conversely, we also retrieved advertisements with alcohol-related content from advertising
archives; then, to find plans for these campaigns, we searched tobacco industry documents
for these advertisements' taglines, slogans, or other descriptors. To build a comprehensive
picture of how the different activities were related to each other both historically and
conceptually, we made a summary of all research memos containing all major clusters of
documents, summaries of all relevant documents, and direct quotes from the documents.
The following criteria guided iterative analyses to maximize our confidence in the credibility,
dependability, and confirmability of the findings: we emphasized activities that were
conducted repeatedly over time, activities that were pursued by multiple tobacco companies,
plans that were created by or sent to people in positions of power within the tobacco
companies (and thus were more likely to be carried out or to be representative of company
policy), and activities that were supported both by internal documents and outside data
sources.
We selected quotes that were consistent with the general themes across the multiple tobacco
companies, that were consistent with their specific context in a document cluster, and that
represented themes that were discussed repeatedly. We conducted this analysis to gain a
greater understanding of tobacco industry research and marketing activities related to tobacco
and alcohol, rather than to generate theory or to test specific hypotheses about these activities.
RESULTS
We found that tobacco companies did extensive research on smokers' alcohol-related
behaviors, and they pursued a wide variety of marketing strategies to capitalize on those
behaviors.
Research on Alcohol and Tobacco Use
Research on cross usage of cigarettes and alcohol. Tobacco companies researched the cross
usage of cigarettes and alcohol and the impact of the 2 substances on each other. In 1974,
Brown and Williamson Tobacco Company (B&W) hired Kenyon and Eckhardt Advertising
to conduct a consumer research study to investigate ''the perceptions, attitudes and behavior
of younger, recently starting smokers regarding initial products usage, current smoking and
health concerns.''35 They found that smoking increased with consumption of alcoholic
beverages and that beer and cigarettes could each enhance the taste sensations of and increase
the desire for the other.35-37 Kenyon and Eckhardt observed concurrent use most frequently
at social events, and they used the term ''social smoking''35 to describe this phenomenon of
smoking with alcohol use:
Almost all of the respondents claimed an increase in smoking when at parties or on dates. In
most cases, this increase in smoking was related to consumption of alcoholic beverages, most
particularly beer. The general feeling seemed to be that the two tastes and sensations tended
to enhance one another, making each more pleasurable when done together. In these social
smoking situations, the cigarette was described as a contributor to their relaxation and
enjoyment.37
In 1986, Philip Morris (PM) hired Callé and Company to conduct a qualitative study among
menthol smokers to learn about their needs and lifestyles, including behaviors related to
drinking and smoking together. PM intended this study to identify a framework of
consumerdesired products for future menthol cigarettes and other cigarette products, and to
identify potential new cigarettes that would extend the perceived benefits of existing menthol
products to ''go beyond the existing menthol/regular product categories.''38,39 Callé and
Company's research summary included the finding that smoking menthol cigarettes while
drinking alcohol served to ''greatly reduce perceived harshness and to increase the 'throat
moisturizing' effects desired.''38,39 The summary included discussions about smoking and
drinking, saying that a menthol cigarette, in particular, ''goes with drinks better. A nice
sensation-like a chaser.''38,39 The summary also included the observation that ''possibly
drinking acts as a cigarette stimulant.''38,39
From November 1988 to May 1989, PM used the General Foods Corporation (GF) consumer
database to conduct 3 analyses of cross usage of cigarettes, beer, and other food products. PM
acquired GF in 1985.40 The purpose of these analyses was to determine cross usage and
''investigate potential promotional tie-in partners'' if any cross-usage links were identified.4144 The database size ranged from 131000 consumers in 1988 to 199000 consumers in 1989.
PM found that ''monthly household beer consumption predicted incidence of smoking.''41,45
People whose households consumed smaller quantities of beer were less likely to smoke than
were households consuming larger quantities of beer; as household beer consumption
increased, the percentage of smokers increased.44-50 Nonsmoker households consumed the
smallest quantities of beer, full-flavor-smoker households consumed the largest quantities of
beer, and low-tar-smoker households were in between.47,51
R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company (RJR) also researched the cross usage of alcohol and
cigarettes. In November 1980, RJR conducted a qualitative study to ''investigate consumer
attitudes and perceptions toward menthol and non-menthol cigarettes, reasons for smoking a
menthol, and level of interest in 'mentholalternatives.''' 52 While investigating menthol
alternatives, RJR asked about reactions to liqueur, liquor (bourbon, rum), or a white wine
taste in a cigarette. They found that the responses were mixed:
''Good idea-drinks and cigarettes go together!''
''White wine and tobacco-sounds awful.''
''I wouldn't like an alcohol flavor in my cigarette.''
''Liqueurs are too sweet to smoke.''52
In June 1990, an RJR memo noted that Simmons Market Research Bureau had conducted an
analysis finding that among both genders and across almost all age groups, smokers showed a
positive index of alcohol consumption.53 RJR planned to ''utilize this learning which might
enhance our marketing efforts'' and ''to develop ways to leverage the alcoholic
beverage/tobacco use correlation among adults.''53
Research about smokers' drinking behavior. Tobacco companies also investigated specific
drinking behaviors, such as the types and brands of alcoholic beverages that smokers usually
drank and the locations where drinking occurred. For example, in 1980, RJR hired MultiMarketing, Inc, to conduct a study during promotional events among young adults on spring
break in the area of Daytona Beach/Fort Lauderdale, Florida.54,55 The study found that
98.3% of 1574 respondents spent money on alcoholic beverages, and 97.1% consumed
alcoholic beverages. Alcoholic beverages ranked second after food in the average amount of
money spent per month among both men and women. The study found that beer was the
preferred type of alcoholic beverage, the most popular brands of beer were Miller and
Budweiser, Riunite and Lambrusco were the top 2 favorite wine brands on campus, and Jack
Daniel's was the number 1 brand of liquor on campus. About 69.3% of respondents
purchased beer in bars/ taverns, 14.2% consumed beer daily, and 51.9% consumed beer a few
times a week.55
In March 1981, Leferman Associates conducted a qualitative study for RJR to evaluate the
reactions of young male smokers (18-24 years) to Camel Lights' participation in Expo
America, which was a traveling exposition combining showmanship and salesmanship
targeting young adults.56-58 The study found that free or discounted beer was welcome
among young male smokers, although free soft drinks might have been just as well
received.56 The report included several quotes from the participants:
''It would have been nice had they had something like free beer.''
''After going on the bull, I was sweating so much I had to go out and get a beer.''
''I came for the cheap beer and music.''
''Free beer would have gone over real good.''56
In 1983, RJR mapped adults' use of cigarettes and other products, including many different
alcoholic beverages, by age and education level (Figure 1). They reported that smokers of
Benson & Hedges (the most ''highly educated'' cigarette brand in this exercise) shared a
similar education level with Budweiser drinkers. Wine drinkers and imported beer drinkers
were much more educated than were cigarette smokers.59 In the same year, research
conducted to solicit RJR advertising in RockBill magazine (a free magazine distributed at
bars and clubs) also noted that
our affluent, out-going, sociable audience regularly consumes alcohol beverages as part of
their lifestyle-especially when they're out with friends at 'our' clubs . . . and most specify the
spirit by brand.60
Around 1983 and 1984, RJR conducted a study of the purchases and other activities of young
adults (18-24 years), and they found that young adults had above-average consumption of
many types of alcoholic beverages compared with all adults.61,62 In 1988, RJR studied the
lifestyles of young adult smokers (18-24 years) and found that popular alcohol drinks among
this population were regular beer, vodka, rum, tequila, gin, bubbly wines, and sweet wines;
less popular alcohol drinks were light beer, scotch, and traditional wines.63 In 1989, RJR
investigated the lifestyles of less educated smokers64 and found that a higher percentage of
young adult smokers with low education levels attended bars and discos compared with
young adult smokers who had graduated from college. 64 Many other studies also showed
that young adult smokers enjoyed going to bars and discos and drinking beer.65-68
PM conducted similar studies with young smokers. In 1999, the research company Golden
Door, Inc, conducted a study to assist PM in generating a stronger understanding of young
adult male culture and smoking experiences. 69-73 They found that young adult male
smokers frequently visited bars and clubs and that different cigarette brands were associated
with different types and brands of alcohol.69 For example, Newport smokers were associated
with ''40s'' (40-oz beers) and Hennessey, Marlboro Red was associated with whiskey and
moonshine, and Marlboro Light was associated with wine coolers.69
Formative Research on Potential Joint Promotions
Tobacco companies researched the potential effect of promoting cigarettes in conjunction
with alcohol. In April 1987, PM developed a Joint Consumer Promotions Research program
to investigate the feasibility of running joint consumer promotions that featured brands from
GF, PM, and Miller Brewing subsidiaries; these companies were all owned by PM.74,75 PM
confirmed that there were risks associated with promoting cigarettes with beer and other food
products.76,77 In market research on the concept, both smokers and nonsmokers had
negative reactions, and PM noted that ''cigarette inclusion in joint programs could potentially
have negative impact on other brands,'' particularly food brands.76 PM subsequently
considered pursuing promotional activities that only indirectly linked PM, GF, andMiller
Brewing Company products via '''masked' product linkage,'' such as shared free-standing
inserts, shared efforts to populate direct mailing lists, or retailer-implemented corporate
promotions.76,77
In August 1987, RJR studied promotion concepts appealing to young males,78 and they
found that 2 of the 8 concepts with aboveaverage appeal involved alcohol paraphernalia: ''free
beverage holder and mug at retail with 2-pack purchase'' and ''four mugs with different Camel
designs free at retail with 2-pack purchase.'' 78
Marketing Strategies and Expected Benefits
We identified 3 main types of marketing strategies that tobacco companies used to link
cigarettes with alcohol: (1) joint sponsorship, (2) joint promotion, and (3) cigarette
promotions featuring alcohol or alcohol paraphernalia.
Joint sponsorship. Tobacco companies jointly sponsored many special events with alcohol
companies. These special events mainly included sporting events (e.g., auto racing, soccer,
softball, golf), art events (e.g., concerts, fashion shows, festivals), ethnic events (e.g.,
Hispanic and Black festivals and sporting events), resort programs (e.g., spring break), and
bar and nightclub programs. Sporting events and bar nights were the most frequently
sponsored events. Table 1 lists some examples of the joint sponsorship efforts involving
tobacco and alcohol companies.
PM expected joint sponsorship to lower the cost of special event sponsorship, appeal more to
consumers, extend the outreach of brands' special event involvement, reinforce brand
identification, and generate increased sales of cigarettes.136,137 PM reported that as a result
of joint sponsorship, Marlboro was able to reduce the fee for Miller's sponsorship of the
Marlboro Grand Prix in 1988 by more than 25%, which benefited PM, the owner of both
Marlboro and Miller at the time.87 In November 1988, PM stated that the joint sponsorship
of bar nights at spring break sites in Daytona Beach, Florida, and South Padre Island, Texas,
between Marlboro and Miller might save ''over $50,000 for both Miller and Marlboro on
materials, fees, etc.''130
RJR expected joint sponsorship to increase the awareness of their promotional events, lower
the cost of event sponsorship, provide entertainment for the audience, and extend the
outreach of their special event involvement. 138-140 For example, RJR's 1975 plans to
cosponsor California Beach Volleyball with Olympia beer mentioned that the joint
sponsorship would improve event organization, garner a better reception for the event, ease
promotion, and lock out any competitive cigarette or beer companies from becoming
involved with beach volleyball.79
B&W also showed interest in lowering the cost of promotional events by jointly sponsoring
them with alcohol companies. For example, in July 1978, Action Marketing suggested that in
Kool Jazz Festival preliminary promotions, B&W should tie in with the manufacturers of
liquor, liqueurs, wine, beer, and other products to maximize awareness of the festival,
decrease costs, and ''extend Kool direct purchase incentive programs to other types of retail
outlets.'' 112 In January 1979, B&W reported on the conclusion of their 1978 Rich Lights
Disco Program, stating that tying in with a liquor company ''could be potentially beneficial in
terms of cost sharing for future promotions.''141
Joint promotion. Tobacco and alcohol companies often jointly promoted their products at
their jointly sponsored events. Through joint promotion, PM expected to receive substantive
benefits, such as increased sales impact, lower costs, and reinforced brand identity.76,77 For
example, in a PM document reporting on the conclusion of a 1982 Marlboro spring/summer
resort program that aimed to maximize Marlboro brand exposure and stimulate interest and
trial among the brand's young adult target audience, the topic of ''a joint promotion between
Miller and Marlboro'' was broached as a possible improvement. 142 The document stated that
''this would enhance the bar program and increase sales on both products while establishing
brand loyalty and awareness.''142
RJR also expected joint promotion to increase the awareness of their promotions, lower the
cost of promotion, appeal more to consumers, and extend brand exposures.139,140 In1989,
RJR listed a series of creative marketing ideas, including ''promotions in convenience outlets
which offer a 'specified amount off' the price of a six-pack of beer with 2 pack or 3 pack
purchase [of cigarettes].''143 An RJR memo said such a promotion could affect a consumer in
the following ways:
(1) Consumer who intended to purchase only one pack of cigarettes may purchase two or
three packs in order to get discount on beer. (2) Consumer who intended to purchase beer and
no cigarettes may purchase cigarettes to get discount on beer. Therefore, offering the discount
on beer may significantly increase the number of packs of cigarettes sold.143
B&W also showed an interest in joint promotion of their cigarettes with alcohol and expected
that joint promotion would lower the cost. For example, in August 1978, B&W discussed a
promotional concept for ''Kool Super Lights Black Market Promotions.'' The concept was that
the consumer would get a free 6-pack of Budweiser beer when purchasing a carton of Kool
Super Lights. ''Costs for this promotion would be shared between Budweiser and B&W-with
each participant covering one-half the cost of the refund.''144 In 1997, Gray Advertising
suggested many comarketing ideas for B&W and a spirits and wine company named BrownForman Corporation. One of the comarketing ideas was ''Catalina Supermarket Coupon
Program: purchase Jack Daniel's Country Cocktails and get a coupon for $3 off a carton of
any B&W brand.''99
Cigarette promotions featuring alcohol or alcohol paraphernalia. Tobacco marketing
activities, particularly promotional events, often included
1. discounted or free alcohol,
2. special drinks featuring tobacco promotion themes,
3. alcohol-related contests,
4. cigarette-branded gifts with alcohol purchases or alcohol-related contests, and
5. discounted or free alcohol paraphernalia.
Many tobacco companies offered discounted or free alcohol at tobacco-company-sponsored
bar nights, nightclub events, and other promotional events. At several Marlboro promotional
events in the late1970s and early1980s, PM planned to offer free beer to the audience to
generate excitement and please the participants. 145-148 RJR also offered discounted or free
beer and liquor at their bar nights and promotional events in the 1980s and 1990s,149-152
which they expected would not only provide prizes to the consumers but would also provide
benefits to the managers of the bars and nightclubs, so that these managers would allow RJR
to conduct theirmarketing activities.150,151Similarly, B&W also offered discounted and free
alcoholic drinks at their disco nights in 1978.153-155,134
Tobacco companies also sometimes developed special alcoholic drinks for their promotional
events. The name, color, taste, or container of these special drinks usually would match the
promotional theme and the characteristics of the promoted brands. For example, in the 1980s,
RJR conducted many Salem bar nights that featured a special drink named ''Salem-Sling'';
this drink was colored green to match the Salem logo, and it was flavored with mint to match
Salem's menthol flavoring.156,157 Special drinks were also offered at RJR's Salem Ski
Scene.158,159 Similarly, B&W was encouraged to develop an official Kool ''Jazz Fizz'' drink
in 1978 for their Jazz Festival to increase attendees' interest in and enthusiasm for the festival
and to provide a unique way to tie Kools in with wine, liquor, or soft drink companies.112 In
1978, B&W developed a Rich Lights drink for the Rich Lights Disco Program.153 The
marketing firm hired by B&W to develop the special Rich Lights drinks160-163 provided
specific requirements that the drinks should meet:
The drink should enhance and reinforce the positioning of Rich Lights cigarettes which is
distinctive in packaging and positioning, and rich in tone and manner, packaging and
imagery. The drink should be light in taste and visual appearance. The drink should be rich in
appearance (not thick or heavy in taste). A thin blue float, blue garnish, or blue ice cubes
would be ideal. Because of our desire to compliment [sic] the light nature of the Rich Lights
cigarette product, we would prefer to use a drink based on: Gin, Vodka, Rum, Tequila,
Champagne, or White Wine. We do not feel that drinks based on the use of Whiskey,
Bourbon, Scotch or other dark liquors would be appropriate.160
Tobacco promotional events often included alcohol-related contests, such as beer-chugging
competitions. For example, in May 1989, PM's bar night program included the following
beerchug contest:
Miller Beer Chug Contest: Sign up ten people to compete against each other. The winner
would be the first one to drink all the beer and place the mug upside down on his/her head
and yell ''MARLBORO IS NUMBER 1.''164
Variations of beer-chug contests included a Wild West Contest (PM)165 and a team
competition (RJR).166,167
Wild West Contest was designed to fit the Marlboro image in a bar setting. The contest was a
cross between a wild bull ride and a beer chugging contest. Since health rules prohibited a
bull in the bar, a tricycle was substituted on a marked course with a beer chugging stop in the
middle. Very popular contest.165
Tent Stuff: . . . Each participant is given a stein of beer. The first person on each team must
chug his/her beer and then enter the tent, followed by the second person doing the
same.166,167
Beer-chug contests were conducted in many of PM's and RJR's sponsored bar nights and
nightclub events.151,166-174 These contests were usually targeted at young males. Tobacco
companies expected the contests to reinforce brand image, enhance visibility, increase brand
awareness, generate entertaining excitement, provide branded incentives, and generate
increased sales. PM marketers noted that a beer-chug contest was ''easy to run, does not need
many participants and is exciting to watch.''170 RJR noted that beerchug contests involved
skill, dexterity, strength, and other masculine qualities169,172,173; generated ''peer pressure''
to win Camel prizes175; and were exciting and easy to understand.176 In addition to bars and
nightclubs, Lorillard conducted beer-chugging contests during Newport promotions held at
the Fort Bragg army base in April 1983.177,178
Tobacco companies often provided cigarette- branded gifts to those who purchased special
drinks or who won alcohol-related contests.151,156,166-169,172-174,179 For example, with
alcohol purchases, RJR distributed Camel game cards that gave customers a chance to win
Camel merchandise,151,169 and RJR provided Camel beach towels to participants who won
Camel beer-chug contests.174 Cigarette-branded gifts included lighters, key chains, game
cards, beach towels, T-shirts, and coasters.151,169,174,180,181 These gifts were intended to
increase visibility, appeal more to the consumers (especially young adults), extend awareness
of the brand, and provide branded incentives.147,151,169,182,183
Cigarette-branded gifts frequently were alcohol- related paraphernalia, such as bottle openers,
beer mugs, beer coolers, wine skins, shot glasses, and champagne glasses.180,181,184 For
example, in January1974, PM provided a discounted wine rack to consumers who bought 2
packs of Parliament cigarettes.145 During the1980s, PM included beer mugs in several resort
promotions.171,185-187 At RJR's promotions, consumers could exchange packs of cigarettes
for a free beer mug.181,188 In 1997, Gray Advertising suggested comarketing ideas for
B&W and Brown-Forman Corporation, including a promotion in which customers would
''collect Kool UPC's and get Lenox Glassware Set (shot glass, snifter, wine glass, martini
glass, champagne flute, etc.).''99
DISCUSSION
We found that tobacco companies researched the concurrent use of alcohol and cigarettes,
understood the high prevalence of couse of cigarettes and alcohol (especially beer), and
intended to use these findings to enhance their marketing efforts. Tobacco companies'
marketing strategies linking cigarettes with alcohol were elaborately planned and carefully
executed both to connect tobacco sales with alcohol purchases and to increase cigarette sales.
The link between smoking and drinking might have been strengthened by these marketing
activities. This finding is consistent with previous research showing that tobacco
manufacturers incorporated images of and references to alcohol in cigarette advertisements in
magazines targeting young adults.189
Young adults are the most frequent target of tobacco companies' marketing activities
featuring alcohol. Since at least the1980s, tobacco companies expressed special interest in
this population in both their research studies and their marketing activities.25,27,28,33,190
The companies understood that young adults spent time in bars and nightclubs and enjoyed
social activities such as drinking and partying with friends in these places.36,37,54,59,60,6369 The tobacco companies' marketing activities linked with alcohol were targeted at both
male and female young adults, which is consistent with previous research on bar and
nightclub events.25,27,28,33,190 Significant numbers of young adults continue to be exposed
to these promotions.25 Thus, young adults should be a priority for tobacco control and
cessation interventions, because young adulthood represents a unique period in the life cycle
in which patterns of behaviors are established that will affect both current and future health.
Tobacco company sponsorship that involves using a tobacco brand's name, logo, symbol,
motto, selling message, recognizable pattern of colors, or any other indicia of product
identification of cigarettes or smokeless tobacco was recently prohibited for athletic, musical,
artistic, or other social or cultural events.191 However, tobacco companies still conduct
promotional events at bars and nightclubs, which represent fun, smoker-friendly places for
young people to initiate and enjoy smoking in the context of drinking. These promotional
events continue even after implementation of smoke-free policies in bars.
Tobacco promotions in these venues may be partly responsible for the creation and
reinforcement of links between smoking and drinking by encouraging nonsmokers to initiate
smoking, encouraging social and nondaily smokers to smoke more frequently, or encouraging
former smokers to relapse. Nichter et al.24 found that young adults perceived smoking to be
more acceptable at parties with concurrent alcohol use. Also, studies have suggested that
discontinuing or reducing alcohol consumption predicts the success of smoking
cessation.6,192 Therefore, tobacco control efforts should prioritize venues and settings where
alcohol use is frequent, such as bars and nightclubs. Studies are needed to monitor tobacco
companies' marketing activities linking tobacco with alcohol products and to determine those
activities' effects on the concurrent use of the 2 substances.
Although tobacco companies have aggressively pursued joint promotion of tobacco and
alcohol products, it is worth noting that PM found that negative associations with cigarettes
threatened the effectiveness of joint promotion of cigarettes with other products, particularly
food brands. This finding suggests that campaigns that denormalize smoking and the tobacco
industry and that create negative associations with tobacco brands will limit the tobacco
industry's ability to cross promote cigarettes with other products or to attach cigarette brands
to other products; this effect is in addition to the strong relation that denormalization
campaigns have with smoking status and intentions to quit.193 Such effectsmay be
particularly important in countries where indirect advertising and cobranding are
common.194,195
A limitation of the present study is that the internal documents we located were primarily
from the 1980s and the 1990s. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to use
internal tobacco industry documents to investigate tobacco companies' research on the
concurrent use of cigarettes and alcohol, their research on smokers' drinking behaviors, and
their marketing strategies linked with alcohol. Tobacco marketing reinforces the links
between smoking and drinking, and these marketing activities continue today; therefore, the
prevalence of tobacco and alcohol comorbidity may continue to increase.
On the basis of these findings, we make 3 recommendations. First, it should be prohibited to
tie in any tobacco products, tobacco paraphernalia (such as lighters and ashtrays), or tobaccobranded products with alcohol purchase. Second, tobacco sales and promotions should be
prohibited in any establishments serving or selling alcohol, including adult-only venues. The
use of alcohol impairs one's ability to make an informed choice about tobacco use, and the
use of both tobacco and alcohol may enhance the addictive potential of both substances, so
the US Food and Drug Administration's prohibition of tobacco sponsorship should be
extended to include venues and events where alcohol is served or sold. Third, given the
strong association between smoking and drinking, smoking cessation programs should
address the use of alcohol, and bingedrinking interventions should consider addressing
tobacco use, such as evaluating tobacco-use behaviors among binge drinkers and alcoholics
and including tobacco cessation strategies in drinking interventions. New efforts to break
linkages between tobacco use and alcohol use are needed.
References
References
1. American Heart Association. Smoking & cardiovascular disease. Available at:
http://www.heart.org/
HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/QuitSmoking/Quitting
Resources/Smoking-Cardiovascular-Disease_UCM_ 305187_Article.jsp#. Accessed July 7,
2011.
2. Mokdad AH, Marks JS, Stroup DF, Gerberding JL. Actual causes of death in the United
States, 2000. JAMA. 2004;291(10):1238-1245.
3. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Alcoholrelated disease impact (ARDI)
software. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/ardi.htm. Accessed May 10, 2010.
4. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Alcohol alert. Available at:
http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/ publications/aa39.htm. Published January 1998. Accessed June 23,
2010.
5. American Cancer Society. Alcohol use and cancer. Available at:
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/Cancer
Causes/DietandPhysicalActivity/alcohol-use-andcancer. Revised May 5, 2010. Accessed June 30, 2010.
6. Hymowitz N, Cummings KM, Hyland A, Lynn WR, Pechacek TF, Hartwell TD.
Predictors of smoking cessation in a cohort of adult smokers followed for five years. Tob
Control. 1997;6(suppl 2):S57-S62.
7. Bobo JK, Husten C. Sociocultural influences on smoking and drinking. Alcohol Res
Health. 2000;24(4): 225-232.
8. McKee SA, Hinson R, Rounsaville D, Petrelli P. Survey of subjective effects of smoking
while drinking among college students. Nicotine Tob Res. 2004;6(1):111-117.
9. Schorling JB, Gutgesell M, Klas P, Smith D, Keller A. Tobacco, alcohol and other drug
use among college students. J Subst Abuse. 1994;6(1):105-115.
10. Weitzman ER, Chen Y- Y. The co-occurrence of smoking and drinking among young
adults in college: national survey results from the United States. Drug Alcohol Depend.
2005;80(3):377-386.
11. Harrison ELR, Desai RA, McKee SA. Nondaily smoking and alcohol use, hazardous
drinking, and alcohol diagnoses among young adults: findings from the NESARC. Alcohol
Clin Exp Res. 2008;32(12):2081- 2087.
12. McKee SA, Falba T, O'Malley SS, Sindelar J, O'Connor PG. Smoking status as a clinical
indicator for alcohol misuse in US adults. Arch Intern Med. 2007; 167(7):716-721.
13. Acosta MC, Eissenberg T, Nichter M, Nichter M, Balster RL; Tobacco Etiology Research
Network (TERN). Characterizing early cigarette use episodes in novice smokers. Addict
Behav. 2008;33(1):106-121.
14. Batel P, Pessione F, Maître C, Rueff B. Relationship between alcohol and tobacco
dependencies among alcoholics who smoke. Addiction. 1995;90(7):977-980.
15. Harrison ELR, McKee SA. Young adult non-daily smokers: patterns of alcohol and
cigarette use. Addict Behav. 2008;33(5):668-674.
16. Rose JE, Brauer LH, Behm FM, Cramblett M, Calkins K, Lawhon D.
Psychopharmacological interactions between nicotine and ethanol. Nicotine Tob Res.
2004;6(1): 133-144.
17. King AC, Epstein AM. Alcohol dose-dependent increases in smoking urge in light
smokers. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2005;29(4):547-552.
18. Glautier S, Clements K,White JA, Taylor C, Stolerman IP. Alcohol and the reward value
of cigarette smoking. Behav Pharmacol. 1996;7(2):144-154.
19. Barrett SP, Tichauer M, Leyton M, Pihl RO. Nicotine increases alcohol selfadministration in non-dependent male smokers. Drug Alcohol Depend. 2006;81(2):197-204.
20. Sher KJ, Gotham HJ, Erickson DJ, Wood PK. A prospective, high-risk study of the
relationship between tobacco dependence and alcohol use disorders. Alcohol Clin Exp Res.
1996;20(3):485-492.
21. Falk DE, Hsiao-Ye Y, Hiller-Sturmhöfel S. An epidemiologic analysis of co-occurring
alcohol and tobacco use and disorders. Alcohol Res Health. 2006;29(3): 162-171.
22. Dierker L, Lloyd-Richardson E, Stolar M, et al. The proximal association between
smoking and alcohol use among first year college students. Drug Alcohol Depend.
2006;81(1):1-9.
23. Nichter M, Nichter M, Lloyd-Richardson EE, Flaherty B, Carkoglu A, Taylor N.
Gendered dimensions of smoking among college students. J Adolesc Res. 2006;21(3): 215243.
24. Nichter M, Nichter M, Carkoglu A, Lloyd-Richardson E; Tobacco Etiology Research
Network (TERN). Smoking and drinking among college students: ''It's a package deal.'' Drug
Alcohol Depend. 2010;106(1):16-20.
25. Gilpin EA, White VM, Pierce JP. How effective are tobacco industry bar and
clubmarketing efforts in reaching young adults? Tob Control. 2005;14(3):186-192.
26. Stromberg P, Nichter M, Nichter M. Taking play seriously: low-level smoking among
college students. Cult Med Psychiatry. 2007;31(1):1-24.
27. Sepe E, Ling PM, Glantz SA. Smooth moves: bar and nightclub tobacco promotions that
target young adults. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(3):414-419.
28. Katz SK, Lavack AM. Tobacco related bar promotions: insights from tobacco industry
documents. Tob Control. 2002;11(suppl 1):i92-i101.
29. McCracken G. Diderot unities and the Diderot effect: neglected cultural aspects of
consumption. In: Culture and Consumption. 1st ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press;
1990:118-129.
30. Malone RE, Balbach ED. Tobacco industry documents: treasure trove or quagmire? Tob
Control. 2000; 9(3):334-338.
31. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1994.
32. Bero L. Implications of the tobacco industry documents for public health and policy.
Annu Rev Public Health. 2003;24:267-288.
33. Sepe E, Glantz SA. Bar and club tobacco promotions in the alternative press: targeting
young adults. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(1):75-78.
34. Anderson SJ, Dewhirst T, Ling PM. Every document and picture tells a story: using
internal corporate document reviews, semiotics, and content analysis to assess tobacco
advertising. Tob Control. 2006;15(3):254-261.
35. Brown Williamson. Young adult smoker life styles and attitudes. 1976. Bates no.
680141012/1021. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/viy40f00. Accessed May 5,
2010.
36. Kenyon and Eckhardt Inc. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company new ventures project.
Consumer views. The ''new'' smoker. September 1974. Brown & Williamson. Bates no.
170052291/2325. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qnq83f00. Accessed May 5,
2010.
37. Kenyon and Eckhardt Inc. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Company new ventures project.
Stage II. The ''new'' smoker. September 1974. Brown & Williamson. Bates no.
170052326/2365. Available at: http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/rnq83f00. Accessed May 5,
2010.
38. Callé and Company. Philip Morris, Inc. new menthol cigarette ASSAY. October 1986.
Philip Morris. Bates no. 2041137501/7658. Available at: http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/wbz67e00. Accessed May 9, 2010.
39. Callé and Company. Philip Morris, Inc. new menthol cigarette ASSAY. October 1986.
Philip Morris. Bates no. 2042854700/4728. Available at: http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/xdb37c00. Accessed May 1, 2010.
40. Philip Morris. Philip Morris Companies Inc. annual report 1986. 1986. Bates no.
2048000568/0618. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lac84e00. Accessed June
30, 2010.
41. Filak J. Memorandum: relationship between coffee drinking and smoking. May 16, 1991.
Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2049173019.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/lpe98a00. Accessed July 31, 2009.
42. Guglielmone L. PSC survey smoker names. December 13, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2044998266/ 8268. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ crh06e00. Accessed
September 2, 2009.
43. Guglielmone L. December 30, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2044998293/8294.
Available at: http:// legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dvx48a00. Accessed September 2, 2009.
44. McMath C. GF survey of smokers. May 4, 1989. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2041830455/0456. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/frp26e00. Accessed
September 2, 2009.
45. McMath C. GF survey of smokers follow-up. May 16, 1989. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2044998218/8224. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lrh06e00. Accessed
September 2, 2009.
46. Guglielmone L, Lynch M, Romer D. Tabulations GF cross promotional. February 8,
1989. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2041830394/0451. Available at: http://
legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/yqd82e00. Accessed September 3, 2009.
47. Philip Morris. Caffeinated coffee consumption at home. May 1989. Bates no.
2041830459/0460. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/irp26e00. Accessed
September 6, 2009.
48. Philip Morris. Beer consumption at home. May 1989. Bates no. 2041830461. Available
at: http:// legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ard82e00. Accessed September 1, 2009.
49. Romer D GF. promotion analysis. June 15, 1989. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2044998225.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mrh06e00. Accessed September 1, 2009.
50. Philip Morris. Age and sex profiles of smoker/coffee drinking households. June 14, 1989.
Bates no. 2044998226/ 8255. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ frh06e00.
Accessed September 2, 2009.
51. Philip Morris. General Foods Corporation promotional services center fall 88 questionaire
brand report for merged tapes all smokers. November 17, 1988. Bates no. 2044998271/8286.
Available at: http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/cvx48a00. Accessed September 2, 2009.
52. Andrews A. Report of individual and group interviews on a new cigarette. November
1980.
R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
501366486/6542.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jbj49d00. Accessed May 1, 2010.
53. Troutman GA. Idea generation meeting - alcoholic beverage/tobacco use correlation. June
28,
1990.
R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
507399390/9391.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gmy24d00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
54. Patterson DM. MMI lifestyle research. December 10, 1980. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
501293101/3103. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ftp49d00. Accessed February
2, 2010.
55. R. J. Reynolds. Expo America 1980 collegiate lifestyle research report highlights. 1980.
Bates no. 500686358/6388. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/unp69d00.
Accessed June 1, 2010.
56. Leferman Associates Inc. A qualitative assessment of participant reactions to Expo 198081. March 1981. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no. 503471613/1654. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zgf95d00. Accessed April 4, 2010.
57. Expo America Inc. Expo America national tour. 1980. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
506079703/9714. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ raz18c00. Accessed June 28,
2010.
58. Expo America Inc. Final report Camel Lights Expo America 1980. 1980. R.J. Reynolds.
Bates no. 505776941/ 6946. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ hbs05d00.
Accessed June 28, 2010.
59. R. J. Reynolds. Less-educated: today's trend tomorrow's market??? 1984. Bates no.
504616783/6808. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/qnf65d00. Accessed July 2,
2010.
60. Simmons Market Research Bureau. A RockBill magazine readership profile and
advertising proposal for the Salem brand of the R.J. Reynolds Co. May 1983. R.J. Reynolds.
Bates no. 503113267/3282. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ipk68d00.
Accessed February 4, 2010.
61. R. J. Reynolds. New brands research: the younger adult smokers of the '80's. 1983. Bates
no. 503004505/ 4579. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ ixr68d00. Accessed
February 4, 2010.
62. R. J. Reynolds. Project YAX (XG). Storyfinder. 1984. Bates no. 504653831/3842.
Available at: http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/vtb65d00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
63. R. J. Reynolds. Effective marketing to younger adult smokers. September 19, 1988. Bates
no. 507241690/ 1774. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ bin76b00. Accessed
March 15, 2010.
64. R. J. Reynolds. Lesser educated smokers. 1989. Bates no. 507182933/2956. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/gph28c00. Accessed January 12, 2010.
65. R. J. Reynolds. Strategic research report: the 1981 brand family segmentation study. April
14,
1982.
R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
502035398/5486.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lcj29d00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
66. Whaley J. Input received in meetings with promotions, marketing and brand research RE:
younger adult smokers. June 26, 1984. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no. 503497627/7633. Available
at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/phd95d00. Accessed April 16, 2010.
67. Promotional Marketing Inc. Camel tie-in promotions. February 14, 1988. R.J. Reynolds.
Bates no. 506882997/ 3000. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ vvd44d00.
Accessed September 2, 2009.
68. Long Haymes Carr Lintas Inc. Generation XYZ. September 26, 1995. R.J. Reynolds.
Bates no. 522694402/4454. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/hak56d00.
Accessed March 4, 2010.
69. Golden Door Inc. A look at the smoking culture of young adult males: presented to Philip
Morris - USA. 1999. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2079128804/8883. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lrq91c00. Accessed April 2, 2010.
70. Golden Door Inc. Philip Morris Incorporated. Marlboro young adult male consumer
research. April 20, 1999. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2064983915/3922. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ldx94a00. Accessed May 17, 2010.
71. Golden Door Inc, Philip Morris. April 15, 1999. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2064983923/3924. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kdx94a00. Accessed May 7,
2010.
72. Golden Door Inc, Philip Morris. Marlboro young adult male consumer research II. July
30,
1999.
Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2064983908/3914.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mdx94a00. Accessed May 17, 2010.
73. Golden Door Inc. Qualitative research proposal for Philip Morris USA. April 6, 1999.
Philip Morris. Bates no. 2072468551/8578. Available at: http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/lnk27a00. Accessed May 17, 2010.
74. Schumacher W. PMC joint consumer promotions. April 7, 1987. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2044733910/ 3911. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ mxp83e00. Accessed
August 8, 2009.
75. Philip Morris. PM corporate leverage: proposal for research on joint consumer
promotions. April 1987. Bates no. 2044733913/3935. Available at: http://
legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bfl11b00. Accessed January 4, 2010.
76. Philip Morris. Philip Morris Companies corporate leverage project: consumer
promotion.May 1987. Bates no. 2049020468/0558. Available at: http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/phj93e00. Accessed September 18, 2009.
77. Philip Morris. Philip Morris Companies corporate leverage: joint sponsorships and joint
promotions.
May 5,
1987.
Bates no.
2043645360/5412.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gmq81f00. Accessed August 18, 2009.
78. Snyder SL. Promotion research report: Camel 75th birthday promotion ideas. August 27,
1987.
Research.
Bates
no.
509230963-509230976.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vnf76b00. Accessed January 4, 2010.
79. Dixon D, Dancer Fitzgerald Sample Inc. Summer volleyball 1976. October 10, 1975. R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
500734136/4143.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/oyl69d00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
80. Standen CC. California beach volleyball. October 23, 1975. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
500734135. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nyl69d00. Accessed June 23,
2010.
81. Lewis CE. Tobacco public relations second quarter, 1985. 1985. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
505476804/ 6811. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ bas15d00. Accessed March
3, 2010.
82. Fishel DB. Tobacco management report. June 21, 1985. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
505439632/9635. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ qhw15d00. Accessed March
3, 2010.
83. Aprati FP Jr. April 4, 1986. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no. 505477491. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf. edu/tid/hfy77c00. Accessed March 3, 2010.
84. Lewis CE. External affairs plan for 1986 public relations proposal. July 1985. R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
505463822/3829.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/vct15d00. Accessed March 3, 2010.
85. Fishel DB. Weekly report: domestic tobacco. June 6, 1986. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
505485394/5397. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jjr15d00. Accessed March 3,
2010.
86. Philip Morris. Status report for September - national accounts. October 1988. Bates no.
2043853631/3658. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cmv03e00. Accessed June
22, 2010.
87. Leiber CL. Event promotion synergy results. March 11, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2048578598/8599. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/zvb92e00. Accessed
October 18, 2009.
88. Philip Morris. Corporate synergy issues. May 11, 1988. Bates no. 2048641563/1564.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vxe22d00. Accessed June 15, 2010.
89. Ewers A, Cohen M. Marlboro Soccer Cup of Los Angeles - #2. July 28, 1988. Philip
Morris. Bates no. 2048576974/6981. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/qst75e00.
Accessed December 16, 2009.
90. Vera G. Marlboro Soccer Cup/Giant Stadium. May 31, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2048641578/1579. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/riy68a00. Accessed March
4, 2010.
91. Berner V. Recommended events - Marlboro target marketing. January 31, 1989. Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2048670975/0978.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/zzw88a00. Accessed June 22, 2010.
92. Yodice F. Event calendar/corporate synergy. December 7, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2048514483. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fxe22d00. Accessed June 15,
2010.
93. Championship Auto Racing Teams Inc. 1989 PPG Indy Car world series schedule.
December 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2048514484. Available at: http://
legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cip98a00. Accessed June 15, 2010.
94. Philip Morris. Philip Morris U.S.A. trade relations 1990 schedule of events. December
18, 1989. Bates no. 2047926127/6140. Available at: http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/eys52d00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
95. Philip Morris. Calle Ocho Festival. February 3, 1994. Bates no. 2040562647/2650.
Available at: http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/plc66e00. Accessed June 22, 2010.
96. Vichich E. Project agreement No. 4. February 13, 1996. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2065160255/0261. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/pmq73c00. Accessed July
2, 2010.
97. Courtney K. Welcome to the Marlboro Grand Prix of Miami presented by Toyota. 1996.
Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2083793885/3919.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/ypx48c00. Accessed July 1, 2010.
98. Philip Morris. 1996 Marlboro auto racing schedule. 1996. Bates no. 2060287826/7831.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/exf40b00. Accessed July 1, 2010.
99. Grey Advertising Inc. Brown & Williamson and Brown-Forman co-marketing ideas.
1997. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 210431280/1281. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/nsu12d00. Accessed February 17, 2010.
100. Brown Williamson. Chicago designer fashion showcase merchandising program. 1978.
Bates no. 794003917/3919. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/zvg00c00.
Accessed February 19, 2010.
101. Brown & Williamson. Canadian Mist and Viceroy Rich Lights designer fashion
showcase. September 26, 1978. Bates no. 690141075. Available at: http://
legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/vam40f00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
102. Brown & Williamson. Canadian Mist Viceroy Rich Lights designer fashion show.
September 26, 1978. Bates no. 690141054. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.
edu/tid/cam40f00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
103. Brown & Williamson. Canadian Mist Viceroy Rich Lights designer fashion show.
September 26, 1978. Bates no. 690141055. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.
edu/tid/dam40f00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
104. Brown & Williamson. You are cordially invited to attend the Canadian Mist and
Viceroy Rich Lights designer showcase. September 26, 1978. Bates no. 690141084/1085.
Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/zam40f00. Accessed February 24, 2010.
105. Arnold F. Canadian Mist designer fashion showcase. October 2, 1978. Brown &
Williamson. Bates no. 690141069. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf. edu/tid/pam40f00.
Accessed February 19, 2010.
106. Jones D. Canadian Mist designer fashion showcase. September 1, 1978. Brown &
Williamson.
Bates
no.
690141079/1080.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/xam40f00. Accessed February 16, 2010.
107. Jones D Canadian Mist & Viceroy Rich Lights. September 18, 1978. Brown &
Williamson. Bates no. 690141074. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf. edu/tid/uam40f00.
Accessed February 19, 2010.
108. Jones D. November 14, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 690141053. Available at:
http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/bam40f00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
109. Jones D. September 1, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 690141078. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/wam40f00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
110. Jones D. November 14, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 794003887/3891.
Available at: http:// legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/awg00c00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
111. Walls VA. September 12, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 690141076/1077.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hzq93f00. Accessed February 24, 2010.
112. Copello V, Action Marketing Ltd. Kool Jazz Festival preliminary promotion
recommendations. July 25, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 685087457/7526.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ysc91d00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
113. Leonard E. Consolidated calendar of events 1990. 1990. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2048629768/9813. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ jau75e00. Accessed March
2, 2010.
114. Philip Morris. Events 1990 community marketing programs schedule. January 26, 1990.
Bates no. 2041964633/4641. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/gib79a00.
Accessed June 23, 2010.
115. Philip Morris. The 1992 Houston international festival: a salute to the arts of Spain and
the new world. January 22, 1992. Bates no. 2043671514/1524. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mpt48a00. Accessed September 29, 2009.
116. Philip Morris. CMP: festival sponsorship 1992 contracts/PO's. 1992. Bates no.
2043678461. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/bxe18a00. Accessed July 1, 2010.
117. Philip Morris. Contract subject matter cross directory 1992. 1992. Bates no.
2065029388/9423. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/giv04c00. Accessed July 1,
2010.
118. Berstling J. May/June report for bar and restaurant program. June 29, 1993. Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2070483091/3095.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/gln97a00. Accessed September 29, 2009.
119. Philip Morris. Corporate affairs 1994 budget presentation. October 21, 1993. Bates no.
2045521070/ 1111. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ gkr81f00. Accessed June
22, 2010.
120. Philip Morris. Black national/local events - exhibits 1989 minority business
development schedule. 1989. Bates no. 2077910507/0515. Available at: http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/nyx29a00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
121. Philip Morris. Minority business development schedule. May 1989. Bates no.
2077910516/0518. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ hlm39a00. Accessed June
23, 2010.
122. Biedermann E. Minority business development calendar of events. April 11, 1989.
Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2046794562/4564.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/xkd45d00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
123. Biedermann EM. Calle Ocho. February 16, 1990. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2048653882/3884. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ybd78a00. Accessed June
23, 2010.
124. Hall Y. African World Festival - proposal. February 7, 1990. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2046794325. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tgb42d00. Accessed June 23
2010.
125. Robinson JY. African World Festival - Milwaukee, Wisconsin. July 11, 1990. Philip
Morris. Bates no. 2046794324. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf. edu/tid/sgb42d00.
Accessed June 23, 2010.
126. Robinson JY. African World Festival Milwaukee, Wisconsin. July 16, 1990. Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2046794299/4300.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/jgb42d00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
127. Font CA. Carnaval Miami. January 24, 1991. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2065034929/4934. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/uxs04c00. Accessed June
23, 2010.
128. Philip Morris. Community marketing programs status report. January 1991. Bates no.
2041923231/ 3232. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ lff59a00. Accessed
September 29, 2009.
129. Metacorp Inc. 1984 Marlboro spring resort field marketing opportunities. 1984. Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2044390059/0073.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/ukf66b00. Accessed June 22, 2010.
130. Vera G. Miller brewing/Marlboro synergy. November 16, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2048641677. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf. edu/tid/wxe22d00. Accessed September
24, 2009.
131. Vera G. Marlboro soccer, ski, menthol and target markets meeting review. October 19,
1988.
Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2048641737/1739.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xxe22d00. Accessed June 22, 2010.
132. Vera G. 1989 target marketing. October 26, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2048641678.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/evl78a00. Accessed June 22, 2010.
133. Vera G. Status report. October 31, 1988. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2048641735/1736.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/kqv87a00. Accessed June 22, 2010.
134. Action Marketing Ltd. Brown & Williamson disco promotion events preliminary
recommendations. September 18, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 680123304/3361.
Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/ilu08c00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
135. Stowe R. Brown-Foreman opportunities. November 17, 1997. Brown & Williamson.
Bates no. 210431706/ 1708. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ xpu12d00.
Accessed July 1, 2010.
136. Leiber C. Corporate synergy project - event promotion subcommittee report. November
9, 1987. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2049004217/4221. Available at: http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/hze22d00. Accessed August 25, 2009.
137. Philip Morris. Promotion presentation to corporate planning committee: part of
corporate leverage project. June 10, 1987. Bates no. 2049004258/4269. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/csu95e00. Accessed September 20, 2010.
138. R.J. Reynolds. Meeting notes. April 16, 1980. Bates no. 500088502/8510. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/kdz89d00. Accessed February 16, 2010.
139. R.J. Reynolds. Position paper: Winston special event tie-ins. November 25, 1975. Bates
no. 500208607/ 8609. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ fbm89d00. Accessed
September 24, 2009.
140. Williams CA. Tie-in opportunities. April 27, 1988. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
506759341/9343. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/jee28c00. Accessed
September 30, 2009.
141. McCafferty BL. Rich Lights disco program. January 12, 1979. Brown & Williamson.
Bates no. 680116770/ 6773. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ onz11c00.
Accessed January 4, 2010.
142. Troupe JM. 1982 Marlboro spring/summer resort program. October 13, 1982. Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2043793593/3596.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/lws03e00. Accessed September 14, 2009.
143. Hribar JR. 1990 creative marketing ideas. February 10, 1989. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
507203478/3483. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/hgm54d00. Accessed
February 2, 2010.
144. Brown & Williamson. August 1978. Bates no. 689012717/2794. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/uhc91d00. Accessed October 18, 2009.
145. Philip Morris. Philip Morris, Inc. January, 1974. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
501116463/6482. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/olc59d00. Accessed
November 12, 2009.
146. Roper RP Jr.. Marlboro resort/promotional events. November 16, 1981. Philip Morris.
Bates no. 2045226450/ 6451. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ srr92e00.
Accessed November 12, 2009.
147. Ambrosino F. Marlboro resort program. December 11, 1981. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2045385670/5671. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/syp65e00. Accessed
December 16, 2009.
148. Ambrosino F. Special summer programs - recommendations. June 17, 1982. Philip
Morris.
Bates
no.
2049005153/5155.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/bve01b00. Accessed December 16, 2009.
149. R.J. Reynolds. Camel bar program Richmond market visit. November 9, 1999. Bates no.
527814771. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ epd08c00. Accessed February 2,
2010.
150. Multi-Marketing Inc. M-2 program development action plan. December 30, 1980. R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
502043922/3948.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/xti29d00. Accessed December 17, 2009.
151. R.J. Reynolds. Camel Expo America spring break program description. February 25,
1982. Bates no. 505771430/1464. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/uus05d00.
Accessed November 22, 2009.
152. Bowling JS. Field trip report - Salem spirit winter resort program - Snowshoe, WV.
December 27, 1982. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no. 507577944/7945. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/xok24d00. Accessed December 16, 2009.
153. Outlaw PK. October 11, 1978. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 680080613. Available
at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/jsy14f00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
154. McCafferty BL. Update on Rich Lights' pilot disco effort. October 18, 1978. Brown
&Williamson. Bates no. 680116800/6801. Available at: http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/tjz11c00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
155. McCafferty BL. Rich Lights/Peter O's disco promotion. December 6, 1978. Brown &
Williamson.
Bates
no.
680116794/6796.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/nkv04f00. Accessed March 2, 2010.
156. R.J. Reynolds. Salem spirit field marketing promotional activities. April 8, 1982. Bates
no. 503028639/ 8642. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ leq68d00. Accessed
January 20, 2010.
157. Multi-Marketing Inc. Salem spirit field marketing program promotions. 1982. R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
505718475/8478.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/ybv18c00. Accessed January 20, 2010.
158. R.J. Reynolds. Salem spirit ski scene tactical plan exhibit I: Salem winter resort market
schedule. October 13, 1982. Bates no. 500862281/2290. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fkx51c00. Accessed February 26, 2010.
159. R.J. Reynolds. Salem spirit ski scene '84. 1984. Bates no. 502191064/1090. Available at:
http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/jqv19d00. Accessed February 13, 2010.
160. Mills RA. January 11, 1979. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 660069510/9511.
Available at: http:// legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cin89e00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
161. Copello V. Viceroy Rich Lights drink promotion. January 29, 1979. Brown &
Williamson. Bates no. 660069509. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf. edu/tid/ttl14f00.
Accessed June 23, 2010.
162. Copello V. Contact report 1/25/79 meeting with the Bartending School of Mixology,
Inc. February 5, 1979. Brown & Williamson. Bates no. 660069508. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/stl14f00. Accessed June 23, 2010.
163. Mundy P. Rich Lights drink promotions. December 4, 1978. Brown & Williamson.
Bates no. 680116768/ 6769. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ pnz11c00.
Accessed December 16, 2009.
164. Philip Morris. May 1989. Bates no. 2048646272/ 6286.
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ wtz26c00. Accessed February 15, 2010.
Available
at:
165. Love JL. Marlboro resort program - 1982. June 23, 1982. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2045385415/5417. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/mld87a00. Accessed
December 16, 2009.
166. R.J. Reynolds. Salem field marketing activities associated with high country. 1981.
Bates no. 505777188/7189. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/dcs05d00.
Accessed March 3, 2010.
167. Multi-Marketing Inc. 1981 Salem high country field marketing rollout executional plan.
August 11, 1981. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no. 505777213/7228. Available at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/fcs05d00. Accessed March 31, 2010.
168. Multi-Marketing Inc. 1981 Camel Lights military programs summary report. December
22,
1981.
R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
505776993/7002.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lbs05d00. Accessed March 1, 2010.
169. R.J. Reynolds. Camel field marketing promotions. 1981. Bates no. 505718470/8472.
Available at: http:// legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/acv18c00. Accessed March 1, 2010.
170. Philip Morris. November 16, 1982. Bates no. 2045385850/5854. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/str92e00. Accessed October 28, 2009.
171. Philip Morris. Marlboro resort program. December 1982. Bates no. 2045385810/5842.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/cib88a00. Accessed December 16, 2009.
172. R.J. Reynolds. Objectives of Camel field marketing promotions. November 29, 1984.
Bates no. 502175832/ 5836. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ jqw19d00.
Accessed March 1, 2010.
173. Gilleland JT. Camel field marketing. January 18, 1985. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no.
503709047/9052. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ aul85d00. Accessed
February 1, 2010.
174. Advanced Promotional Concepts Inc. RJR master paperwork/program guidelines. 1989.
R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
507357779/7835.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/lob34d00. Accessed February 3, 2010.
175. Malcolm CB. Trip report: Camel high impact club program. February 23, 1982. R.J.
Reynolds.
Bates
no.
505771560/1561.
Available
at:
http://legacy.library.
ucsf.edu/tid/ejs05d00. Accessed March 1, 2010.
176. Marketing Outreach Inc. Camel filter hardpack field marketing program Los Angeles,
San Diego, Denver. December 21, 1982. R.J. Reynolds. Bates no. 505771422/ 1428.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/ tid/tus05d00. Accessed February 26, 2010.
177. Lorillard Tobacco Company. Newport 1983 military program. May 13, 1983. Bates no.
85280405/ 0410. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ zxx88c00. Accessed
February 26, 2010.
178. Lindsley VD. Newport's Fort Bragg military promotion. April 25, 1983. Lorillard. Bates
no. 85280416/ 0420. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/ byx88c00. Accessed
February 26, 2010.
179. R.J. Reynolds. 1983 Camel field marketing promotions for nightclubs, pool decks, and
beaches.
1983.
Bates
no.
504061737/1738.
Available
at:
http://legacy.
library.ucsf.edu/tid/iqf75d00. Accessed February 26, 2010.
180. R.J. Reynolds. Camel ski adventure. December 17, 1982. Bates no. 503913118/3137.
Available at: http:// legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/tqs75d00. Accessed February 26, 2010.
181. R.J. Reynolds. 1985 summer resort development plan. 1985. Bates no. 505767179/7180.
Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/wys05d00. Accessed March 31, 2010.
182. Blair WA. High impact Camel club program. November 25, 1981. R.J. Reynolds. Bates
no. 505771562/1567. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/fjs05d00. Accessed
January 25, 2010.
183. R.J. Reynolds. Salem spirit ski scene '83 presentation. September 10, 1982. Bates no.
503828147/8174. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/lsz75d00. Accessed February
26, 2010.
184. R.J. Reynolds. Program overview. 1994. Bates no. 509371924/1927. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/ytn73d00. Accessed May 10, 2010.
185. Miranda M. October 6, 1983. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2044390322/0323. Available at:
http://legacy. library.ucsf.edu/tid/zkb70b00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
186. Scully JA. Spring resort - Ft. Lauderdale. September 29, 1982. Philip Morris. Bates no.
2044390319/0320. Available at: http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/flb60b00. Accessed
February 19, 2010.
187. Scully J. November 3, 1982. Philip Morris. Bates no. 2045226464/6465. Available at:
http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/pud11b00. Accessed February 19, 2010.
188. Church CK. Salem full flavor promotion test. December 21, 1978. R.J. Reynolds. Bates
no. 500853866/3867. Available at: http://legacy.library. ucsf.edu/tid/mbd69d00. Accessed
March 31, 2010.
189. Belstock SA, Connolly GN, Carpenter CM, Tucker L. Using alcohol to sell cigarettes to
young adults: a content analysis of cigarette advertisements. J Am Coll Health.
2008;56(4):383-389.
190. Ling PM, Glantz SA. Why and how the tobacco industry sells cigarettes to young adults:
evidence from industry documents. Am J Public Health. 2002;92(6): 908-916.
191. US Food and Drug Administration. Frequently asked questions: protecting kids from
tobacco.
Available
at:
http://www.fda.gov/TobaccoProducts/Protecting
KidsfromTobacco/RegsRestrictingSale/ucm204589. htm. Updated June 10, 2010. Accessed
June 29, 2010.
192. Breslau N, Peterson E, Schultz L, Andreski P, Chilcoat H. Are smokers with alcohol
disorders less likely to quit? Am J Public Health. 1996;86(7):985-990.
193. Ling PM, Neilands TB, Glantz SA. Young adult smoking behavior: a national survey.
Am J Prev Med. 2009;36(5):389-394.e2.
194. Assunta M, Chapman S. ''The world's most hostile environment'': how the tobacco
industry circumvented Singapore's advertising ban. Tob Control. 2004;13(suppl 2): ii51-ii57.
195. Assunta M, Chapman S. The tobacco industry's accounts of refining indirect tobacco
advertising in Malaysia. Tob Control. 2004;13(suppl 2):ii63-ii70.
AuthorAffiliation
Nan Jiang, PhD, MS, and Pamela M. Ling, MD, MPH
AuthorAffiliation
About the Authors
Nan Jiang and Pamela M. Ling are with the Center for Tobacco Control Research and
Education, University of California, San Francisco. Pamela M. Ling is also with the Division
of General Internal Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San
Francisco.
Correspondence should be sent to Pamela M. Ling, MD, MPH, Associate Professor of
Medicine, Box 1390, 530 Parnassus Ave, Suite 366, University of California San Francisco,
San Francisco, CA 94143-1390 (e-mail: pling@medicine.ucsf.edu). Reprints can be ordered
at http://www.ajph.org by clicking the ''Reprints/Eprints'' link.
This article was accepted December 30, 2010.
Contributors
P. M. Ling conceptualized and supervised the study. N. Jiang collected documents and led the
writing of the article. Both authors participated in the review, revision, and approval of the
final draft of the article.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by the National Cancer Institute (grant CA-87472).
This work was presented at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Public Health
Association.
The authors wish to thank the members of the University of California, San Francisco
Writer's Task Force for their helpful comments on the article.
Note. The funding agency had no involvement in the conduct of the research or preparation
of the article.
Human Participant Protection
No protocol approval was necessary because no human research participants were involved.
Copyright American Public Health Association Oct 2011
Word count: 10738
Show less
Indexing (details)
Cite
Subject
Marketing;
Alcohol
use;
Behavior;
Libraries;
Alcoholism;
Breweries;
Studies;
Young adults
Title
Reinforcement of Smoking and Drinking: Tobacco Marketing Strategies Linked With
Alcohol in the United States
Author
Jiang, Nan; Ling, Pamela
Publication title
American Journal of Public Health
Volume
101
Issue
10
Pages
1942-1954
Number of pages
13
Publication year
2011
Publication date
Oct 2011
Year
2011
Section
RESEARCH AND PRACTICE
Publisher
American Public Health Association
Place of publication
Washington
Country of publication
United States
Journal subject
Public Health And Safety, Medical Sciences
ISSN
00900036
CODEN
AJPHDS
Source type
Scholarly Journals
Language of publication
English
Document type
Feature
Document feature
References;Graphs;Tables
Subfile
Alcohol use, Studies, Alcoholism, Libraries, Behavior, Young adults, Breweries, Marketing
ProQuest document ID
894726298
Document URL
http://search.proquest.com/docview/894726298?accountid=62692
Copyright
Copyright American Public Health Association Oct 2011
Last updated
2011-09-29
Database
ProQuest Biology Journals