Thank You For Smoking

                             "Thank you for Smoking Reflection."

After seeing Jason Reitman's film Thank You for Smoking, I had major concerns about the morality of strategic communications. The distinction between simple communication and well-crafted messaging is made abundantly evident in the movie. The main character, Nick Naylor, shows how advertising can be carefully crafted to appeal to a certain target, even while endorsing a controversial product like tobacco, with a disturbing emphasis on younger people.

When he is questioned in court about why cigarette packaging does not have a skull-and-crossbones warning to convey the risks, he provides a compelling analogy. Instead of adopting a strong parental stance or overtly opposing smoking, he replies that he would purchase his kid his first pack if he chose to start smoking at the age of 18. This response is well-thought-out; it emphasizes consumer freedom and personal choice without explicitly promoting smoking.

The core of strategic communication, carefully selecting language and framing to promote a position without making overt claims, is encapsulated in this instance. Naylor effectively justifies his position as a spokesperson and advocate for the tobacco industry by putting the emphasis on individual rights rather than overtly endorsing hazardous conduct. Even though I was aware of how successful this strategy was, I could not morally assume a position similar to his. Supporting the business would make me complicit in its effects, even if I didn't smoke myself. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that between 80 and 90 percent of lung cancer fatalities are caused by cigarette smoking. Given this, even if the sector is still enormous and spends billions of dollars on advertising each year, it would be hard to defend a brand associated with such results.

However, not all images of smoking should be viewed equally. For example, smoking is frequently used in classic Humphrey Bogart films, but usually as a stylistic or atmospheric decision rather than a means of persuasion. Instead of serving as a promotion in these situations, it adds to the tone.

This results in a more comprehensive differentiation between ethics and law. Legal consent does not imply moral standards to one's own or society's norms. Advertising can violate ethical standards while yet complying with all legal obligations.

If someone like Nick Naylor can convince younger audiences to engage in destructive conduct through strategic messaging, then communication professionals have the capacity and obligation to employ the same techniques in a constructive manner. Strategic communication may be used to inform, empower, and improve societal results as easily as it can to manipulate.