E-Cigarettes: No Smoke without Fire?
Recent regulation of a TV advertisement in the UK for an electronic-cigarette brand has once again caused controversy regarding the communication and classification of the contentious 4" device. But what issues does the debate revolve around?
Since their conception in 2008, e-cigarettes have steadily grown in popularity, no more so than in the UK. The current global e-cigarette market is believed to be worth some $2 billion, with the top areas of consumption being the US, Russia, Germany and the UK.
E-cigarettes are designed to look and feel like a traditional cigarette, but contain liquid nicotine which is inhaled as a vapour and powered by a rechargeable battery. The devices do not contain tobacco and reduce the risked associated with carcinogens such as tar, with no burning taking place.
Currently e-cigarettes are considered to be general consumer products, however new proposal for regulation in the UK by 2016 looks to change this completely, along with the way these devices are promoted and communicated. From 2016 it is likely that all devices containing nicotine will be regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The MHRA will aim to offer confidence to consumers, by ensuring that the devices meet rigorous standards of quality. This will have large implications for the products themselves and how the brands are marketed.
From the perspective of the large brands in the e-cigarette market, such as E-Lites and Gamucci, stricter quality control will lead to a consolidation of their market share, with smaller brands not being able to afford the higher costs associated with staying within the needed boundaries of quality. It is also welcomed to prevent companies undermining the market with an influx of low quality devices.
However the classification of the devices as medicines may cause a u-turn in how brands need to communicate their products. Currently, major brands do not profess that their products help smokers quit their habit and adamantly do not want to be considered in the same light as cessation products such as Nicorette gum and patches. Rather they want to be regarded as 'lifestyle' brands, with products which claim to allow users to regain their 'freedom'. By this it is meant the ability to consume the devices in places where traditional smoking is banned, the plus points of not producing ash and the fact that they involve fewer risks unlike traditional cigarettes such as second-hand smoke etc will allow smokers to live a more fulfilling life. In this way, e-cigarette brands want their products to be seen as alternatives to normal cigarettes, rather than a helping smokers to quit. However in reality many consumers, especially smokers, view the devices as a way to cut back the habit of smoking, and this is why the MHRA want tighter regulations. It will be interesting, with the upcoming reclassification of the devices, whether or not brands will use their new found ability to make health claims about their products i.e. being healthier than cigarettes, or if they continue down the path of being a 'lifestyle' product.
As of this moment there is no formal advertising code concerning the sale and promotion of e-cigarette products. The growing popularity for the devices has been seen with promotion on billboards at football matches, alongside product placement in programmes such as Eastenders:
However future classification of the devices as a medicine will change this and many of the current uses of promotion will not be permitted.
Some critics of e-cigarettes argue that brands promote the devices in a glamourised manner, often using celebrity endorsement especially in the US, which may appeal to new markets especially non-smokers and even children. Thus there have been fresh calls for advertising to only target smokers only for the aid of cessation, rather than appealing to non-smokers and in particular 'vulnerable' teenagers. Others have said that advertisements are misleading, unclear and show a lack of social responsibility. This was particularly pertinent with the response to the recent first TV ad for e-ciagrettes by E-Lites:
The advert's message is to 'not miss out on things', alluring to the moments missed through smoking. The advert has recently been banned by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for failure to show the ingredients of the product, for being misleading about the fact that devices contain nicotine and for not mentioning that under 18 use is prohibited.
Current consumer product regulation means that brands cannot make reference to tobacco or smoking in any communication of the products. Nor can they make unproven medical claims such as stating they pose "no health hazard". Interestingly the product itself cannot be shown in TV advertisements leading to a form of promotion called 'surrogate advertising' whereby no product is shown just the brand logo, but the device can be shown in all other media such as print promotion.
From the governments standpoint e-cigarettes go against their tough stance on tobacco consumption. However do not be surprised to see as these devices grow in popularity that they may soon face similar traditional cigarette taxation.
I certainly feel that these products should not be banned in the entirety, as that is likely to cause a reversion for many current users of e-cigarettes back to traditional cigarettes. However the controversy surrounding the reclassification of the devices is still up for debate. If brands are not communicating their products as a cessation aid, should they really be put in the same bracket as those that overtly do? I certainly believe regulation of products is required, in order to prevent cheap low quality devices flooding the market, which would potentially be harmful for both the market and consumers. In terms of communication I also feel that currently some promotions by these brands often do not go far enough to communicate the fact that these products contain nicotine which at the end of the day is a drug. Moreover the ASA need to continue to watch out for and regulate 'surrogate advertising' from these e-cigarette companies, which may be considered misleading for some consumers. Whether or not these products have an influence on teenage consumption of nicotine is yet to be known and further research is required in this issue. But one thing is certain, this market will only continue to boom right up until the regulation change, especially as tobacco companies see the potential rewards to be reaped.
By Harry Sparkes
References
 | |||||||||||||||||
| Anatomy of a standard e-cigarette |
Currently e-cigarettes are considered to be general consumer products, however new proposal for regulation in the UK by 2016 looks to change this completely, along with the way these devices are promoted and communicated. From 2016 it is likely that all devices containing nicotine will be regulated by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA). The MHRA will aim to offer confidence to consumers, by ensuring that the devices meet rigorous standards of quality. This will have large implications for the products themselves and how the brands are marketed.
From the perspective of the large brands in the e-cigarette market, such as E-Lites and Gamucci, stricter quality control will lead to a consolidation of their market share, with smaller brands not being able to afford the higher costs associated with staying within the needed boundaries of quality. It is also welcomed to prevent companies undermining the market with an influx of low quality devices.
However the classification of the devices as medicines may cause a u-turn in how brands need to communicate their products. Currently, major brands do not profess that their products help smokers quit their habit and adamantly do not want to be considered in the same light as cessation products such as Nicorette gum and patches. Rather they want to be regarded as 'lifestyle' brands, with products which claim to allow users to regain their 'freedom'. By this it is meant the ability to consume the devices in places where traditional smoking is banned, the plus points of not producing ash and the fact that they involve fewer risks unlike traditional cigarettes such as second-hand smoke etc will allow smokers to live a more fulfilling life. In this way, e-cigarette brands want their products to be seen as alternatives to normal cigarettes, rather than a helping smokers to quit. However in reality many consumers, especially smokers, view the devices as a way to cut back the habit of smoking, and this is why the MHRA want tighter regulations. It will be interesting, with the upcoming reclassification of the devices, whether or not brands will use their new found ability to make health claims about their products i.e. being healthier than cigarettes, or if they continue down the path of being a 'lifestyle' product.
As of this moment there is no formal advertising code concerning the sale and promotion of e-cigarette products. The growing popularity for the devices has been seen with promotion on billboards at football matches, alongside product placement in programmes such as Eastenders:
 | |||||
| SkyCig recently promoted their brand at a UK football match |
E-Lites have featured in Eastenders
However future classification of the devices as a medicine will change this and many of the current uses of promotion will not be permitted.
Some critics of e-cigarettes argue that brands promote the devices in a glamourised manner, often using celebrity endorsement especially in the US, which may appeal to new markets especially non-smokers and even children. Thus there have been fresh calls for advertising to only target smokers only for the aid of cessation, rather than appealing to non-smokers and in particular 'vulnerable' teenagers. Others have said that advertisements are misleading, unclear and show a lack of social responsibility. This was particularly pertinent with the response to the recent first TV ad for e-ciagrettes by E-Lites:
E-Lites advert featuring 'Gangnam style' baby
Current consumer product regulation means that brands cannot make reference to tobacco or smoking in any communication of the products. Nor can they make unproven medical claims such as stating they pose "no health hazard". Interestingly the product itself cannot be shown in TV advertisements leading to a form of promotion called 'surrogate advertising' whereby no product is shown just the brand logo, but the device can be shown in all other media such as print promotion.
From the governments standpoint e-cigarettes go against their tough stance on tobacco consumption. However do not be surprised to see as these devices grow in popularity that they may soon face similar traditional cigarette taxation.
I certainly feel that these products should not be banned in the entirety, as that is likely to cause a reversion for many current users of e-cigarettes back to traditional cigarettes. However the controversy surrounding the reclassification of the devices is still up for debate. If brands are not communicating their products as a cessation aid, should they really be put in the same bracket as those that overtly do? I certainly believe regulation of products is required, in order to prevent cheap low quality devices flooding the market, which would potentially be harmful for both the market and consumers. In terms of communication I also feel that currently some promotions by these brands often do not go far enough to communicate the fact that these products contain nicotine which at the end of the day is a drug. Moreover the ASA need to continue to watch out for and regulate 'surrogate advertising' from these e-cigarette companies, which may be considered misleading for some consumers. Whether or not these products have an influence on teenage consumption of nicotine is yet to be known and further research is required in this issue. But one thing is certain, this market will only continue to boom right up until the regulation change, especially as tobacco companies see the potential rewards to be reaped.
By Harry Sparkes
References
- Marketingweek.co.uk. 2013. E-cigarettes: Will tighter ad rules send sector up in smoke? | Trends | Marketing Week. [online] Available at: http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/trends/e-cigarettes-will-tighter-ad-rules-send-sector-up-in-smoke/4005826.article [Accessed: 28 Sep 2013].
- Marketingweek.co.uk. 2013. Ad watchdog cracks down on e-cigarette ads | News | Marketing Week. [online] Available at: http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/news/ad-watchdog-cracks-down-on-e-cigarette-ads/4008037.article [Accessed: 28 Sep 2013].
- Marketingweek.co.uk. 2013. E-cigarette brands prepare to emphasise quality message | News | Marketing Week. [online] Available at: http://www.marketingweek.co.uk/news/e-cigarette-brands-prepare-to-emphasise-quality-message/4007054.article [Accessed: 28 Sep 2013].
- YouTube. 2013. Electronic Cigarettes on Eastenders - E-Lites. [online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TAvaBpfkRY [Accessed: 28 Sep 2013].
- YouTube. 2013. Electronic Cigarette | E-Lites Gangnam Baby TV Ad Extended. [online] Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tcu1ZLGwi8 [Accessed: 28 Sep 2013].
- Image: http://smokingeverywhereelectroniccigarettes.com/images/vapors-from-electronic-cigarette.jpg
- Image: http://www.eastcoastvapor.com/electronic-cigarette-guide-s/1849.htm
"these products contain nicotine"
ReplyDeleteSo do tomatoes. What's your point?