Would you support a *complete* ban on alcohol advertising?

Dostoevsky

Fact No. 1: Alcohol companies spend billions on advertising because they get people to consume more of their drug. That is the only reason they spend enormous money advertising. If they thought they could get the same sales without advertising, they would not bother advertising.

Inversely, a ban on advertising would lead to a massive decline in alcohol sales - at least as much as the alcohol industry spends promoting itself every year. Because of that, I support a complete ban on alcohol advertising, similar to that which exists in other European countries such as France and Norway.

Having spent another night with a relative in A&E where drunk after drunk came in pushing the rest of us to the back of the queue, it seems not a day can go by without being reminded of the cost of alcohol abuse, and the unwillingness of the Irish state to face down the alcohol industry. The constant romanticising of this product in a state where it creates so much harm only adds to my despair at the irony.

---

Who financially benefits from alcohol advertising?

Alcohol companies, advertising agencies, media organisations, publicans and other alcohol sales people, professional "sports" organisations.

Who doesn't financially benefit?

Everybody else. Despite the taxes paid on alcohol, here's some of the financial cost of alcohol abuse, 'Ironically, cheap booze is costing us a lot as individual consumers. Bringing it down to the beloved bottom line, it’s estimated that it costs us €3.7billion a year mopping up alcohol-related harm; including €1.2 billion in crime and €1.2billion in health. That works out at every income tax payer picking up a €3,318 annual tab in avoidable alcohol-related costs....' Alcohol Action Ireland)

Alcohol problem costs €2.5 billion per year (2004) [Irishhealth.com]

€3.7bn – The hidden price of alcohol (2011) [Irish Examiner]

'Alcohol abuse was responsible for 2,000 hospital beds being occupied every night' (2012) [Irish Times]

None of those links seem to be mentioning the days lost in productivity because of people not coming in after abusing alcohol the night before.

---

It is long passed the time that the Irish state's politicians stopped kowtoing to the powerful alcohol industry and introduced bans on television and billboard advertisements, just as progressive European countries like France and Norway have done. As long ago as 1991 France passed its legislation banning alcohol advertising, Loi Evin.

Interesting articles on the French alcohol ban here and here. It is free from the madness in Ireland where the alcohol industry regulates itself. In France, the state regulates alcohol advertising without consultation with the industry. And that's in a country with a massive economic interest in wine production and selling. If France can do it, Ireland can.

In Ireland, the following medical organisations are calling for an advertising ban:

1) The Irish Medical Organisation: here and here and IMO supports calls for total ban on alcohol advertising

2) Irish College of Psychiatrists (2008)

3) As long ago as 2001 Fine Gael proposed a ban on all alcohol advertising on TV and alcohol sponsorship of sport.

In Britain, the British Medical Organisation supports a complete ban:

Ban all alcohol advertising and sponsorship, says BMA (2009) and in February 2013 it has repeated its call for 'a complete ban on alcohol advertising and sponsorship'.

Personally, on this issue I'd be more influenced by the lobbying of medical professionals who encounter alcohol abuse than I would be by the lobbying of the alcohol industry, or the silence of a media which would lose millions in advertising revenue if such a ban came into place.

Dwork

Not sure. Will the savings be passed on to consumers in the form of a price cut?

Rayne Wooney

Am I the only one that thinks a ban on advertising would have hardly any effect on sales of alcohol in this country?

oldyouth

Can't wait for 'Fact No. 2'

humbert

Companies should have the right to try and sell me something and other people should have the right to try and convince me not to buy it and I should have the right to decide for myself.


If parents can't educate their kids that's the parents fault, they spawned it, it's their responsibility.

Edit: I was here first, give my back me avatar.

Dostoevsky

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Am I the only one that thinks a ban on advertising would have hardly any effect on sales of alcohol in this country?

Why do you think they'd spend so much on advertising if it did not increase their sales? (I'm assuming the people running the alcohol companies are rational actors whose motivation is profit and/or increased market share)

starlings

such a ban would only have an effect on new or lesser-known products. I think all the drunks in A&E know the names of a few alcoholic drinks and will be able to find them without first looking through a magazine.

Dostoevsky

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

oldyouth wrote: »

Can't wait for 'Fact No. 2'

Fact No. 2: There's always one dickhead response on the first page of an After Hours thread.

3hn2givr7mx1sc

Beer advertisements are often the best ones, so no, no I would not.

Corvo

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

That's a Rafa Benitez sized fact there OP!

I would support it. I think there are enough pubs and clubs in this country to tempt you as is and I especially think that it should be eradicated from sports.

I'd miss the Strongbow ads though

Dostoevsky

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

starlings wrote: »

such a ban would only have an effect on new or lesser-known products.

So why do you think Guinness, for instance, spends hundreds of millions per year on advertising? For the craic?

humbert

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Fact No. 2: There's always one dickhead response on the first page of an After Hours thread.

Bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy there.

kwestfan08

I wouldn't support a ban in alcohol advertising at all as long as its advertised at age appropriate times I don't see the harm.

Like where do you stop. Do you also ban fast food or salty snack adverts because people are getting unhealthy and more obese?

starlings

Dostoevsky wrote: »

So why do you think Guinness, for instance, spends hundreds of millions per year on advertising? For the craic?

to sell to a greater number of people worldwide, not to sell a greater number of units to the same people.

Sorry you had a rough night in the hospital, and I hope your relative is OK, but the drunks in A&E have a problem with alcohol, not specific products they saw in a cool ad on TV. If advertising was banned I'm pretty sure they'd find a drink.

Corvo

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

kwestfan08 wrote: »

I wouldn't support a ban in alcohol advertising at all as long as its advertised at age appropriate times I don't see the harm.

Like where do you stop. Do you also ban fast food or salty snack adverts because people are getting unhealthy and more obese?

Fast food I'm sure does not put the same level of strain on the health services as alcohol. Never mind the effects it has on a persons mindset and how it can add to feelings of depression.

Ficheall

I'd be okay with a ban on all advertising.

DarkJager

Nope I'd be 100% against it. Taxpaying adults don't need a nanny state, or the opinions of "won't somebody think of the children" assholes foisted upon them.

oldyouth

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Fact No. 2: There's always one dickhead response on the first page of an After Hours thread.

I knew there would be a Fact No 2 and, fair, play to you, it is far more concise and to the point than your original one.

You started a thread with 'Fact No 1', so it is only fair to assume that others would follow.

Insect Overlord

I've never seen ads for Duvel, Chimay, Westmalle, Leffe, Trappistes Rochefort, La Trappe, The Carlow Brewing Co, 8 Degrees Brewing Company, Trouble Brewing, etc. A ban on advertising wouldn't stop me buying those.

GobblyNob

Alcohol advertisements are pointless anyway. I already know there is beer in the pub and the offie. I don't need the TV to tell me.

BillyMitchel

I'd support a ban on tv and sports sponsorship only

humbert wrote: »

Bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy there.

Fact 3. Prophecies always fulfilled on AH.

ArmaniJeanss

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Am I the only one that thinks a ban on advertising would have hardly any effect on sales of alcohol in this country?

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Why do you think they'd spend so much on advertising if it did not increase their sales? (I'm assuming the people running the alcohol companies are rational actors whose motivation is profit and/or increased market share)

Rayne is making a simple point.

A lack of advertising of Carlsberg will almost certainly affect the sales of Carlsberg vis a vis other alcohol products, with the total spend remaining constant.

However a lack of advertising of all alcohol will not necessarily see a drop off in total alcohol sales.

humbert

Dostoevsky wrote: »

Inversely, a ban on advertising would lead to a massive decline in alcohol sales - at least as much as the alcohol industry spends promoting itself every year. Because of that...

This is unfounded speculation. IMO alcohol advertising in Ireland has sod all to do with alcohol abuse.

COYVB

Anyone who wouldn't have a problem with this and EVER complains about nannystatism doesn't deserve to have a say

Czarcasm

Banning all advertising of any product or service, in all media formats, would be great!

But that's about as likely to happen as a ban on alcohol advertising in Ireland.

shopaholic01

Cocaine, heroin etc. aren't advertised, yet people are still brought to A&E after using/abusing them.

Dwork

Dostoevsky wrote: »

So why do you think Guinness, for instance, spends hundreds of millions per year on advertising? For the craic?

Not at all. It's their patriotic duty to propagate an image of Ireland throughout the world as a form of safety net for impoverished students on their world travvels. Sure you can always get a job in an Irish Bar if you're stuck. I for one applaud Guinness's efforts to support our youth. Even if they only need supporting because they drank too much Guinness.

c_man

Ficheall wrote: »

I'd be okay with a ban on all advertising.

No boards is cool with you?

Czarcasm

c_man wrote: »

No boards is cool with you?

Smaller boards with no advertising was cool with me, but then they had to go and ruin it.

P_1

No ban but each ad must contain a substantial disclaimer making people aware of the potential negatives of alcohol consumption.

Lando Griffin

shopaholic01 wrote: »

Cocaine, heroin etc. aren't advertised, yet people are still brought to A&E after using/abusing them.

That's because they consume these deadly drugs with Alcohol that's advertised.

humbert

P_1 wrote: »

No ban but each ad must contain a substantial disclaimer making people aware of the potential negatives of alcohol consumption.

Whatever about putting warnings on the product's packaging this wont work.

The company will do everything to make the ad enticing and then the disclaimer will be boring and tedious. So the audience sees a witty ad for the product followed by a boring nagging warning put there by some official organisation.

shopaholic01

Lando Griffin wrote: »

That's because they consume these deadly drugs with Alcohol that's advertised.

So there's a proven link between advertising alcohol and drug use?

COYVB

P_1 wrote: »

No ban but each ad must contain a substantial disclaimer making people aware of the potential negatives of alcohol consumption.

Because people aren't aware of those?

orestes

Banning advertising alcohol would do pretty much nothing to sales of alcohol in Ireland unless you want to ban all promotional activities in the entire hospitality industry. Advertising isn't done to gain sales, it's done to create awareness of brands and to connect certain products with certain attitudes and certain "types" of drinkers. Bulmers is strategically advertised as a product that is enjoyed on a nice summers day, WKD is a mischievous light drink, Guinness is for people who enjoy and savour their pint, Coors Light is the cool youngsters beer, gin is for classy people, yada yada yada. You don't see tequila or sambuca advertised because everyone knows what they are and what they're for - to get wrecked - and there is no point in creating brand awareness for a product like that. Advertising is at a stand-off so they are only doing it to bolster their image and keep up with each other, since not doing it will result in a loss of sales to a competitor. It's a big game of keeping up with the Jones'. Banning advertising will just impact brands, it will do nothing to actual alcohol consumption.

If a producer wants to sell more of their product the way to do it is to go through promotions - giving it away to people in bars where they are already having a good time (basic but effective) or by going through the staff of the hospitality industry - give bars loads of your product for free so that they use it in the hope that people will get used to using it instead of a competing brand that they normally use, throwing industry nights for bar staff and pamper the hell out of them so that they push your product when they're working.

Banning advertising won't do anything, people like to drink and they know what they want to drink. All advertising does is try to get you to drink vodka A instead of vodka B, it will have about zero effect on how much people drink and if advertising were banned then promotional activities would just be bumped up and made more creative as the producers try to outdo each other in the new environment that an advertising free market would create, so the companies would just use the same money they were using on advertising to subsidise giving away free booze in order to maintain the image of their brand, so banning advertising would probably actually result in people getting sh1t-loads of free booze on nights out.

Banning advertising is a waste of time, creating awareness of the dangers and damages of excessive alcohol consumption which the government is already doing is a far more effective move in terms of the larger picture and long-term consequences. Don't try to stop the producers, try to educate the market so the producers are powerless.

DonkeyStyle \o/

GobblyNob wrote: »

Alcohol advertisements are pointless anyway. I already know there is beer in the pub and the offie. I don't need the TV to tell me.

You should let the alcohol companies know about this, they're wasting millions.

token101

Jesus next it's going to be junk food, then toys, then video games, then they'll need some other boogeyman to make excuses for parents not to do their job.

Chuck Stone

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

I'd support a complete ban (except for places where you buy and consume alcohol ofc) and a concerted campaign to stigmatise alcohol abuse in its place.

Tombi!

I'd be against since I don't really see the point of it banning it.
Sure, if I see an add for "buy this vodka", I might think about buying that vodka instead of the some other brand but that's about it.

It wouldn't cause me to buy more of it. If the pub has a special offer on, that might have me buy more

Arawn

I hate this ****e. I don't like weight watchers. Lets ban them

Cavehill Red

I'd support a ban on tv and sports sponsorship only

Oh, ffs.
The problem isn't alcohol or advertising. It's people.
Some people appreciate a fine craft-brewed beer, or a vintage wine, or a finely matured whiskey. These people do not drink to excess. They enjoy an artisanal product sensibly and contribute vast sums in doing so to the tax take of the country.
These aren't the problem. We all know who the problem people are - they're the ones skulling Dutch Gold, two litre plastic bottles of high strength cider, cheap and nasty vodka with fake Russian brand names, wine at under 4 euro a bottle.
Rather than introduce an advertising ban, a minimum pricing law would be more effective. It's time the irresponsible selling of certain supermarkets was curbed with a legislative floor put under the cost per alcoholic unit.

Arawn

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Oh, ffs.
The problem isn't alcohol or advertising. It's people.
Some people appreciate a fine craft-brewed beer, or a vintage wine, or a finely matured whiskey. These people do not drink to excess. They enjoy an artisanal product sensibly and contribute vast sums in doing so to the tax take of the country.
These aren't the problem. We all know who the problem people are - they're the ones skulling Dutch Gold, two litre plastic bottles of high strength cider, cheap and nasty vodka with fake Russian brand names, wine at under 4 euro a bottle.
Rather than introduce an advertising ban, a minimum pricing law would be more effective. It's time the irresponsible selling of certain supermarkets was curbed with a legislative floor put under the cost per alcoholic unit.

Lol minimum pricing can **** right off, pubs rip people off by a ton, minimum pricing would make it a complete joke

Swarly45

I would not support such a ban. With my own experience and most if not all of my friends got their information and aspiration to drink from hear say. Also from being around your parents at events or family parties, so from a young age a curiosity is built up. And also they will usually pick a brand that a friend has suggested, advertising only tries to change your mind on what brand to pick, which is its goal.

The add's are not telling or forcing us to go out and wreck the place, that's our responsibility or our parents. Although maybe a few more add's on the affects of over doing the alcohol would not go un-noticed.

Cavehill Red

I'd support a ban on tv and sports sponsorship only

Arawn wrote: »

Lol minimum pricing can **** right off, pubs rip people off by a ton, minimum pricing would make it a complete joke

Minimum pricing wouldn't affect pubs because they've already hiked the prices into the stratosphere.
But it would force supermarkets to sell alcohol at responsible pricing levels which would make a meaningful impact in the level of irresponsible drinking in this country.

Arawn

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Minimum pricing wouldn't affect pubs because they've already hiked the prices into the stratosphere.
But it would force supermarkets to sell alcohol at responsible pricing levels which would make a meaningful impact in the level of irresponsible drinking in this country.

So what do you think would be a fair minimum pricing??

Cavehill Red

I'd support a ban on tv and sports sponsorship only

Arawn wrote: »

So what do you think would be a fair minimum pricing??

British research concluded in 2011 that between 40p and 70p was the best range at which to locate the floor. Translated into euro, that would work out at 46c to 82c per unit, which would make your average 10 unit bottle of wine a minimum of 4.60 to 8.20, and the average 6 pack of beer 5.10 to 9 euro at a minimum. That still seems low to me, to be honest. I'd be inclined to specifically target certain drinks too - high alcohol beer and cider, fortified 'tonic' wine and industrial vodka among them.

Chuck Stone

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

Cavehill Red wrote: »

Minimum pricing ... would make a meaningful impact in the level of irresponsible drinking in this country.

The problem there though is that min pricing would hurt the pockets of people least able to afford it and exacerbate poverty. People struggling to pay mortgages who can no longer afford to go to the pub and pensioners who have a few cans at the weekend for example. It could also create a black market if the price strays (and it almost inevitably would) upwards from its true market value.

I reckon we should follow the successful example of cigarette smoking, that is, ban advertising which presents drug consumption as desirable lifestyle and do the opposite i.e. information and health campaigns on the dangers of alcohol and stigmatise alcohol abuse.

Perhaps minimum pricing could be part of the picture but I'm not convinced it would have much effect by itself.

Cavehill Red

I'd support a ban on tv and sports sponsorship only

Chuck Stone wrote: »

The problem there though is that min pricing would hurt the pockets of people least able to afford it and exacerbate poverty. People struggling to pay mortgages who can no longer afford to go to the pub and pensioners who have a few cans at the weekend for example. It could also create a black market if the price strays (and it almost inevitably would) upwards from its true market value.

With due respect, people who are struggling to pay their mortgage probably oughtn't be in the pub in the first place, and in any case as I said, pubs already charge well higher than any minimum pricing would affect.
I think you're incorrectly conflating the issue of tobacco and alcohol, to be honest. The tobacco black market would not be replicated in an alcohol circumstance. Prices are already lower in duty-free and across the border, and that has not led to the creation of a substantial black market for illicit booze.
I am all for stigmatising alcohol abuse but not alcohol use, and a blanket advertising ban would be an obvious attempt to incorrectly depict all alcohol use as damaging.

Chuck Stone

I'd support a ban on all tv advertisements only

Cavehill Red wrote: »

With due respect, people who are struggling to pay their mortgage probably oughtn't be in the pub in the first place, and in any case as I said, pubs already charge well higher than any minimum pricing would affect.

I agree. The point I was making was that minimum pricing will impact most those with the least disposable income which is pretty self-evident.

I think you're incorrectly conflating the issue of tobacco and alcohol, to be honest.

They're different drugs but the way they're presented by the advertising industry would be similar. I was hinting at how smoking has declined hugely as both a desirable product and has been stigmatised as a dirty habit (by means of advertising bans and public health campaigns).

The tobacco black market would not be replicated in an alcohol circumstance. Prices are already lower in duty-free and across the border, and that has not led to the creation of a substantial black market for illicit booze.

If the price of a unit increases it increases the govts tax take (VAT) and creates the incentive to raise prices further. If the minimum price remained reasonably low I agree that a black market would not emerge because alcohol is a bulky item and can't easily be smuggled for profit.

My fear would be that dullard politicians prodded by their buddies in the VFI would continuously raise the floor price and end up making it profitable to smuggle which in turn increases the costs of policing.

Ruudi_Mentari

It's not particularly intrusve as it is...

And would only free up more advertizing space for lucozade, or pampers or something so no.

Cavehill Red

I'd support a ban on tv and sports sponsorship only

Chuck Stone wrote: »

I agree. The point I was making was that minimum pricing will impact most those with the least disposable income which is pretty self-evident.

Only if they either drink to excess or drink beyond their means.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

They're different drugs but the way they're presented by the advertising industry would be similar. I was hinting at how smoking has declined hugely as both a desirable product and has been stigmatised as a dirty habit (by means of advertising bans and public health campaigns).

Smoking has declined to a certain level and levelled off. The main factors that I identify in its decline are a) it's universal bad for health, b) the smoking ban in public places and c) the development of NRT and vaping technologies. None of these are replicable in the context of alcohol. I don't think advertising plays a significant role there at all, in fact. Much more important are societal issues like the so-called central role of pubs in Irish socialising.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

If the price of a unit increases it increases the govts tax take (VAT) and creates the incentive to raise prices further. If the minimum price remained reasonably low I agree that a black market would not emerge because alcohol is a bulky item and can't easily be smuggled for profit.

There is the additional issue of product confidence. Would you buy a bottle of unspecified alcohol from someone in the street? Poitin makers do exist and can barely sell their product at well under 10 euro a bottle. That's because there is no consumer confidence in its quality. This to my mind is the main disincentive to an alcohol black market.

Chuck Stone wrote: »

My fear would be that dullard politicians prodded by their buddies in the VFI would continuously raise the floor price and end up making it profitable to smuggle which in turn increases the costs of policing.

It's already profitable to smuggle. The problem is no one will buy in a black market context. If it came to pubs and off-licences crossing the border to stock up, you'd have a problem, but an easily solved one.