Tanning industry uses tobacco ad tactics
A fascinating and important study just published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology finds similarities in the way cigarettes and tanning beds are marketed.
Dermatologist David A. Jones, MD, PhD, FAAD, of Newton, Mass., writes that both industries employ advertising strategies to counteract health concerns of their products in order to positively influence the consumer’s perception of smoking and indoor tanning. The obvious goal: to drive demand.
The author first reviewed thousands of cigarette ads over a period of approximately 80 years to determine the strategies behind the marketing of cigarettes. He identified four.
These strategies included mitigating health concerns, appealing to a sense of social acceptance, emphasizing psychotropic effects, and targeting specific population segments.
Here are specific tactics used by the tanning industry that mirror those of the cigarette industry.
- Using physicians as allies to mitigate health concerns. During the 1930s and 1940s cigarette companies frequently showed physicians wearing white lab coats. The obvious implication being that if “a physician does something it must be OK,” writes Jones. Similarly, the tanning industry has resorted to using medical research to suggest that indoor tanning is somehow safe or safer than tanning outdoors.
- Promoting Misleading Health Advantages. In the 1950s and 1960s when the health risks of cigarettes became clear, the industry responded with filtered cigarettes suggesting that the filters protected consumers from the harmful effects of smoking. Similarly, the tanning industry has recently promoted the health benefits of vitamin D. “What these ads omit is that UV exposure increases your risk of skin cancer, and there are safer ways to get this important vitamin,” said Dr. Jones. “An adequate amount of vitamin D can be obtained from vitamin D supplements — without the health risks of obtaining vitamin D from intentional UV exposure.” (In writing this post, we visited the Indoor Tanning Association website which lists 19 press releases on its front page. All 19 releases tout the benefits of vitamin D.)
- Appeal to intelligence. The tobacco industry attempted to appeal to consumers’ intelligence by suggesting they were somehow smarter to smoke one brand over another. Similarly, the tanning industry appeals to the intelligence of consumers by promoting sunburn prevention at tanning bed facilities through trained professionals who teach consumers how to “tan safely” without getting sunburned.
Dr. Jones’s study confined itself to identifying those marketing objectives and tactics used by the two industries. We would point out another tactic currently in use by the Indoor Tanning Association. That is, the cynical exploitation of economic and job fears during the current downturn.
The Tanning Association repeatedly paints the indoor tanning industry as a sort of David vs Goliath by asserting tanning companies are small business owners whose livelihoods and the livelihoods of their employees are threatened by current moves to restrict tanning by minors and/or to impose a tanning tax. It also asserts that fully 25% of tanning owner-operators are women.
We fail to see how either of these facts should mitigate health concerns over indoor tanning.
Tanning beds dangers are beginning to be very well known. This kind of study sheds light on kind of methods that can be used to mitigate public understanding of a very real health issue.
Don’t use tanning beds.
Be SunAWARE. Be safe.
