News Focus
News Focus
icon url

EZ2

06/01/07 8:51 AM

#1360 RE: NovoMira #1359

Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa !!!!!! :-{

Fashion Mags Anger Some With Tobacco Ads
Wednesday May 30, 5:18 pm ET
By Jocelyn Noveck, AP National Writer
Anti-Smoking Groups Angered by Cigarette Ads in Fashion Mags With Youthful Appeal


NEW YORK (AP) -- Not long ago, fax machines and e-mail inboxes at Vogue, the world's premier fashion magazine, were briefly assaulted with thousands of angry letters. Not about the latest gorgeously photographed fashion trends or beauty products in its influential pages, but about a single, colorful ad: for Camel No. 9 cigarettes.
"If you draw income from the advertisement of tobacco," Heidi Thompson of Freeport, Ill., wrote in one letter, "you are as guilty as big tobacco companies in selling the health and future of so many of our youth in order to pad your bank accounts."

The letters were part of a grass roots campaign by an anti-smoking group to get Vogue to drop ads for the new, prettily packaged Camels, which they and others feel are targeted to younger women and teenagers.

But it isn't just Vogue. Pick up nearly any fashion magazine this month -- Glamour, Harper's Bazaar, Lucky -- and you'll see a colorful cigarette ad mixed in with articles on beauty, fitness, nutrition and glowing skin.

You won't find them in a number of other countries. A European Union law, for example, bans tobacco print ads on grounds they glamorize smoking and promote it among young people.

But in the United States, where TV and radio ads were banned long ago and billboards more recently, print ads are the final frontier in tobacco advertising, aside from store displays and the like. And to anti-smoking groups, their presence, though waning, is especially tasteless in fashion magazines and others aimed at young women -- at a time when lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer deaths in women.

"Research out there shows that young people are susceptible to advertising," says Ellen Vargyas, counsel for the American Legacy Foundation, established in the wake of the 1998 settlement between the states and the tobacco industry. "I wish the publications themselves would look hard at what they're doing. Readers look to them to see what's cool, and what's trendy -- and they see cigarettes."

Her organization sponsored a major tobacco report issued last week by the Institute of Medicine, a branch of the National Academy of Sciences. The report, which called on Congress and the president to give the Food and Drug Administration power to regulate tobacco, also had a recommendation for print ads: that they be restricted to black and white text only -- no images.

That would certainly thwart the impact of the Camel No. 9 campaign, whose ads use shiny paper, sophisticated colors like teal and fuschia, and accents of lace to achieve a sense of feminine chic. Those ads have provoked accusations, including from a group of U.S. senators, that R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., maker of Camels, is trying to lure teens and younger women to smoke. (The company says it seeks only to sway established adult smokers.)

But they've also aroused anger at the magazines printing the ads. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids says volunteers around the country sent Vogue more than 8,000 protest e-mails or faxes earlier this month. It says it got no response, other than a couple of scribbled notes faxed back on letters that had been addressed to editor Anna Wintour. "Will you stop? You're killing trees!" read one note shown to The AP.

A spokeswoman for Conde Nast Publications, which publishes Vogue, said neither Wintour nor publisher Thomas Florio were available for an interview. "Vogue does carry tobacco advertising. Beyond that we have no further comment," said the spokeswoman, Maurie Perl. She also said no one at Glamour, Lucky or W, also Conde Nast publications, would be available. Editors at Essence magazine, which also carries tobacco ads and is owned by Time Inc., also declined comment.

Matthew Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, says that while print ads are on the decline, he's still concerned about fashion magazines, and especially the iconic Vogue, because "they have far more impact on teenage girls than almost any other written media. And that's the reason the tobacco industry is in these magazines."

Magazine analyst Samir Husni says it's "oddly hypocritical" for magazines to run articles about health issues, including cancer, and then have tobacco ads nearby. "What they're saying is that they value their ad customers more than their million or two million readers," says Husni, of the University of Mississippi. "Country after country is banning cigarette ads in magazines."

Tobacco companies spent $13.1 billion on promotional spending in 2005, the last year for which there were figures, according to a recent report by the Federal Trade Commission. Most of that went into price discounts for consumers. On magazine ads, they spent $17.2 million in the first quarter of 2007, according to the Magazine Publishers of America.

A number of magazines refuse to accept tobacco ads: just a few are Men's Health, Self, and Money, according to a list provided by the Tobacco-Free Periodicals Project.

But most fashion magazines do. In current June issues, for example, Lucky, Vogue and Glamour have Pall Mall ads in bright orange. Harper's Bazaar advertises American Spirit and Camel No. 9 in an issue that interviews Cate Edwards, daughter of Elizabeth Edwards, about her mother's fight against advanced breast cancer.

One possible contributing factor for the continued presence of tobacco ads in fashion magazines: the stubborn prevalence of smoking in the fashion world, particularly among models.

"All the girls smoke," says Michael Vollbracht, creative director at Bill Blass. "I was doing a fashion show, and all these beautiful young things were smoking outside. They looked at me like I was an old fuddy-duddy."

One prominent player in the fashion industry says it's "jarring" to think that fashion magazines print tobacco ads -- but confesses she flips by them without noticing.

"I'll bet if you told a lot of people there are cigarette ads in fashion magazines, they'd say, 'you're kidding,'" says Nian Fish, creative director and senior vice president at KCD, which produces shows for top fashion houses.

Both she and Vollbracht feel that the fashion industry itself shouldn't have to address alone a much broader social issue.

"We're a capitalist society, aren't we?" Vollbracht said. "We have to take it up with our government. The fashion industry can only do so much."



icon url

EZ2

06/01/07 8:58 AM

#1361 RE: NovoMira #1359

finally ~~~ we have a theme song for our board !

icon url

EZ2

06/01/07 9:52 AM

#1363 RE: NovoMira #1359

Altria Group, Inc. Declares Regular Qtrly Div 69c >MO

Altria Group: 69c Div Adjusted For Kraft Spin-Off >MO

Altria Group Previous Qtr Div Was 86c Before Spin-Off >MO
icon url

EZ2

06/04/07 3:25 PM

#1365 RE: NovoMira #1359

MO (blog commentary) ~~~~~~

SeekingAlpha
Altria Board Announces . . . Nothing
Monday June 4, 1:56 pm ET


Todd Sullivan submits: The Board of Directors of Altria Group, Inc. (NYSE: MO - News) Friday declared a regular quarterly dividend of $0.69 per common share, payable on July 10, 2007, to stockholders of record as of June 15, 2007.
The ex-dividend date is June 13, 2007. The new dividend rate reflects an adjustment for the Kraft Foods (NYSE: KFT - News) spin-off, which was completed on March 30, 2007. Now don't get me wrong, a 3.8% dividend that grows and is as close to money in the bank as you can get is nice, but not really what we were hoping for.

What we really wanted was something about a share buyback, PMI spin, maybe a nice fat increase in that dividend? But nothing.

Now based on Altria's history, in all reality, shareholders have nothing to worry about. These will come, we will benefit and the stock will rise. It is just when you get yourself ready for something and it does not happen, you feel a bit let down. Couldn't you even have hinted about it, guys?

Now the option players are betting on an announcement by January. Open call interest for the January options is huge and were some of the most active options traded last week. For the $90 strike price there, over 100,000 contracts open and the $85 and $100 prices each have over 50,000 contracts open, representing 200 million shares.

The Kraft spin was officially announced in January of 2007, so it seems folks are betting on similar timing for these other moves.

I guess we will just have to keep collecting our fat dividend, sit back and wait.
icon url

EZ2

06/06/07 6:41 AM

#1367 RE: NovoMira #1359

N.C.: 'Fire-Safe' Cigarettes Advance

Tuesday June 5, 3:18 pm ET
By Margaret Lillard, Associated Press Writer

North Carolina: House Panel Approves Standard for 'Fire-Safe' Cigarettes

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) -- With the cautious support of North Carolina's tobacco manufacturers, a House committee approved a bill Tuesday that would require the companies to make and sell cigarettes that burn out if left unattended.
The so-called "fire-safe" cigarettes are rolled in special paper with two bands of less porous material that smother the burning tobacco unless someone is actively smoking it. The bill would bar the sale of any other type of cigarette in North Carolina.

Chapel Hill Fire Chief Dan Jones said such cigarettes might have prevented a pre-dawn fire that killed five students at a University of North Carolina fraternity house on graduation morning, May 12, 1996.

The flames began in a basement trash can, where discarded smoking material smoldered overnight, he said.

"None of those five participated in the smoking in the basement the night before, yet they lost their lives," Jones said. "This is a true public safety bill. ... This is a bill that will save the lives of smokers and nonsmokers alike."

The bill, which also outlines testing methods and performance standards for self-extinguishing cigarettes, was approved by the House Judiciary I committee. It will go to the House Finance Committee before a vote in the full chamber.

The measure is modeled on legislation passed in New York state and adopted in more than a dozen other states -- most recently Iowa, Oregon and tobacco giant Kentucky -- and Canada, according to the Coalition for Fire-Safe Cigarettes.

The organization, which is promoting the legislation nationwide, says cigarettes are the leading cause of fatalities in U.S. home fires, responsible for 700 to 900 deaths a year.

In North Carolina, discarded smoking material is the leading cause of structure fires -- mainly in homes -- and causes half of the fires in which someone dies, Insurance Commissioner Jim Long and other experts told the committee Tuesday.

They said fire-safe cigarettes won't prevent all such fires, but will cut down dramatically on their number by reducing the length of time that a discarded butt smolders.

"Seventy-five percent of the cigarettes, when they're dropped, will continue to burn for up to 45 minutes," said Adam Goldstein, an associate professor of family medicine at the UNC Chapel Hill School of Medicine. "It's that long-lasting impact that creates the fire, not the short one."

In 2005, cigarettes and other smoking material caused 700,500 residential fires in North Carolina that resulted in 100 deaths, 800 injuries and almost 10,000 emergency room visits, said Marcus Plescia, chief of the chronic disease and injury section in the state Division of Public Health.

Results from other states where similar legislation has been enacted indicate that North Carolina could see a 75 percent drop in residential fire deaths if the state allows the sale only of fire-safe cigarettes, Plescia said.

Lobbyists for several tobacco companies with factories in North Carolina said they are comfortable with the legislation as long as it gives them time to modify their manufacturing lines.

Sandy Sands, who represents Phillip Morris, said the company would prefer a nationwide standard requiring fire-safe cigarettes, but accepts the New York-modeled legislation for now.







icon url

EZ2

06/07/07 7:08 AM

#1369 RE: NovoMira #1359

EDITORIAL: Indoor Smoking Bans: Philip Morris butts back in

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

MarketWatch
03:48 a.m. 06/07/2007


Jun 07, 2007 (The Philadelphia Inquirer - McClatchy-Tribune Information Services via COMTEX) -- Just before the World Health Organization celebrated its annual World No Tobacco Day last week, the people who created the Marlboro Man took a moment to remind the public of their position on indoor smoking bans.

As if you couldn't guess, officials at the nation's largest cigarette company -- Philip Morris USA -- are against indoor smoking bans. Well, duh.

In a news release put out by its Pittsburgh press agent, Philip Morris also sounded this warning: "We have decided to engage on this issue with legislators and other interested parties when we believe we can help shape reasonable measures to regulate smoking in public places."

In other words, Philip Morris plans to throw its considerable lobbying weight around Harrisburg and other state capitals where smoke-free laws are under discussion.

This represents a change, the company said, from 2005 and 2006, when the firm "did not lobby or participate in any coalition activity related to smoking restrictions."

Little wonder Philip Morris has chosen this year to jump into the fray with both feet: There's a growing movement across the country to protect every workplace, as well as patrons of bars, restaurants and nightclubs, from the well-documented dangers of secondhand smoke.

Abroad, even Irish pubs are smoke-free by law.

New Jersey already is reaping the health benefits from its statewide indoor smoking ban (with a partial exemption for Atlantic City casino floors). Ohio just joined neighboring states in going smoke-free, and polls show three-quarters of all American families ban smoking at home.

Philadelphia's smoke-free law has transformed nightlife and restaurants for the better, and the city's 2006 ordinance serves as a good model for the statewide limits that Gov. Rendell wants to enact to further his "Prescription for Pennsylvania" health-care reforms.

But the tobacco industry proved that it can fight back, winning a court decision to strike down Allegheny County's progressive smoke-free law before it was put into play.

That boosts the stakes in Harrisburg. Pittsburgh's inability so far to clear its own air should convince legislators of the urgent need to pass the strong statewide smoke-free bill sponsored by State Sen. Stewart J. Greenleaf (R., Montgomery).

Should Philip Morris lobbyists come calling, Pennsylvania lawmakers may hear how the company "agrees that people should be able to avoid being around secondhand smoke."

But they'll also be told, according to the firm's policy, that "reasonable ways exist to respect the comfort and choices of both non-smoking and smoking adults."

At bars and restaurants, Philip Morris says, the public should be able to "choose whether to frequent places where smoking is permitted."

Too bad about the employees who have to work in smoking areas. Their right to choose, presumably, is to get another job.

As for protecting patrons and workers from secondhand smoke, the tobacco industry policy ignores a key finding by health professionals and the U.S. surgeon general that there is no risk-free level of secondhand-smoke exposure. So-called no-smoking areas are useless in protecting people fully.

Enacting smoke-free laws is the best means to protect the health of patrons and workplaces.

To see more of The Philadelphia Inquirer, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.philly.com . Copyright (c) 2007, The Philadelphia Inquirer Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services. For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.


Copyright (C) 2007 The Philadelphia Inquirer ********************************************************************** As of Sunday, 06-03-2007 23:59, the latest Comtex SmarTrend Alert, an automated pattern recognition system, indicated an UPTREND on 03-12-2007 for MO @ $86.79. For more information on SmarTrend, contact your market data provider or go to www.mysmartrend.com SmarTrend is a registered trademark of Comtex News Network, Inc. Copyright 2004-2007 Comtex News Network, Inc. All rights reserved.

icon url

EZ2

06/08/07 6:14 AM

#1370 RE: NovoMira #1359

big court WIN !!!.. Could be a VERY big win for RAI !!

N.Y. top court sides with tobacco on arbitration
Thu Jun 7, 2007 5:26 PM ET


CHICAGO, June 7 (Reuters) - The New York Court of Appeals on Thursday ruled that tobacco companies that are part of the 1998 agreement that settled tobacco litigation with most states can go to arbitration to try to reduce their settlement payments, according to a court document.

The ruling, which is in line with decisions by most other state courts, means the tobacco companies that are part of the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement can try to reduce their 2003 payments through arbitration.

The $246 billion Master Settlement Agreement requires tobacco companies to make annual payments to the states and also places strict limits on how those companies market cigarettes.

But the payments can be reduced if the tobacco companies that signed the agreement lose market share to other cigarette makers because of restrictions in the agreement.

An independent auditor found that the companies that signed the settlement did lose market share in 2003 and assumed that restrictions from the agreement were "a significant factor contributing to this loss," according to the top court's ruling.

But the auditor did not reduce the payments, accepting an argument by the states that they had diligently tried to collect payments from tobacco companies that did not sign the agreement.

Tobacco companies that sought arbitration argued that the auditor could not presume the states were diligently enforcing statutes geared toward collecting payments from the nonsignees.

Among the companies that signed the master Settlement Agreement are Altria Group Inc.'s <MO.N> Philip Morris USA and Reynolds American Inc's. <RAI.N> R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Cos. unit.

"It's clearly spelled out in the Master Settlement Agreement that a dispute over a payment, which this is, should be resolved through binding arbitration," said David Howard, a spokesman for R.J. Reynolds..

The ruling did not quantify the payments in dispute. A spokesman for the New York Attorney General's office could not be reached for comment.