politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
When are we, as a society, going to wake up and realize that teenagers are going to do whatever we tell them not to do. It happens over and over and over, but people are still surprised. "That's bad for you" is about as ineffective as a deterrent as it gets. I breath all manner of fumes, exhaust, and whatnot every day. Our land, sea, and food supply is packed to the brim with forever chemicals and microplastics. Those are bad for us, but we seem more worried about what we are intentionally putting in our bodies? Okay, sure.
"They're targeting kids!" Because adults don't like things that taste good, y'know. Fuck the kids. They'll be alright DESPITE all the meddling us adults do.
I appreciate your "aww shucks, kids gonna be kids" worldview; however, the data is clear, we have dramatically reduced the rate at which young people smoke cigarettes by instituting rules and guidelines concerning advertising targeting adolescents. Further, we have clear data showing that level of education greatly effects the likelihood of an individual using tobacco.
So with all due respect, this is something we can easily tackle. We know for certain the adolescents respond readily to marketing, and we therefore can control tobacco adoption by reducing said marketing to their demographic. This isn't anywhere near as futile as you're making it out to be.
"Marketing" here being entirely incidental is the point, that the products appeal to youth simply by existing. To my knowledge, there aren't any literal advertisements going around to young people like those ridiculous Juul ads 5 or so years ago. Talking about specific types of imagery or colours on packaging, or the types of flavours used in a flavoured product as "marketing" is using an umbrella term to suggest intent to actively market to kids, but that isn't a thing that's happening.
Can you link me some of this child-focused advertising? Not calling anyone a liar, but I (personally) have never seen vapes marketed in any way other than "hey, we sell these" and am interested.
Google the instagram juul ads that they got into major legal trouble over.
They made them look like a cool lifestyle product and as a result lots of not too bright kids started vaping without even realizing that they were a nicotine consumption device.
All that being said, I overall do think vapes are good and that candy flavors totally appeal to adults and shouldn’t be banned. I’m fine with limits on advertising, and mostly I really think comprehensive and honest drug education for kids will empower them to make good choices.
Having worked with my government for school dental programs, I've met my fair share of students age 12 to 17 who smoke because their parents do. You're right that marketing is a huge part of it, but I wanted to share the parents' responsibility also.