The Safe Cigarette: Six by Jackie Batey

The Safe Cigarette: Visual strategies of reassurance in American advertisements for cigarettes, 1945-1964.

Number:

Technology as Reassurance - The Filter-Tip

Practice-Based Ph.D.

Jackie Batey

www.thesafecigarette.blogspot.com

The Safe Cigarette: Visual strategies of reassurance in American advertisements for cigarettes, 1945-1964.

Volume Number:

The Safe Cigarette

Practice-Based Ph.D.

Jackie Batey

www.thesafecigarette.blogspot.com

The Safe Cigarette

One:

The Safe Cigarette

Two:

The Cigarette

Three:

The Need to Reassure

Four:

Personification: Who Should We Trust ?

Five:

Nature as Reassurance - The Menthol Cigarette

Six:

Technology as Reassurance - The Filter-Tip

Seven:

Conclusion

Eight:

Glossary, References and Appendices

Six: Contents The Development of the Filter-Tip Cigarette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:01

A Short history of the Filter-Tip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:02

Types of Filter-Tip . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:03 White Filters - Cellulose Acetate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:04

Technical Representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:06

The Smoker’s Quest For Whiteness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:07

Grey Filters - Charcoal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:08

Dual Filters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:09

Can a Filter Improve Health? The ‘Micronite’ Filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:10

What Was Micronite ? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:10

‘Guide Lines’ For Cigarette Advertisers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:11 Smoking and Health . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:12

Endnotes to Fascicle Six . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6:14

Six: Technology as Reassurance - The Filter-Tip “Not for decades has the industry seen so many major product changes, all dealing with the last half-inch of a cigarette.” ‘The Uproar in Cigarettes’, FORTUNE, December 1949, p.130.

At the start of the ’fifties only two percent of manufactured cigarettes incorporated a Filter-Tip. Ten

years later over half of all cigarette production was filter-tipped. The era of the Safe Cigarette had

arrived, the cigarette that was advertised as safe to consume was now re-formulated, and made even

safer. Combating a flurry of health scares about the effects of cigarette smoking on the body throughout

the ’fifties, manufacturers sought new ways to reassure consumers that their products were somehow

‘safer’ than their competitors. The Filter-Tip provided a reassurance that apparently could be ‘scientifically’ proved. The visual strategy of the scientific explanation was about to supersede the word-

of-mouth opinion, the recommendation of the Celebrity, the charm of the Blood Hound. The image of

filtration together with the development of the menthol cigarette came to dominate the cigarette

industry of the later part of the period.

The Development of the Filter-Tip Cigarette

Filter-Tips had originally been a familiar part of the American cigarette industry with two

radically different sets of consumers - the luxury market and the economy market. The economy market

was originally associated with hardship and deprivation. A Filter-Tip cigarette does require less tobacco

than a regular cigarette thus making the profit margin much higher, or cost cutting more effective. The filter materials have to be cheaper than the tobacco replaced.

Handmade Filter-Tip cigarettes were common in Europe by 1900 and Cork-Tips were added to 1

cigarettes primarily to stop small hot fragments of tobacco falling out of the cigarette and burning the

mouth rather than representing a cheaper alternative to regular cigarettes. Cork-Tips were promoted as a luxury product that protected the consumer from some unpleasantness. In the U.S. Coloured (Beauty)

tips were manufactured after 1919 as a fashion product for female consumers.

In the cigarette market after the Second World War, the tipped cigarette had finally committed

itself to the side of luxury and the elité, e.g. fig 6:01, Herbert Tareyton (January 1950). American Tobacco

used the strategy of visualising the Cork-Tip as a luxury item despite no differential in price.

6:01

Fig 6:01

Tareyton Advertisement, SEP, January 1950

This campaign ran from 1949 up to the introduction of American Tobacco’s Filter-Tip brand

Tareyton in 1955. The campaign “DISCRIMINATING PEOPLE PREFER” used photographs of the socially successful and wealthy at home and on holiday. Debutantes, socialites and polo players all endorsed

Herbert Tareyton. Mrs. William G. McKnight, Jr., perches on a strangely shaped green table accompanied

by her two white poodles. The cigarette is again held a long way from the mouth. A wisp of smoke is

visible but only just so. The ‘discriminating’ person is encouraged to notice that “...the cork tip doesn’t stick to the lips, it’s clean and firm.” The ‘Filter Wars’ were duly opened between the major brands to give the consumer the safest cigarette.

A Short History of the Filter Tip

For this revolutionary realignment of the cigarette industry, the infrastructure was already in place. Philip

Morris had already introduced the first commercial Filter-Tip, Parliament in 1931, made from a wad of cotton that had been soaked in caustic soda, driven more by novelty than health.

Then came Brown & Williamson’s Viceroy in 1936. “We got into the Filter-Tip business in 1936 3

because we realised that to compete we’d have to find something different.” Being a ‘middle-weight’ tobacco company Brown & Williamson could not afford to be in direct competition with the largest

tobacco companies, and so regularly sought the incorporation of some special or unique product appeal

(such as redeemable coupons).

P.Lorillard had patented a new material tradenamed ‘Micronite’, that claimed to repel smoke

particles on inhalation. The Kent brand was released in 1952 and sold so well that P.Lorillard initially had problems meeting consumer demand. The growth in sales of filtered cigarettes was in fact only inhibited by production difficulties. By 1953 the major cigarette companies had installed, or had on order, enough

machinery to satisfy the annual demand for 60 billion filter-tipped cigarettes a year. This amounted to

15% of the total cigarette market, which grew to 55% by 1963 and to over 84% by 1973 . It is safe to say 5

that, to all intents and purposes, the hopes for the Safe Cigarette, during the period, were pinned on the Filter-Tip.

During the early ’fifties the Filter-Tip business was associated with the middle-sized tobacco

companies, looking for that ‘extra something’, particularly those with annual fascicles (inc. federal taxes)

of between $200-$400 million. The three most prominent Filter-Tipped brands at this point were Kent,

Parliament and Viceroy. Brown & Williamson prepared a new cellulose-acetate filter to be added to the existing Viceroy in 1953. Viceroy was now the first king-Size Filter-Tip and was promoted as providing

“Double-Protection” (fig 6:02). Viceroy was sold at a lower price than Kent and within a few months

became the undisputed brand leader in the filter market.

6:02

Fig 6:02

Viceroy Advertisement, SEP, May 1954

Each new filter-tipped brand made claim to be less irritating than its competitors, and by implication,

suggested that non-filter cigarettes posed a very real risk to health.

Types of Filter-Tip

See Appendix 6:1, Taxonomy of the Filter-Tip The Filter-Tip market needed to make consumers believe that each brand had some unique feature to

offer the smoker. This resulted in a flurry of new filter products, each claiming to out-filter the others.

During this period, these were some of the more popular varieties on offer in the U.S. I have added to

each brand the advertised constituent elements of the tips themselves; Hit Parade

‘T-7’ filter, introduced in 1957 by the American Tobacco Co.

Kent

‘Micronite’, introduced in 1952 by P.Lorillard

L&M

The ‘Miracle-Tip’,introduced in 1954 by Liggett & Myers

Marlboro

‘Selectrate’ filter, introduced in 1924, filter added in 1954 by Philip Morris

Old Gold

‘Spin filter’, introduced in 1958 by P.Lorillard

Parliament Tareyton

Unspecified material in a spiral shape to increase smoke flow distance

Treated crocidolite ‘blue’ asbestos on crepe paper

Cellulose Acetate with modified Alpha-Cellulose powder, electrostatically charged filter fibres

Cellulose Acetate

Unspecified material

‘Filter’, introduced in 1931 by Philip Morris

A plug of cotton soaked in caustic soda

‘Dual-Filter’, introduced in 1913, Cork-Tip added 1920, Dual-Filter added 1954 by American Tobacco Co. Activated charcoal inner, white outer

Viceroy

‘Estron’ and King-Size, introduced in 1936, Brown & Williamson

Winston

‘Pure White’, introduced in 1951, filter added in 1954 by R J Reynolds

Pure Cellulose Acetate filter in a longer length cigarette

Porous paper filter

With this bewildering variety of chemical and structural propositions, in what way did the concept of the

6:03

Filter-Tip contribute to reassurance? There were many other products that also sought to assist in the

filtering of cigarette smoke, such as Dunhill’s cigarette holder, available in both the U.K. and U.S.,

containing the patented ‘Crystal Tip’. Such was the success of the Filter-Tip as a sales strategy, that even

non-filter brands such as the King-Sized Pall Mall, advertised themselves as producing a ‘filtering effect’, (fig 6:03). This is a non filter brand but a filtering effect is visualised by a square grid of white dots

covering the nose, mouth and chin. The concept of throat irritation is still placed firmly in the consumer’s

mind, although with tars and nicotine then becoming the main anxiety for consumers, cancer was of a

graver concern.

The main materials of the Filter-Tip were firstly plastics derivatives such as Acetate Cellulose

Flake and secondly, treated charcoal. Like Menthol, both of these substances were not readily visualised

by the consumer. With coffee filtration, the consumer could readily witness the process, smells and hear

the passage of hot water through the granuals and filter paper. The technology of the tipped cigarettes

was miniaturised, concealed behind a paper wrapping, under the very nose of the consumer. The

mechanism of the Filter-Tip needed a strong visual interpretation to be provided by the advertisers and

manufacturers. So how could a complex filter made of Cellulose Acetate be made to reassure the consumer?

White Filters - Cellulose Acetate

Cellulose Acetate was a plastic used in the production of American gas masks during the war, (fig 6:04).

Dashed lines point to the Cellulose in the gas mask, in the style of a scientific diagram, to make sure the

reader understands which section of the mask is being referred to. The main copy begins “When a gasmask means life or death to the wearer, there can’t be any guesswork.”

Hence it should be a simple task to filter out the more harmful elements in tobacco smoke, but

was a filter this strong really needed? Cellulose Acetate Flake is not a readily recognised substance, but unrecognisable substances were seemingly a positive attribute.

With so many different Filter-Tips on the market all claiming to incorporate wonder chemicals,

Rayonier, the main producer of cellulose in the U.S. (not cigarette filters) advertised themselves by

seemingly explaining the benefits of cellulose filters directly to interested cigarette smokers directly as can be seen from fig 6:05 (February 1959). The advertisement is unusual for the period in that it is copy

with no imagery. The campaign was to reassure consumers but the flowery prose and eccentric trade

references e.g. “sausage casings” look ineffective by today’s standards. This strategy of using text heavy explanations was successfully lampooned in 1960 by MAD Magazine (As will be seen later in Fascicle 7).

6:04

Fig 6:03

Detail, Pall Mall Advertisement, SEP, September 1949

Fig 6:04

Detail, Hercules Powder Company Advertisement, ILL, October 1942

Fig 6:05

Rayonier Advertisement, LOOK, February 1959

Many Filter-Tip brands, however, delighted in the challenge to show the consumer what was

really happening in that ‘top inch’. Fig 6:02, (May, 1954) boasts of a “...MIRACLE FILTER...” and mighty claims for ‘ESTRON’ and the ‘20,000 tiny filter traps’. The whiteness of the filter is exaggerated, as if

whiteness alone provides all the reassurance the consumer needs. The underlining of Estron in red draws

attention to this mystery substance. The cross-section diagram of the cigarette outer-paper unfurling to

reveal the neatly packed brown tobacco and ‘snow-white’ filter airbrushed to resemble a scientific

explanation. The use of the air brushed illustration was remarked upon in 1946,

“...the artist who thinks of reality in terms of photographic naturalism loses the edge that a skillful artist has on the camera.” Ernest W. Watson, Forty Illustrators and How They Work, Libraries Press, Freeport, New York, 1946, p.148.

Liggett & Myers introduced their Filter-Tip brand L&M in 1954 with the slogan, “To All Smokers

of Filter Tips ... THIS IS IT ! ‘JUST WHAT THE DOCTOR ORDERED’ ” The Doctor, although mentioned, is not

visualised in this advertisement from September, 1954, (just about escaping the FTC ban on mentioning

doctors in cigarette advertisements). With the introduction of a new brand the most vital concern to the

manufacturers is to create effective product recognition. The advertisement goes on the list four points

as to why ‘THIS IS IT!” (fig 6:06) ‘Alpha Cellulose’ is specifically named as an exclusive feature (although

in fact widely used). L&M continue grandiose claims that the filter “selects and removes the heavy 6

particles leaving you a light and mild smoke”. L&M attempted to visualise their filter later (february

1959), with limited success. (fig 6:07). One common approach to making visual suggestions about the

product was to create a diagrammatic representation in the form of abstracted strata. L&M’s ‘Miracle Tip’ aims to show the consumer how the filter acts as a barrier against harmful chemicals such as

nicotine. The smaller vertical lines are described as “extra filter fibres added crosswise to the stream of

smoke”. The five larger lines running horizontally therefore must represent the “stream of smoke”. The

‘stream of smoke’ lines are so thick that it is difficult to visualise how the tiny “filter fibres added

crosswise” will have any impact upon them. L&M only featured this diagram briefly, before concentrating their efforts upon images of cheerful couples, singing about the brand’s merits to each other.

A later Viceroy advertisement from 1957, (fig 6:08), focuses on scale as a possible visual

strategy. The cross-section used is now about five times actual size, giving the consumer the feeling of looking at the cigarette as a scientist would through a magnifying glass or microscope. This information

is presented as a scientific fact, as if ESTRON was unchallengeable. The slogan ‘Double the Filtering Action’ refers to the fact that Viceroy was also a King-Size Filter-Tip. Visualising what exactly was going

on inside the filter, for the consumer, was a real challenge. Viceroy attempts to explain ‘filtering’ “Only

Viceroy gives you 20,000 FILTER TRAPS FOR THAT SMOOTHER TASTE.” Reassurance, by confident

6:05

Fig 6:06

L&M Advertisement, SEP, September 1954

Fig 6:07

Detail, L&M Advertisement, SEP, February 1959

publication of very large numbers “113,597 doctors”, “2,470 weekly examinations” is in the tradition of Cold War identification of “54,174 Communists party members in the U.S.”,

In fig 6:08 two attempts are made to visualise the filter. The ‘Ordinary Filter’ is half as dotted as

the ‘Viceroy Filter’, the consumer being reassured that their filter is twice as dotty. If the consumer is

baffled by the dots and what they are intended to represent, there is an inset below each image showing

an “Actual photomicrograph of Viceroy filter section.” The ‘Ordinary Filter’ is represented as a dirty blotchy circle, whereas the ‘Viceroy Filter’ is represented as a clearer softer white circle.

The copy attempts to explain the two versions as “Simplified drawings” to “dramatise the

difference”. In total out of the 69 words in this advertisement, ‘ filter’, ‘traps’ and ‘20,000’ make up 30 of them. The message is repeated again and again. To reinforce the technological reassurance, an insert

at the foot of the page shows a tobacco farmer’s hands caressing a golden leaf reinforcing traditional elements of manufacture. Any range of products where the obvious differences in brands are minimal is

forced to resort to ingenuity of claim. To use images of the (invisible) microscopic world of internal

mechanisms. Cigarettes all look similar but with the consumer now aware that internal structures are

very different, a cunning brand loyalty is created in the smoker’s mind. The conventions of technical

drawing, with graphic presentation of machine elements, articulations of surfaces, the turning and

finishing of precision engineering are a familiar element in many generic types of advertising of products

in the post-war American marketplace.

Technical Representations

Although the history of the commercial airbrush as an art form is still limited to technical manuals, we

can assess the contribution to commercial art here in an analysis of the work of George Giusti. Using airbrush illustrations, rather than photography, to render complex elements enables the extraneous detail to be edited out from the image, allowing the artist to present only what the consumer needs to

see and understand. The demand in the mass magazines for visualisations of scientific propositions and

processes created a generation of technical illustrators who combined a precision of detail with an

expressiveness of surface that transcended the mere plan or blueprint. Typical artists working in airbrush such as A.Petruccelli (LIFE), Max Gschwind, (FORTUNE) and George Giusti

(FORTUNE). Ernest W. Watson in his biography Forty Illustrators and How They Work comments on 7

Giusti airbrushing intersections of flat planes often combining more than one perspective, creating

overlays of multiple views within a single illustration. Although the style is seen as ‘realistic’, it is never

in danger of being mistaken for a photograph. Recent computing programs such as PhotoShop have all

but replaced the airbrush as a tool, but the concept is identical, images are adjusted to ‘enhance’ consumer understanding. Giusti worked on a campaign for Champion Spark Plugs (fig 6:09), often

6:06

Fig 6:08

Viceroy Advertisement, SEP, November 1957

combining images of how the plugs functioned with images of the vehicles themselves, as in this

advertisement from FORTUNE (July 1941). The spark plug has become an abstracted image focussing on

the shape and pattern of the machine. The evocation of machines cannot be left to painterly interpretations or dark room manipulation.

The convention of technical drawing used within the advertisements of the 1950’s has been

neglected and requires a separate study of its own. A style of machine precision may be informative but 9

all too often was used to beguile and confuse the consumer. Refrigerators, spark plugs, oil filters, cars,

pens, watches and Filter-Tips all dazzle the consumer with their complex internal workings, beautiful

surface qualities, and above all their ultra graphic ingenuity.

If the products of various contending companies lacked obvious visual differences, technical drawing reacted most successfully in a visual Gulliverism. This allows the miniaturised consumer to wander about

and enjoy the technical achievements and sculptural spectacle inside the machine itself.

In (fig 6:10) the external body of the Shavemaster appears only in a small vignette less than

6mm across, The main Shavemaster image is a large airbrushed cross-section held in a giant hand. The

face/hand is an enlarged photograph (the beard growth has been painted on afterwards), whereas the

diagram of the Shavemaster is a separate airbrushed entity. The internal workings of the shaver are shown in detail and it is apparent that the internal mechanism is the main selling point. The copy draws

attention to the “powerful 16-bar armature self-starting REAL motor”, and even trumpets admiration for

large numbers, “...over 3000 shaving edges and...over 24-million shaving actions per minute.” In fig 6:11

tiny versions of the consumer are allowed to crawl around the product itself, what Edward Tufte

identified as;

“...the techniques of conjuring are especially relevant to theories of information display. To create illusions is to engage in

disinformation design, to corrupt optical information, to deceive the audience.” Edward Tufte, Visual Explanations: Images And

Quantities, Evidence And Narrative. Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997, p.55.

The Smoker’s Quest For Whiteness

One of the commonest attributes of the Cellulose Acetate Filter-Tip, as seen in cigarette advertisements

of the period is its “whiteness”. The reference to a ‘pure-white’ substance suggests that product and

consumer both strive for purity and cleanliness, without imperfections. Discolorations in the material are clearly visible by the naked eye. Harmful substances in the cigarette smoke that would usually go unnoticed by the consumer are now seen clearly, trapped before they can do any damage.

Cellulose Acetate is represented as the ‘white knight’ of filters, waiting to defend us, against the

dirty yellows and grimy browns of tar and nicotine. White is associated with a gleam of the teeth and

the white flash of the eye. Advertisers have gone to great pains to provide words for whiteness and its 6:07

Fig 6:09

Detail, Champion Advertisement, FOR, July 1941

Fig 6:10

Detail, Shavemaster, SEP, Nov. 1952

Fig 6:11

Detail, Shavemaster Advertisement, SEP, December 1951

nuances. Before published health concerns, Macleans were adding Peroxide to their toothpaste to 10

make teeth whiter. This additive was solely directed at the superficial surface colour of the teeth. Fig 6:13 shows a ‘Whiteness-Meter’ held-up to a young woman’s teeth made lighter in tone with the application

of bleach.

This concept of the superficial fix was something I explored in my Artist’s Multiple Anxious

Homes. The book explains, in diagrammatic form, how to give visitors the impression that your home is

clean and tidy without actually spending any time cleaning properly. Complex scientific terminology in

advertisements, was familiar enough to be recognised as a target for humour during the period. (fig 6:12)

During this period the majority of filters were Cellulose Acetate with its claims of ‘Snow

Whiteness’. There was one major deviation from the cult of whiteness into ‘greyness’ and the evocation

of the Charcoal Filter.

Grey Filters - Charcoal

American Tobacco first introduced Tareyton in 1913, and by 1954 was the first brand to incorporate a

charcoal filter. Charcoal is a black amorphous form of carbon that is made by heating wood in the

absence of air and is commonly used as a fuel. ‘Activated Charcoal’ is a form of carbon that is a porous

and highly absorbative, used to remove colour or impurities from liquids and gases. Activated Charcoal

is well known for its use in water filters but how would this dull, grey substance appear reassuring when

alongside the pure “whiteness” of Cellulose Acetate when it was already associated with trapped

impurities and blemishes.

Fig 6:14 has a slogan that identifies “Pearl-Gray”. To promote the properties of this rather dull

looking grey substance the Tareyton advertisement does not waste space on the page with images of the

grey charcoal itself, but instead justifies the product with an illustration of an atomic submarine. This is

much more exciting than images of the charcoal itself, and the consumer is invited to imagine they are

benefiting from advanced scientific research. To this is added a diagrammatic inset of objects - a tap,

shopping basket, pestle and mortar and a bottle being poured into a glass, associating itself with healthy

products. The suggestion is that the charcoal can ‘purify’ the soiled cigarette. It is in the nature of the

competitiveness of American advertising in this and other periods that two diametrically opposed visual

systems can co-exist without the bafflement of the consumer. The grey material appears as a sort of metaphor for the genius of technical solutions whereas the white substance is a machine substance used to protect the body of the consumer.

Not all brands were put off by the unappealing greyness of the charcoal. Diagrams of grey

cylinders in exploded diagrams were very popular during the search for the most reassuring filter 6:08

Fig 6:12

Cartoon by William Oâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Brian, The New Yorker 1950-1955 Album, Harper & Brothers, New York, 1955.

Fig 6:13

Detail, Macleans advertisement, SEP, June 1955

substance. With consumers not sure whether grey or white filters were the best protection it was only a matter of time before they would be offered both.

Dual Filters

The American Tobacco Company had decided that the greyness of the charcoal alone was not sufficient

to reassure the anxious consumer. By 1959 Tareyton boasted a ‘Dual Filter’ (fig 6:15), a two layered

filter that had the old “Unique inner filter of ACTIVATED CHARCOAL” now twinned with an “efficient pure

white outer filter”, with no mention of what the white layer is made of. The extreme close-up of the hand holding the partially unwrapped cigarette reveals the construction of the two layers. The cork-patterned

outer paper of the cigarette has been printed with a white band around it that indicates the junction of

the Dual Filters. A large proportion of the page is dedicated to showing the filter’s unique selling proposition. The oversized palms are facing towards us as if they are the viewer’s own hands. This was a

strategy that Tareyton used into the ’seventies (fig 6:16). The charcoal water filter and Tareyton cigarette pack (September 1972) share equal space on the page. The slogan above the water filter

reading, “This charcoal filter gives you better tasting water” the slogan above the cigarette pack states

“This charcoal filter gives you better tasting cigarettes.” Taste is the main point in the copy since all mentions of enhanced health properties had been banned. The image invites us to compare pure

drinkable water with pure smokable tobacco.

The graphic devices used in advertising, made an impact on the art and design of the period

after 1945, e.g. Richard Hamilton’s “What Is It That Makes Today’s Homes So Different, So Appealing ?”

The visual strategies identified above have particularly inspired a post war generation of artists, e.g. Warhol, Rosenquist, Rauschenburg, Oldenburg and Maciunas.

My own Multiple, “Which Filter Works ?” proposes an imaginary brand ‘Lemorette’.

In fig 6:17 an anaglyphic exploded diagram shows seven filters stacked-up within the cigarette shaft, with

the tobacco taking up less than an eighth of the length of the whole. The book also exploits the

patronising tone of some scientific explanations meant for non-specialists. “Which Filter Works ?” was

produced in anaglyph images (simulated three dimensional pictures that need to be viewed with

red/green glasses) a satire on the search for technical gimmicks and novelty. The viewer is encouraged

when wearing the 3D glasses to open and shut each eye in turn in order to reveal varying explanations. There is an endorsement by a doctor and an image of the factory. The glossy cigarette cards pasted into

the book contain 3D versions of original diagrams and reassurances from the period interspaced with

bogus explanations.

6:09

Fig 6:14

Detail, Tareyton advertisement, LOOK, October 1955

Fig 6:15

Detail, Tareyton advertisement, SEP, February 1960

Fig 6:16

Detail, Tareyton advertisement, LOOK, September 1972

Fig 6:17

“Which Filter Works ?”, Page 4, Artist’s Book, Damp Flat Productions, 2001

Can a Filter Improve Health? The ‘Micronite’ Filter “But if the public wants it, as long as it isn’t harmful, we’ll give the public what it wants” Few, chairman of Liggett & Myers from an interview, ‘The Uproar in Cigarettes’, FORTUNE, December 1949, p.130.

When the Lorillard Tobacco Company introduced Kent in 1952, the brand was advertised each week on

“The Web” (CBS television) Each week (fig 6:18, a press advertisement featuring the TV campaign) the

host would perform a ‘scientific test’ with two cigarettes, Kent and Brand X. Smoke would be drawn

through a sheet of paper to prove that the Kent Micronite filter was more effective at removing tars and

nicotine than other cigarette brands. The “three friends” have asked the host to allow them to try the

“cigarette comparison test” they see on the television. The right hand page of the advertisement is

devoted entirely to the test results, showing four circular stains with the one labelled Kent being the

lightest in tone. The “dark ugly stains” are explained as “irritants that come right through the filters of

the other cigarettes.” The consumer is encouraged to pull apart other filters “You will find that it is made

of dabs of cotton, cellulose or crepe paper.” Cellulose is dismissed as ineffective like rolled up crepe paper. “But KENT’S Micronite Filter is made of material that has been used to purify the air in atomic

energy plants of microscopic impurities.” The Tareyton Activated Charcoal filter could “purify air in

America’s new atomic submarine.” Micronite however, goes one better, it purifies the air in the atomic plants themselves. “It is so effective that KENT removes nicotine and tar particles as small as 2/10 of a micron...so tiny that several thousand of them could be hidden under the dot over this ‘i’ ”.

What Was Micronite ?

Micronite was made of Crocidolite but is better known today as ‘blue’ asbestos, recognised as dangerous

and carcinogenic. The combination of smoking and asbestos exposure greatly increases the risk of lung

cancer. Asbestos workers who also smoke have a lung cancer risk 50 to 90 times greater than that of the

general population.

On April 29th, 1999, a Baltimore jury found against Lorillard Tobacco Co. and filter maker

Hollingsworth & Vose in a Kent Micronite filter case. The jury awarded the plaintiff $2.25 million, including $2 million in punitive damages. The lawsuit alleged an elaborate cover-up by the companies to

hide the dangers of the filter and the cigarettes, while the company was creating a market sensation by

billing itself as the healthy alternative in cigarettes, it was desperately trying to find ways to get rid of the

asbestos in the filter. As early as 1954, Lorillard hired two scientists to examine whether asbestos fiber

was leaking into the smoke. In a report that was subsequently destroyed, they found the filters were defective. The company continued to market the cigarette until the filter was changed in 1956.” 14

6:10

Fig 6:18

Kent advertisement, SEP, February 1954

There is concern that many filtered cigarette brands used cheaper grades of leaf with stronger

flavours to make sure the smoker will be able to taste the cigarette through the filter. Filter-Tips offered

a visible and imaginable block between the tobacco and the consumer’s mouth. The Filter-Tip

intervened. The filter was perceived as a ‘bung’ rather like the section of Englander mattress through

which this woman is attempting to blow smoke (fig 6:19).

‘Guide Lines’ For Cigarette Advertisers

In the early ’fifties the Federal Trade Commission were unhappy with the strategies used by some

cigarette advertisers. Being neither food nor drug, the cigarette escaped the need for warning labels.

Labelling Laws were, however being considered that would require the manufacturers to list all of the

ingredients on the pack. Chesterfield were quick to pre-empt this ruling to gain consumer confidence.

Liggett & Myers did the same in 1952, that they were listing their ingredients voluntarily, and before their rivals. The rhetoric was about the quality of the ingredients and their purity. Interestingly the tag

lines seemed to imply that previously information had been hidden,”THE MASK IS OFF”, “THE CURTAIN’S

UP”, and in fig 6:20 “CARDS ON THE TABLE” .

The copy at the foot of fig 6:20 shows why the FTC brought in more stringent ‘guidelines’ in

1955. Any claims not supported by scientific proof were banned. This followed the banning of all

references to the "throat, larynx, lungs, nose, or other parts of the body" or to "digestion, energy, nerves, or doctors."

The FTC were taken by surprise when these ‘guide lines’ prompted several brands to make

claims about ‘ultra-high filtration’ but by 1960 the FTC sought to end this strategy also, by telling all manufacturers, “There will be no more tar and nicotine claims in cigarette advertising.”

Fig 6:21 shows that not all brands could resist the temptation of making medical claims. The slogan

reads,

“ [ Test results on the pack ] ” Carlton had the tar and nicotine measurements printed at the foot of

the pack;

‘TAR’ 2.7 MG..............PER CIGARETTE

NICOTINE 0.3 MG.........PER CIGARETTE Carlton made claims to “high porosity paper”, “new filter enriching filter with activated charcoal” and

“Precision Air Vents”, a new feature, intended to help unpleasant chemicals in the smoke escape.

Unfortunately it was discovered that they were placed where the consumer’s fingers would cover them in order to grip the cigarette.

6:11

Fig 6:20

Chesterfield advertisement, SEP, May 1952

Fig 6:19

Englander advertisement, SEP, September 1952

During the beginning of the ’sixties the Surgeon General was determined to curb the industry

and address widely publicised consumer anxieties.

Smoking and Health

The first major American report on smoking and health "Smoking and Health: Report of the Advisory Committee to the Surgeon General of the Public Health Service," was published in 1962. It concluded

that cigarette smoking was a major cause of lung cancer in men and a suspected cause in women. It also

identified many other causal relationships and smoking-disease associations. The report suggested

"appropriate remedial action." This prompted Congress to pass the Federal Cigarette Labelling and

Advertising Act (1965) requiring the Surgeon General's Warnings to be printed on all cigarette pack and advertisements.

The design of the warning was left to the Tobacco Companies. It did appear on the packs but

was not displayed in the same spirit as the pack graphics.

“...a thick frame clutters the words of warning (by activating the negative white space between word and box) just as

waving hand masks small moves of the fingers in switching coins. The sans serif, capital letters minimise distinctions

among letters and words, contributing to the difficulty of reading.” Edward Tufte, Visual Explanations: Images And Quantities, Evidence And Narrative. Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997, p.65.

Fig 6:21 still proudly promoted the fiction of the ‘Safe Cigarette’, eight years after printed

warnings were placed on cigarette packs. Ironically the brand name was True (fig 6:22).

By 1969 the FTC had issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to ban cigarette advertisements

on TV and radio. Cigarette advertisers voluntarily agreed to stop advertising on the air in return for a delay in controls on the sale of cigarettes.

In Fascicles 5 and 6, I have explored the twin themes of Landscape and Technology as potential

agents of reassurance for the consumer when all the available evidence was clearly indicating that the Safe Cigarette was a figment of the industry’s imagination. There are the twin themes often discovered in analysis of the heart of American culture.

In the post war period it was no longer possible to evoke the spirit of the Landscape in pursuit

of well being. The uncritical enthusiasm for the functions performed by the machine and the application 16

of new technological approaches, was no longer tenable. Geoffrey Gorer in his book The American People; A Study in National Character from 1948 (Chapter 5, “Man A Machine?, p.139) stated that

“...One of the two basic components in the development of America’s technological genius has been the

viewing of man as a working machine.” But as the ’fifties wore on it soon started to become apparent

6:12

Fig 6:21

Carlton advertisement, LOOK, July 1964

that this human machine could break down with the addition of ‘new’ and ‘improved’ seemingly wondrous manmade chemicals and products. Artists and designers could no longer provide images to

sustain these claims and governmental bodies sought a subtler approach from the advertisers. It is

significant that motifs from advertising were synthesised and reformulated in this period into cartoons

and general satire. The cartoon that lampooned preposterous advertising strategies sat comfortably alongside the glossy full-page advertisement, its very source within the pages of the mass circulation

magazines.

Fig 6:22

TRUE advertisement, LIFE, September 1972

6:13

Endnotes to Fascicle Six

The Cork-Tip was very popular in both the U.S and the U.K. The legacy of cork tips can still be seen on some current brands in the patterning on the paper at the mouth-end of the cigarette.

The Filter-Tip cigarettes, however, that were available in the U.K. after 1954, were primarily designed to use less

tobacco, and therefore be cheaper to buy. As the British economy strengthened and spending power increased, economy Filter-

Tips lost their popularity because they were perceived as a ‘second rate’ product. For a thorough account of the early days of the cigarette see, Maurice Corina, Trust in Tobacco, Michael Joseph, London, 1975. 2

In the U.S., filter technology became more accessible in 1924 with the introduction of a machine that could assemble a cigarette

with filter. The filter machine was patented by Aivaz, an émigré Russian engineer. It constructed the filter from two layers of pure

cellulose interleaved between three layers of crepe paper. The filter equipped cigarette tube was sold empty, so that the smoker could add their own tobacco. A machine that could make a filter cigarette in one pass was still some way in the future.

The next technical advance was a machine developed in the U.K. by the Wix brothers in 1926. Their first popular-priced

Filter-Tipped brand was Du Maurier introduced in 1931. (Du Maurier was discontinued during the Second World War) . The Wixs’ machine was improved upon by Molins who, in 1949, developed a fast assembly machine that could make the filter cigarette in one pass. Filter-Tip technology advanced dramatically when the machine was made available to all manufacturers. 3

See Anon, “FORTUNE 500 Survey”, FORTUNE, December 1953, p.150ff. 4

For good general histories of the Tobacco Industry, see Maurice Corina, Trust in Tobacco, Michael Joseph, London, 1975; John

K.Winkler, Tobacco Tycoon; The story of James Buchanan Duke, Random House, New York, 1942; Anon, “Embattled Tobacco’s

New Strategy”, FORTUNE, 1963, p.100ff: Anon. “Benson & Hedges”, FORTUNE, May 1950, p.96: Anon. “Philip Morris & Co.”, FORTUNE, March 1936, p.106: Anon. “Philip Morris Comeback.”, FORTUNE, October 1949, p.110. 5

See “FORTUNE 500”, FORTUNE, December 1953:

The top 3 companies in 1953 annual fascicle (inc.federal taxes) $600 million to over $1 billion. American Tobacco R.J.Reynolds

Liggett & Myers

The middle 3 companies of 1953 annual fascicle (inc.federal taxes) $200-$400 million. P.Lorillard

Philip Morris

Brown & Williamson

F6:01

The lower 3 companies of 1953 annual fascicle (inc.federal taxes) under $50 million, with specialist and economy brands.

Laris & Brother

Stephano Brothers Riggio Tobacco

See Jules Henry, Culture Against Man, Random House, 1963, and the use of the word “Puffing” as a recognised term for a grandiose claim (most often used in relation to advertising copy). 7

Scientific/technical illustrations can be found in such periodicals of the period as; FORTUNE, LIFE, Popular Mechanics, Mechanics

Illustrated, and Scientific American. 8

For an interview with Giusti see, Ernest W. Watson, Forty Illustrators and How They Work, Books for Library Press, New York, 1946, pp.148-152. 9

For an informative and fully illustrated account of the development and conventions of technical drawing and information design

see, Edward R. Tufte, The Visual Display Of Quantitative Information. Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1983; Edward R.

Tufte, Envisioning Information. Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1990; Edward R. Tufte, Visual Explanations: Images And

Quantities, Evidence And Narrative. Graphics Press, Cheshire, Connecticut, 1997. 10

For more information about toothpaste and teeth colour and the “You’ll wonder where the yellow went” Pepsodent campagn

during the ’fifties, see Martin Mayer, Madison Avenue U.S.A., The Bodley Head, London, 1958, p.122. For an account of the motivational need for white teeth see, Vance Packard, The Hidden Persuaders, Penguin Special, london, 1960 [David McKay, New York, 1957], p.21; For information about Louis Cheskin’s Colour Research Institute see the same book, p.28. 11

Consumer concern over the effects of flouride prompted the FDA to place cautionary poison advice labels on toothpaste in the U.S. during the early ’fifties. 12

For the influence of visual conventions developed in advertising see; Jack Levine, Jack Levine, introduction by Milton

W.Brown,Rizzoli International, New York, 1989; On exhibited art, Clive Phillpot and Jon Hendricks, Fluxus; Selections From the Gilbert and Lila Silverman Collection, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, 1988; John A.Walker, Art Since Pop, Thames and

Hudson, London, 1975; Simon Wilson, Pop, Thames and Hudson, London, 1974; Deborah Wye, Thinking print: Books to Billboards,

1980-95, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, 1996; Constance W. Glenn, Time Dust Rosenquist, Complete Graphics: 1962-

1992, Rizzoli International Publications, New York, 1993. There is an all pervading influence on post war American art of Marcel

Duchamp who was particularly sensitive to graphic languages such as sign painting, posters and branding see Ecke Bonk, Marcel Duchamp; The Box in A Valise, Rizzoli, New York, 1989.

F6:02

Crocidolite is a fibrous mineral of the amphibole group, blue or bluish green in colour found with a silky or dull luster. Asbestos is

a combination of several minerals that separate into long, threadlike fibres that do not bum, conduct heat or electricity, and are very resistant to chemicals. These minerals are often used for making fireproof materials, electrical insulation, roofing, and filters.

Substantial amounts of asbestos, particularly in sprayed form, have been used in school buildings, in the U.S. especially during the period 1946 through 1972. More asbestos workers die of lung cancer than of mesothelioma. The United States Congress has concluded, after extensive hearings, that there is no "safe level of exposure" to asbestos. (see also Endnote 14) 14

Roger C. Geary, the Missouri attorney who defended Lorillard, argued that Micronite was a “very efficient filter” and said that Lorillard stopped using stopped using the filters in the 1950s because they were expensive and made the cigarettes taste bad.

See Caitlin Francke, “$2 million award in smoking lawsuit Baltimore County man wins against makers of Kents, asbestos filter”, Baltimore Sun, April 1999. www.tobacco.neu.edu/Extra/balimore_sun/connor_micronite.htm

For more information on Asbestos see; Brayton and Purcell Legal Advice, Asbestos Network, www.asbestosnetwork.com; The United States Congress, Asbestos, United States Code, Title 20, Chapter 49, Section 3601, www.asbestosnetwork.com/exposurerisks/usc3601.htm;

Mesothelioma Online Resource, www.mesothelioma-update.com/what.htm

For detailed accounts regarding cigarettes and health issues see, James Wilkinson,Tobacco The Facts behind the Smokescreen,

Penguin, Harmondsworth 1986: H.J.Eysenck, Smoking, Health and Personality, Four Square, Weidenfield and Nicholson Limited, 1965: See also, CDC, Surgeon General’s Reports, www.cdc.gov, August 1997 - August 2001.

More references to Health issues can be found under “1.Tobacco and Health” in the Bibliography and References section of Fascicle

See Endnote 31, of Fascicle Five.

F6:03

The Safe Cigarette: Visual strategies of reassurance in American advertisements for cigarettes, 1945-1964.

Volume Number:

The Safe Cigarette

Practice-Based Ph.D.

Jackie Batey