plain alcohol packaging

[ballzac]

Plain gambling machines? No graphics, buzzing sounds and swirling lights. Just numbers or letters.

 

Good idea. Even better, just a box with a coin slot in it. No screen. No buttons.

[tripsis]

I find it disturbing that some of you guys are so anti-consumerist that you would happily see the government step in to control the way everything is packaged. I see branding as part of our culture. I see beauty in it. Like all types of beauty, it can at times mask something ugly, but that's our perogative as adults to make the choices.

Branding is designed to appeal to our sense of aesthetics, or our desire to 'look the part'. It's part of the marketing machine designed to exploit our weaknesses, so that we buy things we don't necessarily need. That is not beautiful. Yes, some packaging is done very artfully and is beautiful, but it's all still part of the marketing machine designed to make sales and nothing more. I don't care to have a government making choices for me, but at the moment we're letting corporations run the show instead. If there aren't rules and regulations put in place from a higher authority, think about how corporations would exploit the masses. Monsanto is a good example of a corporation with too much power.

As for packaging, think of how much waste goes into landfill every day. If pre-packaged food was phased out and food was bought from bulks bins, such as those seen at food co-ops, and placed into vessels brought from home, we would have far less waste globally. But of course that won't happen, as the precious economy is at stake and corporations would stand to lose money.

[botanika]

As for packaging, think of how much waste goes into landfill every day. If pre-packaged food was phased out and food was bought from bulks bins, such as those seen at food co-ops, and placed into vessels brought from home, we would have far less waste globally. But of course that won't happen, as the precious economy is at stake and corporations would stand to lose money.

 

Look at how nature packages itself: colourful flowers full of pollen, bright inviting fruits of sugary nectar, birds of paradise dancing in neon porn feathers, Elephants with their 550hp V8 tusks, tribesmen marking their bodies with punk paints. I dont think its all about exploiting weakness or purely being for profit. One could argue that beauty and packaging is a crucial part of natures function. Would our ecosystems function any better if they were plain packaged, fair and uncompetitive? We would have far less waste on the planet if we had far less people.

[tripsis]

Sure, flowers advertise their presence with colours and scents, animals advertise there sexual prowess with adornments and calls, but it really doesn't bear much relation to corporations spending millions on advertising designed to make sure the consumer spends their money on their products. Most companies spend a lot of time and money working out exactly how best to exploit the consumer market for their own benefit. Nature doesn't do that. Nature operates on natural selection. If a colour attracts a pollinator, it will probably succeed. If not, it probably won't. Unlike nature, marketing departments, especially in large corporations like Coca Cola, study the psyche and work out the best way to exploit it, regardless of the cost to the environment or society. As long as it is profitable, it will be done.

I didn't suggest our ecosystems would do better with plain packaging. I did suggest doing away with packaging would benefit the environment though. Yes, less people would be good, but we have to work with what we have. The population will continue to grow for some time yet, so with that in mind, we should look at ways to reduce our impact on our planet.

Edited July 11, 2011 by tripsis

[ballzac]

That comes across as simple misanthropy to me tripsis. You can accept all of this in 'nature', but in the human world it is a problem? Why does it make a difference that one is a process of natural selection and the other isn't?

[tripsis]

My 'title':

misanthropic biophile

Would you expect philanthropy from anyone with a title like that?

I accept it in nature, because it's not done with intent. That's the difference. Stags don't choose to have massive horns, their genes dictate it. Flowers don't choose their colours, their genes dictate them. Marketing department do choose their packaging and advertising, to best exploit weaknesses in people, be that the desire to conform, or feel good, or to feel rich, or whatever angle they decide to take.

[ballzac]

Haha, I didn't notice that.

Fair enough. I guess I agree with that to an extent. I mean, I don't have the same negative associations with - for example - wild cats, as I do with tanks or ballistic missiles.

Where I disagree is on marketing. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If their company exploits children in third world countries, I'm less likely to see beauty in their advertising or their products, but if their worst crime is attempting to 'trick' me out of my money, I can live with that. I really don't see what the problem is. If you choose to be cynical about it, that's your choice, but don't dictate what other people can choose to enjoy.

[incognito]

i come from a town where a dude can get his ass kicked at the local for being stoned. if u say that alcohol is a drug the reply is "yeah but its a good drug, or staunch refusla that it is a drug" bring on the warning labels and plain packaging. wont stop them drinking none.

[tripsis]

Where I disagree is on marketing. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. If their company exploits children in third world countries, I'm less likely to see beauty in their advertising or their products, but if their worst crime is attempting to 'trick' me out of my money, I can live with that. I really don't see what the problem is. If you choose to be cynical about it, that's your choice, but don't dictate what other people can choose to enjoy.

I'm not dictating anything, just putting forth my opinion. Coca Cola is an excellent example of psychologically geared marketing. All their ads are feel good, look cool, good times types ads, where they appeal to people's (especially young and impressionable people) desire to fit in and be cool. End result is that you see countless teens cracking open cans of Coke because it the done thing. The same is true for cigarettes, which is what this thread is about, though advertising has largely been banned for cigarettes. Instead, the advertising in done in movies and by peers, where smoking is perceived to be a 'cool' thing to do. You say as adults it's our prerogative to make choices about the products we buy. Well, it's not only adults that are targeted with marketing. No age group is safe, but children and teens are especially easy to win over. Plenty of marketing and packaging is geared towards developing and impressionable minds; minds that don't yet have the full ability to make informed decisions or know when they're being exploited. Plain packaging will not result in consumers having less choice, it will merely result in those choices being made based on other attributes of the products.

Have you seen 'The Corporation'? Watch the clip below and tell me that's beautiful. Children don't have to be in a sweat shop to be exploited by corporations.

 

 

[ballzac]

I'm not dictating anything, just putting forth my opinion.

 

But if I understand you correctly when you say this

I for one support plain packaging, but not only with cigarettes and alcohol, across the entire range of products that exist. Without marketing and branding, people will choose based on quality and price, not based on the wrapper. If a product is good, it will maintain its customer base and people will advertise for that product by talking about it.

 

you are are saying that you think plain packaging should be mandatory. Yes, your words on here are just an opinion, but what you are saying you support is that these things should be dictated. You're not just saying that you prefer plain label products, you are saying that I shouldn't have access to anything else. That is my point.

it's not only adults that are targeted with marketing. No age group is safe, but children and teens are especially easy to win over. Plenty of marketing and packaging is geared towards developing and impressionable minds; minds that don't yet have the full ability to make informed decisions or know when they're being exploited.

 

These days it's too easy to blame Kellogg's rather than just to stop buying the bloody cocoa pops for you kids.

Have you seen 'The Corporation'? Watch the clip below and tell me that's beautiful. Children don't have to be in a sweat shop to be exploited by corporations.

 

 

 

I'm not saying that all advertising is beautiful. In fact, I thought we were discussing labelling, not advertising in general. But seriously, turn the TV off???

[tripsis]

You're right, I probably wouldn't be opposed to plain packaging across the whole range of consumer products, or better yet, do away with packaging altogether. Having products with plain packaging isn't going to limit your options, it just shows each product for what it is, not for what it's made out to be. You'll still have access to everything you want, it just won't look as pretty. I seldom want the government to intervene in the freedoms of its people, but when those freedoms are being exploited for the capitalist money-making machine that is the corporate world, then something needs to change. Losing the pretty packaging to reduce the exploitation perpetrated by corporations is something I could live with.

These days it's too easy to blame Kellogg's rather than just to stop buying the bloody cocoa pops for you kids.

True, parents should take responsibility, but without ever having been a parent, I can't comment on how easy/difficult it is to live in a world where advertising assaults you and your children at every turn. Even kids want to conform, so if a parent is denying their child cocoa pops, but every kid at school is eating them and every ad is talking about how great they are, that kid will just keep pestering. Those folks at Kellogs have to share at least some of the blame.

I'm not saying that all advertising is beautiful. In fact, I thought we were discussing labelling, not advertising in general. But seriously, turn the TV off???

Sorry, got a little carried away and broadened it to advertising in general. It all ties in together.

Better yet, get rid of the damned TV!

[FancyPants]

I'm still up in the air a bit about this. One the one hand, if packaging is done away with (for any product for example), then how would one know of it's quality? Also, there's already a falling rate of Australians taking up smoking to start with; the idea of smoking being "cool" has massively lost its shine for many. IMHO I think the doing away with advertisements, sporting endorsements, and the realisation of a lot of younger people (either family members or govt. adverts) that the illnesses and death associated with smoking is really unattractive is what has achieved the decline. I basically don't think there's any real need for the plain packaging. If alcohol went down the same road; ie keep it legal, but make it more realistic about the associated illnesses, and do away with advertisements, it might eventually go down the same path, without us having to lose any of our democratic rights.

Also, as far as alcohol and cigs go, I think the older generations have a lot more to answer for in terms of youth-impressionism than they'd care to accept. I never took up smoking (tastes gross, waste of money for something that won't get you high) but many of my friends did, with the idea that it's "grown up" and thus "cool". How many schoolkid smokers pinch them from their parents? If they were shown responsible drinking, hell even smoking, then I imagine there'd be a vastly different attitude in this country.

[qualia]

The liquor industry-funded organisation DrinkWise Australia is introducing labels displaying new consumer warnings on alcoholic drinks.

Labels will now include messages that alcohol should not be drunk by children, can cause self-harm and should be avoided by pregnant women.

The labels also include the address of the drinkwise.com.au website.

"There is some evidence overseas that labelling alone won't change everything, it needs education as well so that is why we are trying to bring the two together and bring people onto the website," DrinkWise Australia chair Trish Worth said.

Psychologist Michael Carr-Gregg says the DrinkWise campaign is positive but he believes the organisation should have consulted more widely before embarking on the label changes.

"I think what the industry are worried about is that the government might bring in more stringent, tougher labelling and might make them put them on all their advertisements as well," he said.

"Now, I'm not opposed to what DrinkWise does - I think some of the stuff they do is very good - but a cynic would suggest they're just trying to thwart tougher regulations."

"can cause self-harm" lol,

[Darklight]

OMG I think I've found my new avatar

I reckon we should have a competition for the most bizarre warning you can think of for generic alcohol packaging. The possibilities for mischief would be infinite

We could even make them into stickers to cover the real warnings

[bℓσωηG]

warning: alcohol consumption can make you a clown

[incognito]

God Emelio Estevez was HOT

nothing to do with booze but dayum!

[rahli]

READ WARNING PRIOR TO CONSUMTION

Alchohol reduces literacy.

[qualia]

WARNING: Beer makes you smear.

*thats actually what my parents used to tell us kids when we were younger.

[tripsis]

WARNING: Excessive alcohol consumption will negatively affect your erection.

[bℓσωηG]

lulz... alcohol will cause you stare at breasts excessively

[botanika]

Warning: excessive alcohol consumption may make you feel good.

[Torsten]

God Emelio Estevez was HOT

 

sizzle! and he'd be so glad to have built his career on the name Estevez rather than Sheen now ;). Thus the topic is back to alcohol [and all other drugs]

Mind you, Charlie definitely won in the looks department in the long run - pity about the brain cells though.

The problem I have with plain packaging of any product is 'where does it stop'? Lollies? Chips? Tabloids? softdrinks? TV? Coffee? Strawberries?

I am all for punishing the cigarette companies for peddling their wares deceptively and for holding the population to ransom for decades, but I feel the plain packing benefits will be marginal while the precedent will be huge. I think restricting tobacco products to 18+ tobacconists would be a much more appropriate move as this removes the product entirely from children's view and inconveniences smokers enough so that they have to plan ahead. But then again we know how well this method works with keeping alcohol out of the hands of minors .... because it is not strictly enough enforced.

As with everything my preferred solution would be education and appropriate restriction of availability. I don't believe in making ANY product [that is not a direct danger to others] unavailable to adults and I don't see much benefit in plain labels. I don't have any problem with mandated warning labels though.

[Psylo]

I think restricting tobacco products to 18+ tobacconists would be a much more appropriate move as this removes the product entirely from children's view and inconveniences smokers enough so that they have to plan ahead. But then again we know how well this method works with keeping alcohol out of the hands of minors .... because it is not strictly enough enforced.

 

You may not be aware, but in NSW the cigarette racks have been covered by a roller door type arrangement so you cant see the products. I have seen this in service stations, supermarkets and corner stores, so I assume its a legal requirement rather than a security measure.

Not that I'm condoning it, but a system of scanning a purchasers licence or other ID card would put an end to underage alc & cig purchases. A device installed at every retail outlet that requires a digital approval to complete a transaction, which would then be audited monthly against sales.

[Foo]

I think we should just plain package everything. Chocolate, cloths, phones. That should fix everything!

[FancyPants]

Lack of advertising killed the "smoking is cool" idea; let's keep the other rubbish legal but kill the advertising.

TV, like religion and drugs, aren't the baddies; they're merely tools to be used as we see fit.