Anti-Smoking Advertising Campaign Analysis

1594 Words7 Pages
Anti-smoking advertising campaign: to be or not to be
One is to analyze a recent campaign advertisement by the Public Health England, which received a lot of controversies in the media. The advertisement encompasses a picture of a possibly middle-aged white man smoking a cigarette that is oozing with flesh-like sores. The picture is also inscribed with the words “Every 15 cigarettes you smoke cause a mutation that can become cancer.” Below the inscription another one is added, “Search “Smoke free” for free quitting support.” Essentially, the purpose of the advertisers was to create urgency in the matter of stopping cigarette smoking. In this context, the department was playing the role since it is part of its responsibility to protect the public
…show more content…
The first one is the desire to make a conclusion on the basis of a very little evidence. To draw valid inferences the author must always have sufficient evidence and qualify its claims appropriately. The second fallacy is a false authority which means that the Public Health England is a sufficient warrant for believing a claim. The power of the text is less capable of persuading others solely on the grounds of authority. Therefore, most of the fallacies in this particular sphere are intentional. One more fallacy is a failure to see an alternative. Given the negative implications of cigarette smoking, smoke-free campaigns such as the one used in this analysis have had to be aggressive. They have to create mental images that a smoker will continually associate with smoking. In the past, such campaigns targeted on looks showing how a young man in his 20s looked like a 40-year-old, but rather than create the anticipated effected, most smokers were not touched by the commercial as it did not look like truth. In this case, not all 20-year olds look like 40-year-olds because of smoking; therefore, smoking cannot be harmful to your health. In another spectrum, when statistics are utilized such as showing every one in three people who smoke end up with a terminal health complication, most individuals are inclined to assume that they are the exception to the rule: genetic fallacy. Genetic fallacies are essentially common in many situations. The majority of people tends to believe in their uniqueness and to have various theories that position their worth. To make the argument less fallacious, they should be based on the strong and correct evidence. It is necessary to mention also such fallacy as a slippery slope when claiming that every 15 cigarettes cause a mutation that, in turn, causes cancer. This fallacy must be intentional, as well, and is closely
Open Document