Drinkers Say Ad Ban Has Little Effect

[george]

Drinkers say ad ban has little effect

BANGKOK: -- A ban on the advertising of alcoholic drinks is unlikely to reduce liquor consumption in the country, according to a survey by health advocates. To cut the number of young drinkers, the government should instead focus more on other measures, such as a ban on the sale of alcohol to people under 21, imposition of higher liquor taxes and the dissemination of information on the negative effects of alcohol consumption, said Jakkrit Phoomsawat, vice president of the Foundation for Development of Complementary-Alternative Medicine.

The foundation surveyed 6,472 drinkers in 10 provinces, asking them whether the ban had or was likely to affect their drinking habits in any way.

The survey showed that the ban had not really helped change the drinking habits of Thais, Dr Jakkrit said.

Almost 92% of the respondents said they would continue drinking alcohol with or without viewing liquor advertisements, while only 8% said the absence of the commercials would make them drink less.

Only 6.2% of the teenage respondents said the ban would make them stop drinking altogether.

On top of that, 72% of the respondents said the ban on liquor advertisements on TV before 10pm had not affected their drinking behaviour, while only 26.5% said they have been drinking less since the ban was imposed.

The survey was conducted in January, when the Public Health Ministry was preparing to impose a ban on liquor advertisements on television and radio.

The ban was approved last month by the national committee on alcohol control, chaired by caretaker Public Health Minister Phinij Jarusombat.

It will take effect when the Department of Public Relations issues the enforcement date.

Dr Jakkrit said the government should come up with other measures to cut alcohol consumption.

He said the ban on advertising has not been successful in discouraging drinkers, so far, particularly youngsters, so a different approach was needed.

--Bangkok Post 2006-03-29

[Phil Conners]

Sure. That's why alcholol advertizements have been banned in most of the civilized world. Because it has no effect. One wonder how much these "experts" are being paid to say this.

[PREM-R]

Sure. That's why alcholol advertizements have been banned in most of the civilized world. Because it has no effect. One wonder how much these "experts" are being paid to say this.

IMO advertising does not cause people to become drinkers, I think that is dictated more by the persons family situation and peer preasure. The only real relevance to advertising is that it portrays one brand or another as "Cool" or "Sexy" so therfore more desirable to a 'young and trendy' teen than another alcoholic beverage. Checking ID of all people who appear "underage" when purchaseing alcohol would seem to me to be a better, though by no means total, solution to the problem of youth drinkers.

[Totster]

A ban on the advertising of alcoholic drinks will have absolutely no affect on me ...!

totster

[britmaveric]

Silly really - those that are going to drink anyways regardless if they see an ad or not.

[jayenram]

Drinkers say ad ban has little effect

Is there an ad ban?

[sonnyJ]

Sure. That's why alcholol advertizements have been banned in most of the civilized world. Because it has no effect. One wonder how much these "experts" are being paid to say this.

IMO advertising does not cause people to become drinkers, I think that is dictated more by the persons family situation and peer preasure. The only real relevance to advertising is that it portrays one brand or another as "Cool" or "Sexy" so therfore more desirable to a 'young and trendy' teen than another alcoholic beverage. Checking ID of all people who appear "underage" when purchaseing alcohol would seem to me to be a better, though by no means total, solution to the problem of youth drinkers.

Agree. Even the Maekhong add on TV is very Cool.

[steveromagnino]

this is a subject close to my heart, and I actually would consider doing research on it.

In the past studies by academics in NZ about beer advertising, they were able to show using econometric techniques that advertising did have a slight effect on overall beer consumption; I cannot quite recall the methodology, but that was the result; much to the disappointment of the beer companies who had commissioned the study.

The beer companies felt it was only about brand switching, and had no effect on acquiring new users. Ditto arguement for cigarette companies. This being the case, they should be free to advertise....

We buy things for various attributes. If the issue of being cool is one; then what references do we need for that? We need to look at what the pop stars and TV people are doing (which is why beer and cigarette companies pay big money for product placement); we look at advertising, we look at our friends.

If all cigarette and beer companies consistently promote to certain groups, then not surprisingly those groups tend to start consuming the products; cigarettes are mostly after young women these days, and with Sex in the City and the like, they are acheiving their goals. For beer, in NZ they consistently advertise beer to men, and surprise surprise NZ beer drinkers are skewed to men.

Advertising works; it gets people consuming the product; with a mass market campaign there is no way to have only brand switching and no acquisition unless you've saturated the market.... I'd say the above poster is right; someone was paid to say this.

[Totster]

Drinkers say ad ban has little effect

Is there an ad ban?

There is... but they're not advertising the fact !

totster

[Patex]

...Dr Jakkrit said the government should come up with other measures to cut alcohol consumption.

He said the ban on advertising has not been successful in discouraging drinkers, so far, particularly youngsters, so a different approach was needed.

--Bangkok Post 2006-03-29

Can one be stupid like this? A Dr?

The advertising ban is not for the already addicted .