Clever logo… (well I thought so anyway)

Sorry, but did anyone ever clear up the issue over NHS branding for TJ back on page 1 / 2? Only the NHS didn’t used to have a single brand, and that was the problem, hence one was introduced ’bout 10 yrs ago. The NHS Executive started to realise that the NHS identity was becoming diluted as the new fangled ‘Trusts’ of the late ’90s started to brand themselves and acquire new logo’s. The public identity of the service, albeit made up of multiple independent components, was being lost.
So they imposed the current logo & typeface standards for all NHS organisations in England (but probably not in Scotland, obviously!)

Personally I think it was a mighty fine change, but then I supported targets 🙂

I don’t tend to think too hard about anything on here. Maybe thats where I’m going wrong?!

I’ve got an idea in my head of a five barbed hook grabbing this thread by the flabby mouth and it being pulled “out of the water”. Can you visualise that idea for me please in a 150mm x 220mm white space by monday please. I need a rough by tomorrow 10am, we’ll let the art editor and editor see it first then get back to you on any changes we need to make to your ideas to make them fit with our demographic/audience.

Children and youth perceive smoking messages in an unbranded advertisement from a NIKE marketing campaign: A cluster randomised controlled trial

Author(s): Auger N., Daniel M., Knauper B., Raynault M., Pless B.

Citation: BMC Pediatrics, April 2011, vol./is. 11/, 1471-2431 (08 Apr 2011)

Publication Date: April 2011

Abstract: Background: How youth perceive marketing messages in sports is poorly understood. We evaluated whether youth perceive that the imagery of a specific sports marketing advertisement contained smoking-related messages.Methods: Twenty grade 7 to 11 classes (397 students) from two high schools in Montreal, Canada were recruited to participate in a cluster randomised single-blind controlled trial. Classes were randomly allocated to either a NIKE advertisement containing the phrase ‘LIGHT IT UP’ (n = 205) or to a neutral advertisement with smoking imagery reduced and the phrase replaced by ‘GO FOR IT’ (n = 192). The NIKE logo was removed from both advertisements. Students responded in class to a questionnaire asking open-ended questions about their perception of the messages in the ad. Reports relating to the appearance and text of the ad, and the product being promoted were evaluated.Results: Relative to the neutral ad, more students reported that the phrase ‘LIGHT IT UP’ was smoking-related (37.6% vs. 0.5%) and that other parts of the ad resembled smoking-related products (50.7% vs. 10.4%). The relative risk of students reporting that the NIKE ad promoted cigarettes was 4.41 (95% confidence interval: 2.64-7.36; P < 0.001).Conclusions: The unbranded imagery of an advertisement in a specific campaign aimed at promoting NIKE hockey products appears to have contained smoking-related messages. This particular marketing campaign may have promoted smoking. This suggests that the regulation of marketing to youth may need to be more tightly controlled. 2011 Auger et a

Perceptions of tobacco advertising and marketing that might lead to smoking initiation among Chinese high school girls.

Author(s): Ho, Michael G, Shi, Yu, Ma, Shaojun, Novotny, Thomas E

Citation: Tobacco Control: An International Journal, October 2007, vol./is. 16/5(359-360), 0964-4563 (Oct 2007)

Publication Date: October 2007

Abstract: Presented here is a pilot study on susceptibility among young women in Beijing. Five focus groups of high school girls aged 16-19 years (n=27) was assembled during summer 2006. Thirteen subjects reported smoking experience (smoked 100 lifetime cigarettes or smoked in past 30 days). In-depth questions identified themes such as knowledge of brand identities, influences and information about smoking among women. Explicit cigarette advertisements are banned by law, but subjects noted the appearance of cigarette brand logos on television. They also were aware that transnational tobacco companies (TTCs) manufacture most female brand cigarettes. Many subjects were aware that cigarettes were advertised at sporting events. Many subjects’ favourite actors and singers are smokers, and they reported that they believe these celebrities are more glamorous and elegant when they smoke. The study suggests that concepts of femininity, independence, style and sophistication are recognised by young women in China as part of the already embedded smoking culture.

Declines in tobacco brand recognition and ever-smoking rates among young children following restrictions on tobacco advertisements in Hong Kong

Author(s): Fielding R., Chee Y.Y., Choi K.M., Chu T.K., Kato K., Lam S.K., Sin K.L., Tang K.T., Wong H.M., Wong K.M.

Citation: Journal of Public Health, March 2004, vol./is. 26/1(24-30), 1741-3842 (Mar 2004)

Publication Date: March 2004

Abstract: Background: We compared the recognition of tobacco brands and ever-smoking rates in young children before (1991) and after (2001) the implementation of cigarette advertising restrictions in Hong Kong and identified continuing sources of tobacco promotion exposure. Methods: A cross-sectional survey of 824 primary school children aged from 8 to 11 (Primary classes 3-4) living in two Hong Kong districts was carried out using self-completed questionnaires examining smoking behaviour and recognition of names and logos from 18 tobacco, food, drink and other brands common in Hong Kong. Results: Ever-smoking prevalence in 2001 was 3.8 per cent (1991, 7.8 per cent). Tobacco brand recognition rates ranged from 5.3 per cent (Viceroy name) to 72.8 per cent (Viceroy logo). Compared with 1991, in 2001 never-smoker children recognized fewer tobacco brand names and logos: Marlboro logo recognition rate fell by 55.3 per cent. Similar declines were also seen in ever-smoker children, with recognition of the Marlboro logo decreasing 48 per cent. Recognition rates declined amongst both boys and girls. Children from non-smoking families constituted 51 per cent (426) of the sample, whereas 34.5 per cent (284), 8.5 per cent (70), 1.7 per cent (14) and 4.4 per cent (36) of the children had one, two, three or more than three smoking family members at home, respectively. Tobacco brand recognition rates and ever-smoking prevalence were significantly higher among children with smoking family members compared with those without. Among 12 possible sources of exposure to cigarette brand names and logos, retail stalls (75.5 per cent; 622), indirect advertisements (71.5 per cent; 589) and magazines (65.3 per cent; 538) were ranked the most common. Conclusion: Advertising restrictions in Hong Kong have effectively decreased primary-age children’s recognition of tobacco branding. However, these children remain vulnerable to branding, mostly through exposure from family smokers, point-of-sale tobacco advertisement and occasional promotions. Action to curb these is now required.

Cigarette package design: opportunities for disease prevention.

Author(s): Difranza JR, Clark DM, Pollay RW

Citation: Tobacco Induced Diseases, 2002, vol./is. 1/2(97-109), 1617-9625;1617-9625 (2002)

Publication Date: 2002

Abstract: ABSTRACT : OBJECTIVE : To learn how cigarette packages are designed and to determine to what extent cigarette packages are designed to target children. METHODS : A computer search was made of all Internet websites that post tobacco industry documents using the search terms: packaging, package design, package study, box design, logo, trademark and design study. All documents were retrieved electronically and analyzed by the first author for recurrent themes. DATA SYNTHESIS : Cigarette manufacturers devote a great deal of attention and expense to package design because it is central to their efforts to create brand images. Colors, graphic elements, proportioning, texture, materials and typography are tested and used in various combinations to create the desired product and user images. Designs help to create the perceived product attributes and project a personality image of the user with the intent of fulfilling the psychological needs of the targeted type of smoker. The communication of these images and attributes is conducted through conscious and subliminal processes. Extensive testing is conducted using a variety of qualitative and quantitative research techniques. CONCLUSION : The promotion of tobacco products through appealing imagery cannot be stopped without regulating the package design. The same marketing research techniques used by the tobacco companies can be used to design generic packaging and more effective warning labels targeted at specific consumers.

Effects of dissuasive packaging on young adult smokers.

Author(s): Hoek J, Wong C, Gendall P, Louviere J, Cong K

Citation: Tobacco Control, May 2011, vol./is. 20/3(183-8), 0964-4563;1468-3318 (2011 May)

Publication Date: May 2011

Abstract: BACKGROUND: Tobacco industry documents illustrate how packaging promotes smoking experimentation and reinforces existing smokers’ behaviour. Plain packaging reduces the perceived attractiveness of smoking and creates an opportunity to introduce larger pictorial warnings that could promote cessation-linked behaviours. However, little is known about the effects such a combined policy measure would have on smokers’ behaviour.METHODS: A 3 (warning size) *4 (branding level) plus control (completely plain pack) best-worst experiment was conducted via face-to-face interviews with 292 young adult smokers from a New Zealand provincial city. The Juster Scale was also used to estimate cessation-linked behaviours among participants.RESULTS: Of the 13 options tested, respondents were significantly less likely to choose those featuring fewer branding elements or larger health warnings. Options that featured more branding elements were still preferred even when they also featured a 50% health warning, but were significantly less likely to be chosen when they featured a 75% warning. Comparison of a control pack representing the status quo (branded with 30% front of pack warning) and a plain pack (with a 75% warning) revealed the latter would be significantly more likely to elicit cessation-related behaviours.CONCLUSIONS: Plain packs that feature large graphic health warnings are significantly more likely to promote cessation among young adult smokers than fully or partially branded packs. The findings support the introduction of plain packaging and suggest use of unbranded package space to feature larger health warnings would further promote cessation.

How does increasingly plainer cigarette packaging influence adult smokers’ perceptions about brand image? An experimental study.

Author(s): Wakefield, M. A, Germain, D, Durkin, S. J

Citation: Tobacco Control: An International Journal, December 2008, vol./is. 17/6(416-421), 0964-4563 (Dec 2008)

Publication Date: December 2008

Abstract: Background: Cigarette packaging is a key marketing strategy for promoting brand image. Plain packaging has been proposed to limit brand image, but tobacco companies would resist removal of branding design elements. Method: A 3 (brand types) x4 (degree of plain packaging) between-subject experimental design was used, using an internet online method, to expose 813 adult Australian smokers to one randomly selected cigarette pack, after which respondents completed ratings of the pack. Results: Compared with current cigarette packs with full branding, cigarette packs that displayed progressively fewer branding design elements were perceived increasingly unfavourably in terms of smokers’ appraisals of the packs, the smokers who might smoke such packs, and the inferred experience of smoking a cigarette from these packs. For example, cardboard brown packs with the number of enclosed cigarettes displayed on the front of the pack and featuring only the brand name in small standard font at the bottom of the pack face were rated as significantly less attractive and popular than original branded packs. Smokers of these plain packs were rated as significantly less trendy/stylish, less sociable/outgoing and less mature than smokers of the original pack. Compared with original packs, smokers inferred that cigarettes from these plain packs would be less rich in tobacco, less satisfying and of lower quality tobacco. Conclusion: Plain packaging policies that remove most brand design elements are likely to be most successful in removing cigarette brand image associations.

The influence of branding on adolescent smoking behaviour: Exploring the mediating role of image and attitudes.

Author(s): Grant, Ian C, Hassan, Louise M, Hastings, Gerard B, MacKintosh, Anne Marie, Eadie, Douglas

Citation: International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, August 2008, vol./is. 13/3(275-285), 1465-4520 (Aug 2008)

Publication Date: August 2008

Abstract: 1. This study investigates the continuing effects of tobacco marketing communications in a post advertising era, focusing on the constructs of brand awareness, brand image, attitude formation and intention to smoke by adolescents. 2. A conceptual model is presented, based on 926 respondents from a UK wide study, to assess brand-related interrelationships and influences of peers on adolescents’ attitudes toward smoking and intention to smoke. 3. Results show the strong influence of branding on both attitude and intention, and have implications for government anti-smoking policies specifically in regard to generic packaging and point of sale displays.

A difference that makes a difference: Young adult smokers’ accounts of cigarette brands and package design

Author(s): Scheffels J.

Citation: Tobacco Control, April 2008, vol./is. 17/2(118-122), 0964-4563 (April 2008)

Publication Date: April 2008

Abstract: Objective: To explore young adult smokers’ construction of meaning and identity In accounts of cigarette brands and cigarette package design, and the processes by which positive associations with a brand may be reinforced and sustained. Methods: Qualitative in-depth interviews with 21 smokers aged 18-23 in Norway, where advertising for tobacco has been banned since 1975. Results: Cigarette brand and cigarette package design appear as an integrated part of young smokers’ constructions of smoker identities, enabling the communication of personal characteristics, social identity and positions in hierarchies of status. Conclusion: Through branding and package design tobacco companies appear to be able to promote their products in a country where advertising is banned, by means of similar principles that make advertising effective: by creating preferences, differentiation and identification.

Branding: could it hold the key to future tobacco reduction policy

Author(s): Eadie, Douglas, Hastings, Gerard, Stead, Martine, MacKintosh, Anne Marie

Citation: Health Education, 1999, vol./is. /3, 0965-4283

Publication Date: 1999

Abstract: The debate surrounding tobacco control has become increasingly polarised as the health and tobacco lobbies seek to influence tobacco policy. In recent times the main focus for debate has been the impact of tobacco advertising on under-age smoking. However, with the proposed ban on tobacco advertising, this paper argues that branding may prove pivotal to re-orienting thinking about how tobacco marketing continues to influence smoking initiation. Marketing theory asserts that creating demand for a product is dependent upon building a strong brand identity that concurs with the needs, values and lifestyles of the consumer. It is hypothesised that branding can function by affecting not only the way people perceive specific tobacco products but also their perceptions of smoking behaviour itself. Using branding to extend the debate in this way provides some useful insights into the role tobacco marketing might play in encouraging young people to start smoking. It is concluded that explanations for smoking initiation can be found, not by attempting to isolate the abilities of tobacco marketing and health policy to persuade young people to adopt one behaviour in favour of the other, but by examining how exposure to competing forces such as these during adolescence may conspire to brand smoking in a way that encourages young people to experiment with cigarettes. It is suggested that more significant advances in reducing smoking rates are likely to depend upon a willingness to confront the fundamental contradictions that are created by such competing forces.

😯

Good stuff Colonel!

cardboard brown packs with the number of enclosed cigarettes displayed on the front of the pack and featuring only the brand name in small standard font at the bottom of the pack face were rated as significantly less attractive and popular than original branded packs. Smokers of these plain packs were rated as significantly less trendy/stylish, less sociable/outgoing and less mature than smokers of the original pack. Compared with original packs, smokers inferred that cigarettes from these plain packs would be less rich in tobacco, less satisfying and of lower quality tobacco.

This seems to validate a few points made waaaay back in this thread.

Anyone got a light?

Well, thank God thats ova.

colonel wax – your evidence is flimsy at best..

yunki – Member
colonel wax – your evidence is flimsy at best..

Well that’s a well thought out and reasoned dismissal there. 🙄

hmm.. well thought out and reasoned are not two attributes that I would associate with the thought processes of anyone making the decision to involve themselves in this tedious quagmire.. but you carry right on ahead with your optimistic outlook while I try and find a suitable song to sum up the thread so far..

I was in the supermarket with my two 2 yr olds today – it was very interesting to note how certain packaging attracted their attention more than others – for example, on the cake-making isle they pointed at/picked up the boxes that were packaged as children’s cakes rather than luxury ones etc. This is the first time we have bought cake mix so it was a first for them, but clearly the colours, type, graphics etc attracted them more than the plainer boxes.

I felt my opinion on here was vindicated by their actions. 🙂

This is the first time we have bought cake mix so it was a first for them, but clearly the colours, type, graphics etc attracted them more than the plainer boxes.

Have you not considered that your children do not have sufficient superpowers that will help them resist the crass attempts at branding or marketing?

I blame Pingu.

Clearly m_f’s tow year olds work in design or brand management.

How else could they “know the code”?

To be fair, I do read them ‘Universal Principles of Design: 100 Ways to Enhance Usability, Influence Perception, Increase Appeal, Make Better Design Decisions, and Teach through Design’ every night before bed 😉

Nos da.

Yunki = TJ wannabe

Yunki = TJ wannabe

😆

I do heartily respect TJ’s persistence and determination if he feels that someone is belittling his alternative point of view (which is some kind of national passtime on here, and is in my opinion a bit of a bloodsport).. and I sometimes share his opinion..
but I don’t have the patience or the inclination to try and emulate him..

I’m just trying to help get the thread to 2000 posts..

yunki

hmm.. well thought out and reasoned are not two attributes that I would associate with the thought processes of anyone making the decision to involve themselves in this tedious quagmire.

And yet … here you are …

we’ve already established that well thought out and reasoned are not amongst my list of redeeming qualities (this post being the exception) so I’m struggling to see what point you’re trying to make..?

Guys – why do you keep distorting what I have said? I have never said I am immune or that I cannot see any of it.

There are two points I have made – one is that all the logos, branding, stuff about fonts and so on actually makes much less difference that you guys think – not none but much less The NHS is not a “brand” It does not need a “brand concept” All teh money spent on that is just beeing wasted.

The other point is that I can disregard it and make free choices – and I do so deliberately and actively. as do many other people.

Your faith in your astrology is touching.

crikey – Member

As I said before, so many people have to believe in this shit with such great passion because if ‘the man in the street’ caught on the whole charade would come a crashing down.

So – heading for 2000?

TJ – So what do you make of the papers posted previously which shows that it has a significant effect? Rather than saying “makes much less difference” (which I noted you scaled back from “makes no odds… at all” :-)) would you care to comment on that evidence that it does make a significant difference?

What’s with the astrology reference? Are you suggesting that marketing is akin to astrology? If so, I’m disappointed.

Its not a scaling back – thats what I said about the overall exercise of marketing right from the beginning – in specific areas and instances it makes no difference at all. Overall it is of much s#less significance that the adherents would have you believe

I have been completely consistent throughout if you look at what I have written in context.

I have only skimmed a couple of the papers – I’ll look in them in death when I have some time. The ones I did look at the methodology was extremely suspect as was the independence of the authors. However – I do not deny it has an effect. I never have.

Astrology? Well I have had plenty of insults thrown my way, I do believe that emperor is naked much of the time and its a little prod with a stick to see if anyone bites.

Don’t start taking this too seriously now

we’ve already established that well thought out and reasoned are not amongst my list of redeeming qualities (this post being the exception) so I’m struggling to see what point you’re trying to make..?

The point, if it needs repeating, is that your contribution to this thread is precisely zero, so I am wondering why you are still here.

Guys – why do you keep distorting what I have said? I have never said I am immune or that I cannot see any of it.

Well, for me, it’s because saying you disregard it, is the same as being immune to it. I.e that it has no effect on your buying choices.

Can you clarify the difference?

TJ: I never!
Chorus: You did!
TJ: I never!
Chorus: You did!
TJ: I never!
Chorus: You did!

Should get us to 2000 no worries! 🙂

I am wondering why you are still here.

well.. that’s made me feel positively unwelcome..! I even added a nice song up there about purple buffalos too, to try and help keep everyone chilled out while they worked through the multiple misunderstandings and muddled meanderings that have made this thread so morose.. 🙁

I never!

No, really, before everyone else starts, just this bit

Well, for me, it’s because saying you disregard it, is the same as being immune to it. I.e that it has no effect on your buying choices.

Can you clarify the difference?