Re: "da marlboro man"
Steven G. Tyler (sgtyler@EROLS.COM)
Tue, 30 Dec 1997 16:14:54 -0500
NeilLup wrote, in part:
> The cigarette companies are not charitable organizations. They are making the
> equipment available not out of the goodness of their heart, but because they
> expect something in return, namely the exposure of their product name. If we
> do believe in our oath and law, and we take the equipment provided by the
> cigarette companies, do we not have some obligation to follow through on the
> implicit deal and provide the exposure they expect, or at least not do what
> one post suggested, which is to stencil a skull and crossbones next to the
> item?
No offense intended, Neil, but I'm reminded of a comment about a person
"being so open-minded his brain fell out." ;-)
Assuming there is no explicit requirement that the tobacco logo be
retained and displayed, there is NO, I repeat, NO requirement, legal,
moral, ethical, Scout Law or otherwise, that requires the recipient to
carry out the ulterior objectives of the tobacco companies, particularly
when that objective presumably includes enticing a new generation of
smokers. The "deal" to get the merchandise is exactly what the tobacco
company requirements say it is, no more, no less. Once the recipient
has met those requirements and received the merchandise, he/she can
retain the logos, remove the logos, or make chicken soup in/out of it.
--
YIS
Steve on Cattail Creek
sgtyler@erols.com
Terry Howerton Sakima Group, Inc. SCOUTER Magazine Kansas City |
