Mandatory warning statement in night aerial cigarette advertising Opin'ion

ADVISORY OPINIONS 1007

ADVISORY OPINIONS

Mandatory warning statement in night aerial cigarette advertising (File No. 763 7004).

Opin'ion. Letter

July 9 1976 Dear Mr. Friedman:

You requested Commission advice concerning proposed measures for disclosure of the mandatory warning statement in conjunction with a method of cigarette advertising at night by means of an airborne electronic "billboard. " The medium consists of an electronic sevencharacter lighted panel that produces moving messages, images or logos at the rate of four characters per second, seven feet high, affixed to an aircraft which moves through the air at a speed of 50 miles per hour.

Although considerable time and attention was given this matter in an effort to determine some practicable formula for a clear and conspicuous disclosure of the mandatory warning statement under these particular visual, time and traverse limitations, the Commission has reluctantly concluded that, without empirical data, it is unable to do so. The course of action proposed, or its effects, are such that an informed decision thereon cannot be made or could be made onry after extensive investigation, clinical study, testing, or collateral inquiry, and therefore the Commission must consider the request inappropriate pursuant to Section 1. 1( c) of its Rules of Practice. The Commission notes that, with the limitations indicated, there is a serious question as to whether the mandatory warning statement itself is susceptible to a clear or fully intelligible communication. In addition the Commission is unable to discern any practicable method for insuring that both the cigarette advertising and the mandatory warning statement will be communicated to the same viewers. Accordingly, the Commission is unable to determine whether, or the extent to which, a clear and conspicuous disclosure of the mandatory warning statement will, in these circumstances, result from use of a display formula directed solely to the time interval and/or sequence of display of the mandatory warning.

By direction of the Commission.

88 F.
Second Supplemental Letter of Request
May 30 1975
Dear Mr. Krug:

Many thanks for spending as much time as you did with me on the phone last Friday. Your comments gave me a greater insight as to how the Federal Trade Commission works, and what they would be looking for.

Regarding our proposal on Aerial Cigarette Advertising, I would like to offer additional information as to how we would conduct our operation when being used to advertise a Cigarette.

The areas that are of greatest interest to us, and to advertisers, are those that have large concentrations of people in them. Ballparks Racetracks, Amusement parks, etc. When flying over such places it is normal for us to make several passes over each area, to obtain maximum effectiveness of the advertising message. In addition to my earlier proposal of flashing the warning every fifteen minutes, we would make one complete pass over each area that we are reaching, with the Warning appearing in the same size letters as the normal advertising is being done in. The Warning message would take twenty four (24) seconds to run at the speed of our sign. Being the sign is visible for 35 - 45 seconds to someone on the ground, the Warning would be seen in its entirety.

When we are not flying over stadiums or ballparks, we would flash the Warning for a continuous minute every fifteen minutes of operation. This would allow more than two complete passes of the Warning considering the present speed of the message movement. I think that this is a fair way to ensure that the Warning will be seen by the people we are flying over. If, however, you find fault with this proposal, I would appreciate knowing of your objections, so that we may then modify our operation so as to conform to your requirements. Please bear in mind, however, that our major concern is to display an advertisers message, and that to impose requirements that would make the advertiser feel he was advertising the Warning and not his product would cause him not to use our service at all.

Very truly yours
Isl Garrett S. Friedman
President

ADVISORY OPINIONS 1009