Earlier this year they were sent into a clucking and flapping frenzy at the sight of a barcode on a Ferrari F1 car.
John Britton, a Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and director of its tobacco advisory group, said: “The bar code looks like the bottom half of a packet of Marlboro cigarettes.Odd, that. The bottom of the Marlboro packets I've seen look a bit like "SMOKING KILLS".
"I was stunned when I saw it. This is pushing at the limits.”Pushing at the limits of our credulity, John. Or pushing at the limits of your quite stunningly authority-obsessed mind. But whichever way you cut it, there is no possible way that a barcode is going to somehow induce an irresistible urge to smoke in the minds of thousands of 14 year olds.
As Anna Raccoon ventured at the time.
Does the prancing Ferrari black horse make you want to rush out and put all your money into Lloyd’s TSB?
The same silly charade is now being played out over the pond after Obama's administration oversaw a ban on the words 'light', 'mild', and 'low'.
WASHINGTON — A US law banning the selling of so-called "light" or "mild" cigarettes took effect Tuesday, but some anti-tobacco groups say the makers are sidestepping the rules by using color-coding packaging.That's right. Anti-smoking nutters now want colours banned.
Some say that color-coding packs and switching to terms such as "gold" and "silver" instead of "light" and "ultra-light" are efforts to continue misleading consumers.
"With a wink and a nod, the tobacco industry has found new ways to continue their deceptive marketing practices to circumvent the new regulations," said Charles Connor, president of the American Lung Association.
"For example, they must drop the word 'light' in their packaging, but have already made it clear to their customers that if they want lights, they just need to look for a package in a specific color, such as gold.
They have had their heads buried in so many self-congratulatory reports and studies; read so many articles on the evils of the tobacco industry; allowed confirmation bias to erase their grip on reality; that they are simply unable to grasp the idea that different cigarettes can offer a different flavour.
In their seriously deluded brains, smokers only smoke lighter cigarettes because they believe they won't die if they do.
Let's apply the same crackpot reasoning to Doritos.
There are packets with the words "super hot" or some such on them, and others bearing the tagline "cool". Doritos, in our analogical world, have been banned from using these words (on the daft premise that all Doritos are unhealthy and some purchasers may believe that the cooler ones are less so) but their customers - who are quite happy to accept the 'health risk' - would still like to know which flavour is gentle on their tongue, and which will require them to pre-load the fridge with bog roll. So the spicy ones are marketed with a red bag, the mild ones in a blue one.
Oh no, say the bansturbators, this is scandalous! Doritos are still telling their customers which is the flavour they enjoy. The evil bastards.
The FDA asked for documentation from the cigarette maker to determine if it was deliberately circumventing the law.Materials? Isn't this torturing linguistics by some considerable degree? They are colours. Colours which are all around us. Everywhere. Every day.
"We applaud the FDA's action," said Matthew Myers of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.
"We call on Philip Morris to go beyond the actions called for by the FDA and immediately stop" using these materials, Myers said.
With this kind of thinking (I use that word loosely), we may as well ban Barclaycard from producing credit cards in pastel shades as it implies less danger of fucking your life up by hitting Harrods with only £12.37 in your bank account.
Put these people on the Freudian couch and I'm sure we'd discover that a fair percentage are certifiably bonkers.**
**Talking of which, check out an example of such a person over at F2C's comments, starting here.