I'm really tired of the "what about the kids" crap.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
I'm not clear on how alcohol is less problematic than tobacco. The latter industry are bigger liars but the former, as far as substances go, is a lot worse for you health-wise, no?
As I understand it, with commercial cigarettes it isn't the tabacco (which used to be utilized as medicine) that kills you...it's the pesticides and herbacides and preservatives that do it.
So with that in mind, alcohol may indeed be harmful...but at least it sells in a much more pure i.e. less tampered form than that of cigarettes...which to me makes alcohol a lesser evil.
I'm not clear on how alcohol is less problematic than tobacco. The latter industry are bigger liars but the former, as far as substances go, is a lot worse for you health-wise, no?
I would say that alcohol is enjoyed in moderation a lot more than cigarettes/tobacco. I have never met a "casual" smoker. Every smoker I know is at least a pack a day or pack every two days. I know, as you all of you probably know, folks who only have a beer every once anawhile, or just wine with dinner, or just a drink on the holidays. I think it is safe to say most cigarette smokers are addicted or walking the line of being addicted, while not every person who drinks is an alcoholic.
I'm really tired of the "what about the kids" crap.
Edpowers is not for the children.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
I imagine that folks would draw the line somewhere in terms of endorsements...it's subjective, right? Personally, I've turned down gigs that involved tobacco money (but I'm also not a working DJ so it's not like my rent depends on shit like this) but I can't say that EVERYTHING I do in life doesn't have negative consequences somewhere down the line.
That said, I've never trusted the kind of relativism that goes, "well, if you won't do A but you do B, isn't that hypocritical?" since really, what people are trying to do is backdoor a clause that allows them to do ANYTHING without fear of critique.
If DJs want to take tobacco money for a gig, it's not an innocent choice. Doesn't mean you shouldn't cash the check but own it, at least.
to me letting yrself get put onto advertisements is a whole nother level of the MORALLY AMBIGUOUS SELLOUT because when you do a 21+ show, its a 21+ show (still suspect cause these companies are basically evil but you can make the 'adults' argument) but when yr talking about advertisements in a magazine you are actually appearing to sell this lifestyle and to me thats just a bad look all the way around. If you don't think teenagers don't look at shit like that yr kidding yrself (not you odub but 'you' generally).
the cigarette industry sucks. endorsing alcohol doesnt bother me but i dont see how people can still defend cigarette companies after all these years and revelations and the huge number of people they've killed
I'm shocked that this is an actual debate.
Alcohol + cigarettes go hand-in-hand with the clurb--I just can't believe anybody would object to DJs getting some of that cigarette money.
Maybe the corrupt cops who regulate the whole alcohol-soaked shindig with an unforgiving iron fist should be breaking off the dj as well.
And what about resident drug peddlers? How much of every hit of x or bag of dope that they sell should go to the dj?
I'm not clear on how alcohol is less problematic than tobacco. The latter industry are bigger liars but the former, as far as substances go, is a lot worse for you health-wise, no?
I would say that alcohol is enjoyed in moderation a lot more than cigarettes/tobacco. I have never met a "casual" smoker. Every smoker I know is at least a pack a day or pack every two days. I know, as you all of you probably know, folks who only have a beer every once anawhile, or just wine with dinner, or just a drink on the holidays. I think it is safe to say most cigarette smokers are addicted or walking the line of being addicted, while not every person who drinks is an alcoholic.
Yeah - I just looked it up. Tobacco related deaths are about 4x that of alcohol (in the US).
I'm not clear on how alcohol is less problematic than tobacco. The latter industry are bigger liars but the former, as far as substances go, is a lot worse for you health-wise, no?
I would say that alcohol is enjoyed in moderation a lot more than cigarettes/tobacco. I have never met a "casual" smoker. Every smoker I know is at least a pack a day or pack every two days. I know, as you all of you probably know, folks who only have a beer every once anawhile, or just wine with dinner, or just a drink on the holidays. I think it is safe to say most cigarette smokers are addicted or walking the line of being addicted, while not every person who drinks is an alcoholic.
This assessment of smokers is way off base. There are tons of casual smokers- once a day, only on the weekends, etc.
I'm not clear on how alcohol is less problematic than tobacco. The latter industry are bigger liars but the former, as far as substances go, is a lot worse for you health-wise, no?
I would say that alcohol is enjoyed in moderation a lot more than cigarettes/tobacco. I have never met a "casual" smoker. Every smoker I know is at least a pack a day or pack every two days. I know, as you all of you probably know, folks who only have a beer every once anawhile, or just wine with dinner, or just a drink on the holidays. I think it is safe to say most cigarette smokers are addicted or walking the line of being addicted, while not every person who drinks is an alcoholic.
This assessment of smokers is way off base. There are tons of casual smokers- once a day, only on the weekends, etc.
Exactly. I'd say I know more casual smokers than pack-a-day types. The most common variety: The only-when-I'm-drinking smoker.
I imagine that folks would draw the line somewhere in terms of endorsements...it's subjective, right? Personally, I've turned down gigs that involved tobacco money (but I'm also not a working DJ so it's not like my rent depends on shit like this) but I can't say that EVERYTHING I do in life doesn't have negative consequences somewhere down the line.
That said, I've never trusted the kind of relativism that goes, "well, if you won't do A but you do B, isn't that hypocritical?" since really, what people are trying to do is backdoor a clause that allows them to do ANYTHING without fear of critique.
If DJs want to take tobacco money for a gig, it's not an innocent choice. Doesn't mean you shouldn't cash the check but own it, at least.
to me letting yrself get put onto advertisements is a whole nother level of the MORALLY AMBIGUOUS SELLOUT because when you do a 21+ show, its a 21+ show (still suspect cause these companies are basically evil but you can make the 'adults' argument) but when yr talking about advertisements in a magazine you are actually appearing to sell this lifestyle and to me thats just a bad look all the way around. If you don't think teenagers don't look at shit like that yr kidding yrself (not you odub but 'you' generally).
the cigarette industry sucks. endorsing alcohol doesnt bother me but i dont see how people can still defend cigarette companies after all these years and revelations and the huge number of people they've killed
I'm shocked that this is an actual debate.
Alcohol + cigarettes go hand-in-hand with the clurb[/b]--I just can't believe anybody would object to DJs getting some of that cigarette money.
Drunk Driving is a bigger problem than Lung Cancer.
Not remotely true. Other way around mang, almost by a 10 : 1 ratio (if you're counting deaths related to each).
I'd be curious to see a statistic comparing the number of victims of drunk driving (or drinking related accidents in general) to those of second-hand smoke.
So with that in mind, alcohol may indeed be harmful...but at least it sells in a much more pure i.e. less tampered form than that of cigarettes...which to me makes alcohol a lesser evil.
Try telling that to people affected by alcoholic families. And really, the way certain alcohol is marketed towards target audiences (malt liquor to black communities, for example) is just as 'evil'. You can't quantify these sorts of things, and therefore cannot say one is worse than the other. They're both equally "evil" and the cost to society, or negative externality to the product, is paid for in sin taxes on the product itself.
Directed more at the debate as a whole: In terms of Roxy on this flyer (which I can't see, image hosting blocked here, but gather that Roxy Cottontail, who I've had the pleasure of meeting and was nothing short of humble and sincere, is featured prominently on an ad for an event sponsored by Camel, right?) I don't see why Roxy, in this situation, is seen as more of a sellout than if she showed up on a flyer for some event sponsored by Skyy, for example. It's kinda bullshit that tragedies resulting from alcohol and tobacco use are suddenly associated with people who are not responsible for the effects of the products, but rather possess enough marketability and realize that there's money to be earned, and bills to be paid. It's easy to claim holier than thou when you're not gettin' the money, and have no reasonable expectation that you would be approached to appear at an event like this in the first place. But honestly, I don't think I would act any differently on a business level. The marginal effects of her appearing on this flyer and performing at this event are nil- does anyone think that a substantial amount of people will start smoking Camels b/c she is on this flyer and will play records at this event? b/w why is everyone on her about it? The "save the children" fearmongering is old. what ever happened to personal responsibility? Can we reasonably say that there is someone out there who can obtain cigs/booze that is NOT aware of the health consequences of these products?
I think the stigma around cigarette $$$ is simply b/c the tobacco corporations have been exposed as devious little weasels again and again in ways that we don't typically associate with alcohol.
So in essence, it's not about the impact of the end product...it's about the behavior of the companies who put out said product.
For me this whole thing was taken to the next level when the people who hosted this event were also used for a print campaign that is running in magazines that can be purchased by any person regardless of age.....
They all obviously approved the use of their images on a larger scale then just the event itself, no? To me that is a big difference than just DJing a party.
Drunk Driving is a bigger problem than Lung Cancer.
Not remotely true. Other way around mang, almost by a 10 : 1 ratio (if you're counting deaths related to each).
I'm not necessarily talking numbers.....Beating up on the Tobacco industry and smokers in The Name of The Children is played out.....Alcoholism & Drunk Driving is a more important issue than worrying about some dude who decided to smoke a hole in his throat..Smokers can't claim ignorance and most smokers don't pretend to be ....I'm not defending Marlboro at all...What Alcohol has done to innocent families is more important to me.....
If that's the case, you should call up Sempra or SoCal Edison or SDG&E or whatever anybody is on and tell them you would like to be disconnected from the power grid. Their products are generally considered "good" and they are definitely prone to weaselish behavior. I think the level of scrutiny that people throw at tobacco companies, who often engage in the same business practices as many other types of manufacturers, (caffineted beverage manuf, manufacturers who bundle products, manufacturers who engage in inelastic market manipulation, etc. etc.)is simply due to negative impact of the end product. (That's not a judgement call on whether or not they deserve it.)
So with that in mind, alcohol may indeed be harmful...but at least it sells in a much more pure i.e. less tampered form than that of cigarettes...which to me makes alcohol a lesser evil.
Try telling that to people affected by alcoholic families. And really, the way certain alcohol is marketed towards target audiences (malt liquor to black communities, for example) is just as 'evil'. You can't quantify these sorts of things, and therefore cannot say one is worse than the other. They're both equally "evil" and the cost to society, or negative externality to the product, is paid for in sin taxes on the product itself.
Directed more at the debate as a whole: In terms of Roxy on this flyer (which I can't see, image hosting blocked here, but gather that Roxy Cottontail, who I've had the pleasure of meeting and was nothing short of humble and sincere, is featured prominently on an ad for an event sponsored by Camel, right?) I don't see why Roxy, in this situation, is seen as more of a sellout than if she showed up on a flyer for some event sponsored by Skyy, for example. It's kinda bullshit that tragedies resulting from alcohol and tobacco use are suddenly associated with people who are not responsible for the effects of the products, but rather possess enough marketability and realize that there's money to be earned, and bills to be paid. It's easy to claim holier than thou when you're not gettin' the money, and have no reasonable expectation that you would be approached to appear at an event like this in the first place. But honestly, I don't think I would act any differently on a business level. The marginal effects of her appearing on this flyer and performing at this event are nil- does anyone think that a substantial amount of people will start smoking Camels b/c she is on this flyer and will play records at this event? b/w why is everyone on her about it? The "save the children" fearmongering is old. what ever happened to personal responsibility? Can we reasonably say that there is someone out there who can obtain cigs/booze that is NOT aware of the health consequences of these products?
Excellent points, but I still think it's funny that someone posting as "JimBeam" made them.
Does anyone here remember the Kool DJ Battles from a few years ago? My man Israel (Zebra Records RIP) was approached by them because he'd held battles at his store for years. He flat-out refused on principle--and he is a hardcore smoker.
I think the stigma around cigarette $$$ is simply b/c the tobacco corporations have been exposed as devious little weasels again and again in ways that we don't typically associate with alcohol.
So in essence, it's not about the impact of the end product...it's about the behavior of the companies who put out said product.
Cigarette companies are some of the shadiest corporations around. The current emphasis they are placing on expansion into poorer countries is especially troubling to me (the American market, hipster or otherwise, is not their primary focus right now).
However, this club ad, and corresponding thread title, are nothing more than soulstrut catnip. More people have now seen this flyer because of this thread than would have as it was passed around Vegas. Soulstrut should receive a royalty check from Camel.
For me this whole thing was taken to the next level when the people who hosted this event were also used for a print campaign that is running in magazines that can purchased by any person regardless of age.....
They all obviously approved the use of their images on a larger scale then just the event itself, no? To me that is a big difference than just DJing a party.
exactly. Definition of "to sell out"
Advertising 101 "We're not not selling _________, we're selling dreams" So you should look at both the product and the "dream" they are selling and make an individual decision on the situation at hand. For me, Camels, Henny, Colt45 = NAGL. Utility company, car, Olive Garden, snowboard etc. = more of a gray area.
So people are more conccerned about the title as "world renowned DJ's" than the cigg endorsement?
yes. last i checked, there wasn't any doctors or scientists advocating the use of cigarretes. if a dj's endorsement is more persuasive than the surgeon general's warning and a consensus from all the worlds doctors and scientists....i guess that explains how our country could elect someone like george bush.
the "world renowned dj" thing bugs me because, if true, it necessarily implies that talent doesn't play a factor in becoming a famous dj (which unfortunately, we know is the reality). is aoki a good dj? perhaps, but he is definitely NOT talented at it.
i like seeing people get recognition for things they deserve. there are plenty of djs with talent. again, its amazing to me that the aoki posse would even go on tour. its like taking a guy right of law school and sending him across the country to give lectures on how to be an effective trial lawyer. well, in that case, at least the student had some kind of tranining.
Comments
I thought her name was OXY Cottontail???
As I understand it, with commercial cigarettes it isn't the tabacco (which used to be utilized as medicine) that kills you...it's the pesticides and herbacides and preservatives that do it.
So with that in mind, alcohol may indeed be harmful...but at least it sells in a much more pure i.e. less tampered form than that of cigarettes...which to me makes alcohol a lesser evil.
I would say that alcohol is enjoyed in moderation a lot more than cigarettes/tobacco. I have never met a "casual" smoker. Every smoker I know is at least a pack a day or pack every two days. I know, as you all of you probably know, folks who only have a beer every once anawhile, or just wine with dinner, or just a drink on the holidays. I think it is safe to say most cigarette smokers are addicted or walking the line of being addicted, while not every person who drinks is an alcoholic.
Edpowers is not for the children.
Maybe the corrupt cops who regulate the whole alcohol-soaked shindig with an unforgiving iron fist should be breaking off the dj as well.
And what about resident drug peddlers? How much of every hit of x or bag of dope that they sell should go to the dj?
Yeah - I just looked it up. Tobacco related deaths are about 4x that of alcohol (in the US).
This assessment of smokers is way off base. There are tons of casual smokers- once a day, only on the weekends, etc.
wrong
Exactly. I'd say I know more casual smokers than pack-a-day types. The most common variety: The only-when-I'm-drinking smoker.
lol busted...you're in new york right?
when's the last time you went to a club homey
Alcoholism is a bigger problem than Emphysema
Not remotely true. Other way around mang, almost by a 10 : 1 ratio (if you're counting deaths related to each).
I'd be curious to see a statistic comparing the number of victims of drunk driving (or drinking related accidents in general) to those of second-hand smoke.
There are more alcoholics than there are people suffering from emphysema but there are more people who DIE from the latter than the former.
Directed more at the debate as a whole: In terms of Roxy on this flyer (which I can't see, image hosting blocked here, but gather that Roxy Cottontail, who I've had the pleasure of meeting and was nothing short of humble and sincere, is featured prominently on an ad for an event sponsored by Camel, right?) I don't see why Roxy, in this situation, is seen as more of a sellout than if she showed up on a flyer for some event sponsored by Skyy, for example. It's kinda bullshit that tragedies resulting from alcohol and tobacco use are suddenly associated with people who are not responsible for the effects of the products, but rather possess enough marketability and realize that there's money to be earned, and bills to be paid. It's easy to claim holier than thou when you're not gettin' the money, and have no reasonable expectation that you would be approached to appear at an event like this in the first place. But honestly, I don't think I would act any differently on a business level.
The marginal effects of her appearing on this flyer and performing at this event are nil- does anyone think that a substantial amount of people will start smoking Camels b/c she is on this flyer and will play records at this event?
b/w
why is everyone on her about it? The "save the children" fearmongering is old. what ever happened to personal responsibility? Can we reasonably say that there is someone out there who can obtain cigs/booze that is NOT aware of the health consequences of these products?
So in essence, it's not about the impact of the end product...it's about the behavior of the companies who put out said product.
They all obviously approved the use of their images on a larger scale then just the event itself, no? To me that is a big difference than just DJing a party.
I'm waiting for all-over print ciggs any day now.
I'm not necessarily talking numbers.....Beating up on the Tobacco industry and smokers in The Name of The Children is played out.....Alcoholism & Drunk Driving is a more important issue than worrying about some dude who decided to smoke a hole in his throat..Smokers can't claim ignorance and most smokers don't pretend to be ....I'm not defending Marlboro at all...What Alcohol has done to innocent families is more important to me.....
I think the level of scrutiny that people throw at tobacco companies, who often engage in the same business practices as many other types of manufacturers, (caffineted beverage manuf, manufacturers who bundle products, manufacturers who engage in inelastic market manipulation, etc. etc.)is simply due to negative impact of the end product. (That's not a judgement call on whether or not they deserve it.)
Well, at least we can agree on something.
BAPEsmokes: The $25 cigarettes
Excellent points, but I still think it's funny that someone posting as "JimBeam" made them.
Does anyone here remember the Kool DJ Battles from a few years ago? My man Israel (Zebra Records RIP) was approached by them because he'd held battles at his store for years. He flat-out refused on principle--and he is a hardcore smoker.
Are both of you being sarcastic? I hope so.
Tobacco related illnesses are the number one cause of preventable deaths in the USA. More than AIDS, car accidents, drugs and rap combined.
Cigarette companies are some of the shadiest corporations around. The current emphasis they are placing on expansion into poorer countries is especially troubling to me (the American market, hipster or otherwise, is not their primary focus right now).
However, this club ad, and corresponding thread title, are nothing more than soulstrut catnip. More people have now seen this flyer because of this thread than would have as it was passed around Vegas. Soulstrut should receive a royalty check from Camel.
exactly. Definition of "to sell out"
Advertising 101
"We're not not selling _________, we're selling dreams"
So you should look at both the product and the "dream" they are selling and make an individual decision on the situation at hand. For me, Camels, Henny, Colt45 = NAGL. Utility company, car, Olive Garden, snowboard
yes. last i checked, there wasn't any doctors or scientists advocating the use of cigarretes. if a dj's endorsement is more persuasive than the surgeon general's warning and a consensus from all the worlds doctors and scientists....i guess that explains how our country could elect someone like george bush.
the "world renowned dj" thing bugs me because, if true, it necessarily implies that talent doesn't play a factor in becoming a famous dj (which unfortunately, we know is the reality). is aoki a good dj? perhaps, but he is definitely NOT talented at it.
i like seeing people get recognition for things they deserve. there are plenty of djs with talent. again, its amazing to me that the aoki posse would even go on tour. its like taking a guy right of law school and sending him across the country to give lectures on how to be an effective trial lawyer. well, in that case, at least the student had some kind of tranining.