A recent NYTimes editorial (1/17/8) discussed how prevalent smoking has become in Hollywood movies (75% across the board, including PG, PG-13, and R rated films). Perhaps even worse, they cites stats showing how the depiction of smoking decreased steadily from 1950 to 1990, but by 2002 it had increased again to the same level as it had been in 1950!
The editorial's subhead said "How do we stop young people from taking up smoking?"
I posted a comment to this editorial suggesting that they were asking the wrong question. Smokers die younger than non-smokers--so much younger that they impose a far lighter burden on the healthcare system, despite the expenses caused by their lung cancer/emphysema and whatnot.
So really we should be encouraging youth to smoke (just not around me, thank you).
An added plus: older people vote far more than younger people. By helping the most foolish ones to kill themselves off we'll improve the quality of the American polity. Everybody wins!
The editorial included reader comments, most of whom railed about nanny state-ism and slippery slope-o-rama. I agree with these sentiments.
However, smoking on movie SETS should be banned, for the same reason as smoking in restaurants and bars has been banned--as a safety hazard to those who work there--both the smokers and those forced to breathe their second-hand smoke.
If they want to show smoking, they're welcome to do the same thing they do if they want to show people being killed or spaceships breaking the speed of light--with CGI.
No comments:
Post a Comment