Movie Reflection - Thank You for Smoking

I enjoyed the film Thank You for Smoking. It brought out so many real world issues about a controversial industry but in an entertaining way. It also made me think more about my own priorities for a future job.

I could not work in the vape area of RJ Reynolds Tobacco. To me it’s an ethical issue of knowing that the company itself is in the tobacco industry and is aware of the dangers to a person’s health from the products it sells. I couldn’t work in an industry that has been directly linked to people’s severe illnesses and deaths. Even though vaping (also known as e-cigarettes) is not using tobacco and people may consider it better than smoking cigarettes, its harmful effects are now being seen and proven to be dangerous.

Nicotine and other chemicals are inhaled when a person smokes cigarettes or vapes and nicotine is both addictive and dangerous. Nicotine can also affect brain development in younger users since the brain develops until the age of 25. The other chemicals can contain metals and are also harmful. Also the aerosol that gets inhaled from a vape has been linked to inflammation which causes lung damage and organ damage. There have been studies which show that younger people who vape are also more likely to smoke cigarettes later on.

I wouldn’t want to be involved with a company that makes tobacco or vaping products because I think I would feel that I’m also partly contributing to harming someone’s health. There are 480,000 deaths in the US every year due to cancer, lung disease and heart disease and smoking is thought to be the cause of this.

I know it’s a choice and people are not being forced to smoke cigarettes or use a vape but these products are still all around us. Even though advertising and marketing of tobacco products has been more regulated over the years it’s still in front of us. In 1964 the Surgeon General’s report linked tobacco and health issues and in 1971 tv and radio were banned from airing tobacco ads. Then in 1998 the Masters Settlement Agreement put even more regulations on tobacco companies by prohibiting them from advertising on transit and billboard ads, sponsoring certain events, paid product placement and marketing to people under 18. 

$8.49bn is spent by the top 10 companies on marketing and 96% is on point of sale marketing. That is a huge number. Vape advertising is currently not as regulated as tobacco. Ads are allowed on tv but in September 2019 most of the major networks voluntarily stopped taking these ads because they have reports of the growing usage by teens and the illnesses that have resulted from vaping. In 2019, $57 million was spent by the e-cigarette industry on broadcast commercials so that’s a lot of money the broadcast companies are giving up. But I wonder whether that’s because of their ethics or wanting to avoid controversy.

I think it’s interesting that at the local level many states have focused on restricting where tobacco products can be sold instead of getting involved in restricting advertising because they don’t want to be faced with First Amendment issues. That also means that there are a lot of ads at the places that can sell tobacco products like gas stations and convenience stores. These kinds of places are exactly where teens and young adults go for snacks or intentionally for vapes and will be presented with colorful, eye catching ads. And the delicious flavors of the vape cartridges! Fruit flavors were banned in 2020 but were still illegally available from imports from China. In May 2026 though the FDA authorized fruit flavors for vapes for adult smokers. I think the under age smokers will likely be able to get them somehow. As of 2019 25.4% of high school seniors had vaped in the last 30 days which shows that under age people can easily get these products.

I’m sure that many people would take a job in a company that makes vapes by thinking it’s just business or just a job. Just like working at an alcohol company or a casino and let the users or consumers decide for themselves. The pay and benefits may be good—but for me there’s too many industries that will likely offer a comparable package and will let me sleep at night!

Blog post #8 In the Age of AI

 The video In the Age of AI was eye opening! There is so much talk about AI, both good and bad, but seeing this video mostly made me realize how dangerous it can be.

The video showed that with AI productivity in factories and many industries can be greatly improved and more efficient. And I think that’s great. But so much that is seen as good ends up at the expense of something else. There has been and will continue to be a lot of reduction of jobs in so many industries since AI robots and automation can replace humans. I was surprised to hear that a lot of the humans that have been replaced were women in jobs like cashiers, clerical and Human Resources because I would usually just think of factory workers.

Another negative is that AI is contributing to the increase in inequality. Big companies that have more money are able to invest in AI and receive the benefits of AI. I don’t think the smaller companies will be able to keep up. The huge tech companies are buying up the smaller ones and it keeps the wealth at the top companies.

AI though is positively affecting many industries like health care with the use of robots for procedures, areas of education, shopping and the criminal justice system. The use of surveillance and facial recognition systems has been helpful in fighting crime.

 

I thought it was interesting how the video talked about how people generate data everywhere they go on computers and the computer is learning about us and personalizing our experience. But then I was shocked and frightened to learn that innocent Alexa is actually a surveillance monitor. Asking about the weather or to play a song my voice is being monitored over time. Changes in my voice could signal I have a cold and then ads are targeted to me for cold medicine!

I use Google all the time to research so many things. But I learned that at the same time Google is searching us. We think we have privacy since we’re in our homes on our own computer or phone but we are losing control of our own privacy. The “digital exhaust” the video talked about that we leave behind from our searches is being used to predict and even change our behavior.

There are also sophisticated hackers that are able to get our information making identity theft easy. Our online information is global and we have no control where it ends up. There has been some progress with being able to reject data sharing but it’s unlikely that it’s enough. 

I think it’s frightening that AI is being used in ways not originally intended and those who control it don’t always have the best intentions. Other countries have also made huge advancements in AI. But not always for improving society. The video said now it’s mostly an AI race between the US and China.

I think it’s extreme that China is on its way to becoming a total surveillance state-cameras are everywhere and can track people who may have different views from their government. Their actions are frightening and our national security is at stake. And many countries have bought China’s surveillance systems. 

On the positive side our country is also using AI to help our own national security with better intelligence, satellites and weapons.

BLOG #7 EOTO

THE SPIRAL OF SILENCE

Have you ever been asked a question, answer it, then look around hoping people are nodding and agreeing with you? But they aren’t? Or you’re asked a question and decide to answer it the way you think most people would agree with and it’s what they likely think but it’s not actually what you think it is? Or you just decide not to answer at all? The spiral of silence is real. 

WHAT IS IT?

The spiral of silence is a theory that people stay silent when they’re not sure that their views on something will be the same as how the majority views it. They may fear that they will be isolated if the group realizes the person has a different opinion from theirs or an even worse fear that if they give their opinion something negative could happen besides just isolation. The fear of social isolation has the person constantly monitoring the behavior of others for signs of approval or disapproval. Isolation threats could be laughing at someone, making faces, criticizing or even worse. 

For this theory to exist though it means that the person really believes that they know what the popular opinion is. When someone in that majority then talks about the popular opinion in a confident way it starts the spiral or keeps it going because the minority person then gets more distant from the majority and more likely to not give their real opinion. All the fears take over and will keep building and the downward spiral keeps going.

IMPLICATIONS

I think the implications of this can be bad because it will prevent people from being their authentic selves and stating their real opinions on something. It can stop the free flow of ideas that can sometimes help solve problems or create new things. It also affects society by making the majority view larger than it actually is because the minority people have now added to it by just agreeing with the majority.

It may also prevent people in the assumed majority from understanding a minority person’s opinion and to be more accepting of others’ views. But there is too much fear by the minority to give their opinion and let that happen. And there is the continuance of the spiral.

Good implications may be that it keeps a discussion focused and moving forward and to more easily come to an agreement. But this can be at the expense of those in the minority.

I believe different segments of people are affected differently. For rich vs poor this is an issue because I think society considers rich people to have more whether it’s money or power. Along with this comes thinking that they are in a higher position, they are smarter because they have more education and their opinions count more and then they’re seen as the majority. Poor people may keep their opinions to themselves and go along with what they think are smarter opinions of the rich people if they believe they’re in the minority so they are caught in the spiral of silence.

I think that old vs young people are affected differently by the spiral of silence. Older people are more established and confident in their beliefs so I don’t think they hold back on their opinions. I don’t think they fall into the spiral. Younger people are more concerned with what people think about them and they wouldn’t want to feel isolated from them. So they probably monitor what they think opinions are and more likely to fall into the spiral of silence. 

For gays vs straights I believe this is a real issue. The straight community is usually looked at as the majority and likely don’t have any issues voicing opinions. The gay community has historically been the minority so many people are afraid to share either that they are gay or their opinions on situations fearing isolation in some form. This keeps them from being genuine and sharing their real opinions if they are monitoring their environment and feel they’re in the minority— it puts and keeps them in the spiral of silence.

The spiral of silence affects me, my family, and friends since we all end up at some point in conversations that may be more heated, sensitive or with people who have strong opinions. We all have a choice to voice opinions or not but it is up to that person whether they feel the fear of being in the minority and of being isolated. Some people won’t care and will voice opinions regardless. Others will be more concerned and may then fall into the spiral of silence if they assess the group and think they’re in the minority. 

My generation is influenced a lot by social media which can easily create and keep the spiral going because you see so many posts and opinions in a certain direction. You then may start to feel like an outsider and pressured to either stay silent or to go along with the majority whether you’re giving your opinion on a social media site or actually with people. And the more you look the more the same algorithm keeps sending you those majority opinions. 

But it can also be helpful to have social media because there are different groups you can seek out to find someone with the same opinion as you and then you may not stay silent because you’ve found others that believe what you believe. Also, commenting on social media may feel safer even if in a minority because you aren’t face to face with a person and even if you receive negative comments there is less fear of the isolation.

BLOG #6 Where are the Antiwar Voices?

I had never heard of Antiwar.com or The American Conservative or the writers on those sites. These writers have very strong points of view that probably go against the views of popular opinion or what mainstream news wants to report on. For this reason they need to report from more obscure websites and people who are interested in this need to actively seek it out. In a way they are being censored by being limited to where they can voice their reports and it results in their message not being widespread.

I believe that most of the mainstream news sources, whether it’s through their websites, news shows, social media sites or newspapers, try to do exactly that—stay within the mainstream. Antiwar voices may bring too much controversy and that is not what most of the big media companies want to promote. They usually want to report on what they think the majority of the country wants to see and hear about.

Another issue is that 6 large corporations own 90% of the main news channels. This will then limit what gets reported and it will likely be what those companies value and what they think the public really wants to hear. Big media companies may also want to stay on the government’s side so they may not report about antiwar protests or opinions for that reason. 

 

Also, media companies are looking to make profits and a big way they do is by revenue from ads. Some of these ads may even be from companies themselves who are involved in the war which has been the case in the past. Other companies that place ads may want to stay with the media companies that can reach the largest audience even if it means siding with the media that doesn’t report antiwar stories. That would be the big media companies. 

Reporting about war which can be graphic is not something people see everyday in news reports, so when it is, it grabs the attention of people and ends up bringing in more readers and viewers.

The anti war websites and news channels likely also don’t have the funding to be able to broadcast in a big way what their opinions and voices reflect. So they can’t compete with the main news sources and then they can’t get their anti war stories out to a large amount of people.