"Industry foes are concerned that Philip Morris may use this increasing economic power to attempt to downplay the public debate concerning smoking and health, by lobbying activity, by controlling internal smoking policies of its non-cigarette divisions, by its advertising decisions and by pressure on its suppliers. Perhaps the focus of the speech could be Philip Morris' recognition of the continued necessity for research in the smoking and health area as well as a statement that discussion on the issue is encouraged by the Company..."Today, PM's "foes" are still concerned with the same issues, particularly that PM is using its economic power to control the debate and pressure media not to carry anti-tobacco ads, and PM is still using the same dodging tactic of focusing on "corporate responsbility."
As a result of our discussion regarding the draft "frank statement" speech, I have given some thought about a possible alternative theme for such a speech. The purpose of the speech seems to be to improve the public image of the company. I believe...it would be difficult to give a speech focusing on the smoking and health issue which would both (1) improve the public perception of the company; and (2) not create litigation risks, including focused discovery requests....
...The only way the public at large will learn of any statements in the speech is through the media. Because there are a number of tobacco foes in the media, anything said in the speech regarding smoking and health that can potentially be used by the media against the company will be used...against the company. For this reason, it might be advisable to focus the speech on overall corporate responsibility, rather than focusing on smoking and health...
Bill Shinn provided me with a copy of an editorial in the Monday, November 14, 1988, edition of the New York Times, a copy of which is attached. The thrust of the editorial is that Philip Morris is continually gaining economic power through its acquisitions of companies such as General Foods and Kraft. Industry foes are concerned that Philip Morris may use this increasing economic power to attempt to downplay the public debate concerning smoking and health, by lobbying activity, by controlling internal smoking policies of its non-cigarette divisions, by its advertising decisions and by pressure on its suppliers. Perhaps the focus of the speech could be Philip Morris' recognition of the continued necessity for research in the smoking and health area as well as a statement that discussion on the issue is encouraged by the Company...
...In its present form, I doubt that the speech will accomplish its purpose of improving the company's public image...In its present form, the draft is basically a defensive effort, aimed at the company's critics...
END OF DOCUMENT