<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
<title>Tobacco Articles: category movies</title>
<link>http://www.tobacco.org/newsfeed/category/movies.rss</link>
<description>Latest top tobacco news headlines</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<item>
<title>Do movie critic&#039;s &quot;smoke breaks&quot; glorify an unhealthy smoking habit?:  | Health &amp; Fitness Blog </title>
<link>http://blog.syracuse.com/healthfitness/2009/10/do_movie_critics_smoke_breaks.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/292147.html</guid>
<description>
It&#039;s no secret that Post-Standard movie critic Joan Vadeboncouer is a smoker. Drive past the downtown building at any time of day, and you&#039;re liable to see her standing outside smoking her cigarettes. (Smoking hasn&#039;t been allowed in the Post-Standard building for almost two decades.)

It&#039;s also no secret that JV knows movies.  . . .

Last week, a fun new feature appeared on Syracuse.com called &quot;Joanie&#039;s Smoke Break Movie Reviews.&quot; There&#039;s one posted about Whip It, and another about Zombieland.  . . .


Research has shown that young people start lighting up partially because of what they see in the movies, because of the way filmmakers glamorize the dirty habit. US News &amp; World Report has written about the controversy, and so has Forbes, in a story about how student participation in sports can&#039;t compete with the powerful influence of smoking in films. . . .

Clearly, it&#039;s a hot research topic, and a controversy in Hollywood. What about right here in Central New York? I&#039;ve heard some complaints about JV&#039;s cigarettes, but what do you think? Are JV&#039;s &quot;smoke breaks&quot; a vector in the expansion of the smoking epidemic?</description>
<source url="http://blog.syracuse.com/">Syracuse  Post-Standard blogs</source>
<pubDate>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>&#20013;&#22269;&#21508;&#30028;&#21628;&#21505;&#31435;&#27861;&#20943;&#23569;&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#20013;&#30340;&#8220;&#28895;&#33609;&#38236;&#22836;&#8221;</title>
<link>http://hb.cctv.com/20091102/101990.shtml</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/292023.html</guid>
<description>&#8220;&#25103;&#19981;&#22815;&#65292;&#25343;&#28895;&#20945;&#8221;&#8212;&#8212;&#36825;&#21477;&#29983;&#21160;&#26377;&#36259;&#30340;&#21488;&#35789;&#21453;&#26144;&#20102;&#20013;&#22269;&#24433;&#35270;&#21019;&#20316;&#20013;&#39321;&#28895;&#27867;&#28389;&#30340;&#29616;&#35937;&#12290;&#39321;&#28895;&#25104;&#20102;&#26368;&#24120;&#29992;&#30340;&#8220;&#36947;&#20855;&#8221;&#65292;&#25277;&#28895;&#25104;&#20102;&#26368;&#24120;&#35265;&#30340;&#8220;&#25925;&#20107;&#24773;&#33410;&#8221;&#12290;&#32780;&#30007;&#24615;&#65292;&#21017;&#26159;&#28895;&#27665;&#20027;&#20307;&#12290;</description>
<source url="http://www.cctv.com">CCTV</source>
<dc:coverage>China</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 05:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>&#20013;&#22269;&#21508;&#30028;&#21628;&#21505;&#31435;&#27861;&#20943;&#23569;&#8220;&#28895;&#33609;&#38236;&#22836;&#8221;</title>
<link>http://news.tfol.com/10026/12698/12700/2009/10/28/10823898.shtml</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/291805.html</guid>
<description>&#28895;&#38654;&#32557;&#32469;&#30340;&#31363;&#21548;&#23460;&#65292;&#28385;&#22320;&#30340;&#28895;&#22836;&#65292;&#39059;&#24223;&#12289;&#32993;&#23376;&#25289;&#30900;&#30340;&#20518;&#23481;&#8212;&#8212;&#22312;&#30005;&#24433;&#12298;&#31363;&#21548;&#39118;&#20113;&#12299;&#20013;&#65292;&#35686;&#21592;&#26472;&#30495;&#32473;&#35266;&#20247;&#30041;&#19979;&#28145;&#21051;&#21360;&#35937;&#12290;
</description>
<source url="http://news.tfol.com/">&#22825;&#24220;&#28909;&#32447;, Tanfo Online</source>
<author>&#32593;&#31449;&#32852;&#31995;&#65306;188@tfol.com</author>
<dc:coverage>China</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Wed, 28 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#28895;&#33609;&#38236;&#22836;&#19981;&#23481;&#20048;&#35266; [Movies and television cameras can not be optimistic about tobacco]</title>
<link>http://zqb.cyol.com/content/2009-10/26/content_2902986.htm</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/291650.html</guid>
<description>10&#26376;20&#26085;&#22312;&#39321;&#28207;&#20030;&#34892;&#30340;&#31532;&#19977;&#23626;&#20004;&#23736;&#22235;&#22320;&#28895;&#23475;&#38450;&#21046;&#20132;&#27969;&#30740;&#35752;&#20250;&#19978;&#65292;&#20013;&#22269;&#25511;&#21046;&#21560;&#28895;&#21327;&#20250;&#38738;&#23569;&#24180;&#25511;&#28895;&#32844;&#19994;&#22996;&#21592;&#20250;&#19987;&#23478;&#21525;&#33509;&#28982;&#12289;&#27573;&#20339;&#20029;&#25351;&#20986;&#65292;&#30446;&#21069;&#65292;&#25105;&#22269;&#23578;&#26080;&#26126;&#30830;&#30340;&#27861;&#24459;&#27861;&#35268;&#38480;&#21046;&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#20013;&#30340;&#28895;&#33609;&#38236;&#22836;&#12290;&#34429;&#28982;&#19982;&#21069;&#20960;&#24180;&#30456;&#27604;&#65292;&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#20013;&#30340;&#28895;&#33609;&#38236;&#22836;&#25511;&#21046;&#24773;&#20917;&#26377;&#25152;&#25913;&#21892;&#65292;&#20294;&#20174;2008&#24180;&#30340;&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#26469;&#30475;&#65292;&#28895;&#33609;&#38236;&#22836;&#26292;&#38706;&#30340;&#24773;&#20917;&#20173;&#28982;&#19981;&#23481;&#20048;&#35266;&#65292;&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#20013;&#22522;&#26412;&#27809;&#26377;&#25511;&#21046;&#28895;&#33609;&#30340;&#23459;&#20256;&#12290;

October 20 in Hong Kong, the four at the third cross-Strait Seminar on Tobacco Control, the Chinese Association on Smoking Control Youth Tobacco Control&#039;s professional committee of experts Lu and if so, Duan beauties pointed out that currently there is no clear laws and regulations in China restrictions on tobacco film and television drama shot. While in previous years, film and television drama shot in tobacco control situation has improved, but the 2008 TV drama point of view, the lens of tobacco exposure is still not optimistic, film and television drama basically no tobacco control advocacy. 

     In the agency investigated 10 domestic films, there are four appeared in the tobacco lens, a total of 25 times, average length of the tobacco lens, 1 minute. Have been investigated 11 television shows, then all the emergence of tobacco lens. A total of 453 times the lens of tobacco there, with an average there are 41.1 per tobacco television camera, when the episode an average length of the lens of tobacco 1.5 minutes. Among them, the appearances of tobacco exposure to a television camera the most, with an average occur once every 17.3 minutes tobacco lens. </description>
<source url="http://www.cyol.net/">&#20013;&#22269;&#38738;&#24180;&#25253;, China Youth Daily</source>
<dc:coverage>China</dc:coverage>
<dc:coverage>Hong Kong</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>L.A. billboard owners squash &#039;Land of the Lost&#039; anti-smoking ads : | The Big Picture | </title>
<link>http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/10/la-billboard-owners-squash-antismoking-crusaders.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/291358.html</guid>
<description>
But what the New York Times&#039; Brooks Barnes reveals online today is that L.A. billboard owners, already enormously unpopular for shamelessly installing an ever-growing assortment of hideous video billboards, refused to accept ads from the AMAA publicly calling out the studio for its on-screen promotion of smoking. The AMAA had previously announced that the studio &quot;found to be the biggest smoking offender would be publicly shamed on nearby billboards.&quot; But when the AMAA went to buy billboard space, every local billboard vendor refused to sell.

According to the AMAA, the billboard vendors, who take in a huge amount of revenue from (surprise!) movie industry advertising, weren&#039;t going to let their favorite clients be embarrassed in such a public way from an anti-smoking organization. It&#039;s yet another black eye for L.A., which has allowed billboard pollution to run rampant without even putting up a fight.

But let me give the last word to AMAA President Nancy Kyler, who says: &quot;It&#039;s a sad day when movie studios can promote smoking to youth, but public health advocates cannot find a billboard in the whole city of Los Angeles that will run an ad to alert the public about the problem.&quot; 
</description>
<source url="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/">Los Angeles Times blogs</source>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>&#8216;Land of the Lost&#8217; Haunts Universal in Unexpected Way </title>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/19/business/media/19lost.html?_r=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/291334.html</guid>
<description>&quot;Land of the Lost&quot; is the gift that just keeps on taking for Universal Pictures.

The American Medical Association Alliance, a volunteer arm of the powerful health organization that focuses on family issues, on Friday released its scorecard for the depiction of smoking in mass-appeal summer movies. Universal was the biggest offender because of &quot;Land of the Lost,&quot; the big-budget failure that helped cost the co-chairmen of the studio their jobs this month.

The alliance said it counted 18 shots of Will Ferrell smoking a pipe in the movie, resulting in about 124 million tobacco impressions. (The industry generally calculates an &quot;impression&quot; by multiplying the number of incidences by the film&#039;s total gross, then dividing by the average ticket price.)

&quot; &#039;Land of the Lost&#039; wasn&#039;t just a flop at the box office, it was also a real loser for public health,&quot; said Nancy Kyler, president of the American Medical Association Alliance.

The group did not name the second- and third-place offenders. A Universal spokeswoman declined to comment.</description>
<source url="http://www.tobacco.org/media.php?mode=display&amp;media_id=1004">New York Times</source>
<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>120000 Lives a Year</title>
<link>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SjZo0qsl43k</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/291140.html</guid>
<description>Video highlights one of the most urgent health challenges of the 21st Century, from the history of paid product placement to the May, 2004 U.S. Senate hearing, scientific research confirming the problem, growing youth activism, and the reasonable, effective four-step Smoke Free Movies solution endorsed by leading health groups.
</description>
<source url="http://www.youtube.com/">You Tube</source>
<pubDate>Tue, 24 Oct 2006 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Viral anti-smoking campaign goes Bollywood </title>
<link>http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/10/01/2701656.htm</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/290591.html</guid>
<description>An Aboriginal health organisation has launched a new anti-smoking campaign in the Northern Territory that involves Bollywood and rap music videos spread via mobile phones.

Miwatj Health in north-east Arnhem Land has commissioned five music videos, which include titles such as &quot;Bolypingu&quot; and &quot;Cough &#039;n&#039; rap&quot;.

The videos are part of a three-year Commonwealth-funded program to build awareness about the dangers of tobacco in remote communities.

&quot;Miwatj is well aware that more Indigenous people will die from tobacco related illness than from alcohol, petrol sniffing, domestic violence and car accidents put together,&quot; said Ric Browne, the coordinator of the organisation&#039;s Tobacco Control Project.

&quot;This is the most prolific and insidious killer of people on the planet.&quot;
</description>
<source url="http://www.abc.net.au">Australian Broadcasting Corporation  </source>
<dc:coverage>Australia</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>GORE: Don&#039;t lose the Lib in Lib Dems :  We need to break the cosy socially conservative consensus in which ideas like banning smoking in films take root </title>
<link>http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/23/liberal-democrat-conference-smoking-films</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/290244.html</guid>
<description>Unsuspecting journalists attending the anti-prohibition conference fringe event would be forgiven for thinking the Liberal Democrats were a hotbed of anti-state libertarian action.

The panel included Colin Eldridge from Liverpool City Council, who had been invited to defend the controversial idea of rating films 18 certificate if they happen to feature &quot;unnecessary&quot; smoking. The audience &#8211; and the rest of the panel &#8211; were not impressed. Questions were invited, then the audience began pouring scorn and ridicule on this heinous idea.

I asked Eldridge if his opinions were his own. Was he parroting a line he thought might be electorally advantageous? &quot;If I were doing it to win votes,&quot; he said, &quot;I&#039;d be against the policy.&quot;
 . . .


As an advocate of free trade, free speech and individualism, I&#039;m used to being in the minority whenever Liberal Democrats are gathered, so to find myself sharing knowing nods and looks of incredulity with an angry mob as Eldridge spoke was a strangely refreshing experience. Being popular is fun! Who knew?

But here&#039;s the problem. While libertarians, classical liberals and free thinkers were all in the bars and fringes of Bournemouth complaining about policy, the nanny state Liberal Democrats were all in the conference hall pouring reinforced concrete on our reputation as yet another mildly authoritarian social democratic party, just like the other two.

The biggest failure was the infamous &quot;airbrushing ban&quot; &#8211; a policy that demands that images aimed at under-16s are not digitally manipulated, and images aimed at adults have to carry a warning. . . .


If the Liberal Democrats want to be distinctive, we need to break the cosy socially conservative consensus, where politicians believe their role in life is to make the people fitter, happier and more productive and justify every illiberal idea with an appeal to the Argumentum Ad Maternitate or &quot;I&#039;m a mother with three children and I reckon you should definitely ban smoking in films. Think of the children!&quot;</description>
<source url="http://www.guardian.co.uk/">The Guardian </source>
<author>userhelp@guardian.co.uk (Charlotte Gore | Comment is free )</author>
<dc:coverage>UK</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Wed, 23 Sep 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Cigarettes in films must be banned: Commission</title>
<link>http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/09/05/cigarettes-films-must-be-banned-commission.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/289322.html</guid>
<description>
The National Commission for Child Protection said Thursday that politicians had to ban the advertising of cigarette in movies.

&quot;We demand that the House of Representatives insert an article in the bill on films banning cigarette promotions in movies,&quot; said Muhammad Joni, the vice chairman of the Commission. The Commission said the bill must forbid cigarette companies from sponsoring the production of films, ban scenes where actors are shown smoking and prevent companies from marketing tobacco brands in the film.

Joni said the current bill, if passed into law, would possess weaker measures on prohibiting cigarette advertising compared to the laws on broadcasting and the press.

&quot;At least in both those laws, companies cannot display or broadcast cigarette products through their advertising,&quot; Joni said.

In the bill on films, Joni said, no article regulating the advertisement of cigarettes had been included.

The Commission has sent letters voicing their concerns and recommendations to the House and would try and arrange a meeting with lawmakers, Joni said.</description>
<source url="http://www.thejakartapost.com/">Jakarta Post </source>
<dc:coverage>Indonesia</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Sat, 05 Sep 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>The Weinsteins Scramble to Regain a Golden Touch in Hollywood</title>
<link>http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/business/media/16wein.html?sq=cigarette&amp;st=nyt&amp;scp=2&amp;pagewanted=all</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/289171.html</guid>
<description>
IN the wee hours of Friday morning, Quentin Tarantino stood in a West Village bar that had opened for him and his entourage -- cast members of his new movie, &quot;Inglourious Basterds,&quot; and his longtime producers, Bob and Harvey Weinstein. Swinging a blue cocktail in one hand, he held forth about the time that Harvey told him he&#039;d like to invest in a restaurant.


The goal, Harvey explained to Mr. Tarantino at the time, wasn&#039;t to schmooze, or to get the best table. New York City had just banned cigarettes from restaurants and Harvey, then an avid smoker, didn&#039;t approve.

&quot;He said, &#039;I want to light up in my own restaurant and blow smoke in the fire marshal&#039;s face,&#039; &quot; Mr. Tarantino recalled.

Vintage Harvey chutzpah. The story killed, and when the laughing died down, Bob smiled, waited a beat and added another punch line.

&quot;A million dollars,&quot; he sighed, &quot;for a cigarette.&quot;

Ah, the flush years. </description>
<source url="http://www.tobacco.org/media.php?mode=display&amp;media_id=1004">New York Times</source>
<pubDate>Sun, 16 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#21560;&#28895;&#38236;&#22836;&#27867;&#28389;&quot;&#35825;&#23548;&quot;&#38738;&#23569;&#24180;&#21560;&#28895; &#25511;&#28895;&#20127;&#38656;&#27861;&#21046;&#21270;</title>
<link>http://www.legaldaily.com.cn/0801/2009-08/27/content_1144227.htm</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/289145.html</guid>
<description>&#8220;&#25105;&#25277;&#31532;&#19968;&#26681;&#28895;&#26159;&#22240;&#20026;&#25293;&#29255;&#30340;&#38656;&#35201;&#65292;&#23548;&#28436;&#35828;&#65292;&#19981;&#25277;&#28895;&#23601;&#25226;&#20320;&#25764;&#25481;&#65292;&#20110;&#26159;&#25105;&#22312;&#39321;&#28895;&#19978;&#25273;&#30528;&#39118;&#27833;&#31934;&#21193;&#24378;&#25277;&#20102;&#31532;&#19968;&#26681;&#28895;&#12290;&#36825;&#19968;&#25277;&#23601;&#26159;12&#24180;&#65292;&#26368;&#22810;&#30340;&#26102;&#20505;&#27599;&#22825;&#20004;&#21253;&#28895;&#12290;&#8221;&#22312;&#36817;&#26085;&#21484;&#24320;&#30340;&#19968;&#22330;&#21517;&#20026;&#8220;&#20513;&#23548;&#26080;&#28895;&#24433;&#35270;&#20928;&#21270;&#38134;&#23631;&#8221;&#30340;&#26032;&#38395;&#21457;&#24067;&#20250;&#19978;&#65292;&#22269;&#23478;&#19968;&#32423;&#28436;&#21592;&#20911;&#36828;&#24449;&#35762;&#36848;&#20102;&#20182;&#30340;&#21560;&#28895;&#21490;&#12290;
&#12288;&#12288;&#27492;&#27425;&#26032;&#38395;&#21457;&#24067;&#20250;&#30001;&#20013;&#22269;&#25511;&#21046;&#21560;&#28895;&#21327;&#20250;&#21644;&#20013;&#22269;&#30142;&#25511;&#20013;&#24515;&#25511;&#28895;&#21150;&#20027;&#21150;&#12290;&#20250;&#19978;&#65292;&#19968;&#20010;&#20449;&#24687;&#30340;&#20844;&#24067;&#8212;&#8212;&#8212;2007&#24180;&#33267;2009&#24180;&#37096;&#20998;&#24433;&#35270;&#21095;&#21560;&#28895;&#38236;&#22836;&#30340;&#35843;&#26597;&#32467;&#26524;&#65292;&#20196;&#20154;&#30624;&#30446;&#32467;&#33292;&#12290;</description>
<source url="http://www.legaldaily.com.cn/">&#27861;&#21046;&#26085;&#25253;, Legal Daily</source>
<author>bxxb@legaldaily.com.cn</author>
<dc:coverage>China</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Thu, 27 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>No smoking, please: Bipasha </title>
<link>http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-interviews/No-smoking-please-Bipasha/articleshow/4947486.cms</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/289110.html</guid>
<description>
Bipasha Basu is a health freak and is known to never smoke or drink, which explains her bootylicious body.

Now, she has refused to smoke a cigarette or even hold it for a scene in her forthcoming film, Pankh.

Our source said, &#8220;Sudipto Chattopadhyay, the director of the film, wanted Bipasha to smoke on screen for a vital sequence. However, Bipasha flatly refused as she does not encourage smoking and hates it. She was not in favour of the scene and if she smokes, it meant that she would be promoting smoking. After that, Sudipto even gave her the option of holding a cigarette, but she refused that as well. Sudipto understood her point of view and agreed to shoot the scene differently.&#8221;

Bipasha Basu confirms the story and maintains her anti-smoking stance. </description>
<source url="http://www.timesofindia.com">The Times of India</source>
<dc:coverage>India</dc:coverage>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>WVU lecture series tackles tobacco topics </title>
<link>http://wvgazette.com/ap/ApTopStories/200908290094</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/289095.html</guid>
<description>Teen smoking, cigarettes in the cinema and the marketing of new smokeless tobacco products are some of the topics of a September lecture series at West Virginia University.

Four experts on tobacco research and behavior will visit the Health Sciences complex Sept. 9, 10 and 11.

Their talks are free and open to the public.
</description>
<source url="http://hosted.ap.org/">AP</source>
<pubDate>Sat, 29 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>Blu Cigs President Won&#039;t Confirm Product in Sex Tape</title>
<link>http://www.emailwire.com/release/26242-Blu-Cigs-President-Wont-Confirm-Product-in-Sex-Tape.html</link>
<guid>http://tobacco.org/news/288816.html</guid>
<description> In response to a surge of inquiries, blu Cigs president Jason Healy said he will not confirm the speculation by Gawker.com that the mystery cigarette in the Eric Dane/Rebecca Gayheart sex tape which emitted a blue ember but didn&#039;t burn was in fact, the company&#039;s signature electronic cigarette.

&quot;Our client records are confidential. We respect the privacy of all our clients, not only high profile ones.&quot;

Blu Cigs are known for the distinctive blue light that glows when the cigarette is drawn on. They have become popular with smokers in the film, television and music industries as they can be used in indoor no (tobacco) smoking environments such as sound stages and recording studios as there is no ash and the vapor emitted won&#039;t bother non-smokers and will not harm sensitive equipment.

Healy adds, &quot;With current and stricter new restrictions coming on the use of traditional cigarettes, blu Cigs provide smokers with a better alternative cigarette experience without the bothersome secondhand smoke.&quot;

In response to whether an electronic cigarette such as blu is safe for use in a bathtub, Healy said, &quot;While we would not recommend use in an environment like that, there&#039;s no problem if it were dropped in the water. It would have to be dried out sufficiently before using again.&quot;</description>
<source url="http://www.emailwire.com/">Emailwire</source>
<author>perkycomm@aol.com</author>
<pubDate>Fri, 21 Aug 2009 04:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>