Debate lights up over plan
to ban outdoor tobacco ads
Both sides agree the
legislative bill is a
matter of health vs.
rights but argue other
points.
By Erin Schulte
Senior Reporter
Advertisers are fuming while law
makers are puffing their chests over a
bill that, if passed, would ban all out
door billboard advertising of tobacco
products.
LB65, introduced by Sen. Ed
Schrock of Elm Creek, was advanced
out of committee last week for floor
debate.
The one thing everyone seems to
agree on is that it’s an issue of First
Amendment free-speech rights vs. the
protection of people’s health.
Scott Stuart, owner of Imperial
Outdoor Advertising, said the effects
of the bill would be more than a mat
ter of mere revenue. Billboard com
panies typically make 75 percent less
of their revenue from tobacco adver
tising now than they did 10 years ago,
he said. Though, he said, revenue re
mains a factor.
“It isn’t life and death,” Stuart said,
“but I would be less than honest if I
said, especially in the first year, that
it wouldn’t have any (financial) im
pact.”
Stuart said the advertising indus
try already regulates itself and does not
place tobacco billboards near
churches, schools or playgrounds. But
the main issue is the slippery slope of
restricting speech.
“People came to this country for
freedom,” Stuart said. “To have
people, even good-minded and good
hearted people, trying to say what’s
good for you... I have a real hard time
with that.
“We have a right to choose in this
country, and I don’t think it should be
abridged in any fashion.”
A UNL journalism professor
agreed.
Stacy James, an associate advertis
ing professor, said the bill could set a
frightening precedent.
“I’m concerned about the rights of
marketers to advertise legal products,”
James said. “People are very con
cerned about smoking, as I am.
“But getting rid of advertising is
not going to get rid of that problem.”
If the bill passed, she said, it would
be possible that advertising other le
gal products could be banned simply
because the service or product isn’t
popular or politically correct.
Child’s play
Those who believe in the bill say
the ads target an audience for whom
tobacco is illegal.
Jody Gittins, Schrock’s legislative
aid, said the billboards commonly
popped up near schools or “fun
plexes” where the target audience was
probably fifth-graders.
“The First Amendment gives way
when we’re trying to uphold our
laws,” Gittins said. “The reasons for
billboard prohibition is to take away
the impetus for teen-agers who can’t
buy cigarettes legally to engage in an
illegal activity.”
Billboards also are easier to regu
late than other forms of advertising
because of their invasive nature,
Gittins said.
“It’s not like newspapers, TV or
radio,” she said. “You cannot turn
them off or close the book.
“You cannot drive with your eyes
closed.”
Blowing smoke
Although lobbyists have said the
bill would be legally challenged, a
UNL assistant news-editorial profes
sor said it would only have to meet
certain criteria to be constitutional.
John Bender, who teaches commu
nications law, said the state must have
a substantial interest in the issue and
the ban must be narrowly tailored to
further that interest.
“Curtailing smoking is a substan
tial state interest,” Bender said. “It
costs a lot in terms of health care, lost
wages ... that interest is particularly
strong when you talk about deterring
young people from smoking.”
The problem, he said, comes in
deciding if the ban is more regulation
than needed. Similar billboard bans
in Baltimore have been held up by dis
trict courts.
Commercial speech legally is af
forded less protection than any other
form of speech, he said. Tobacco ad
vertising takes it even further.
“Unlike any other product, tobacco
is dangerous when you use it as in
tended,” Bender said.
Even liquor, if used in small
amounts, he said, does not harm one
unless one abuses it.
“That’s why the government has
accepted regulation of tobacco adver
tising that they wouldn’t accept oth
erwise, like the ban of tobacco adver
tising on television,” Bender said.
But Stuart countered that argu
ment, saying there are lots of legal
products diat can kill* you if used to
excess. Eyen pizza.
Man jumps from building
JUMP from page 1
would not say whether the roof door
was locked and would not comment
further.
Lincoln Police Capt. Lee Wagner
said Martinez’s feet hit a car stopped
for a red light at 10th and O streets as
he landed.
Wagner said he did not know
Martinez’s exact injuries, but said a
fall from the building would be “a little
hard on the organs of your body.”
Martinez’s clothes were piled on the
street where paramedics had cut them
off before taking him to the hospital.
Casady said Lincoln police have
previously come in contact with
Martinez for attempting suicide.
Judging from Martinez’s past sui
cide attempt, drinking and apparent
depressed state, police believe
Martinez’s fall was not an accident,
Casady said.
“I think all these things together
indicate that he probably jumped.”
--
Bob Devaney Sports Center
|H NU VS. MINNESOTA
General Admission - $2
UNL Students with ID - FREE
Children 6 and under - FREE
I- ^^p--1
Godfather’s LARGE
! Kaza SERSLE
\ TOPPERS PIZZA I
I
I
I
I _
! 1624 South St. 27th & Superior
j 477-1900 476-7676
| 48th & Vine 48th&HWY2
i 466-8264 483-4129
i__'
I
I
EAT IN, CARRY-OUT, OR DELIVERY!
NOT VALID WITH ANY OTHER COUPONS |
OR OFFERS. LIMITED DELIVERY TIMES AREAS.
EXPIRES 3/30/97 j
- I
-