Position Paper: Marlboro Boycott
most recent contribution of $2,000 made on March 30, 1990.) Runners up in contributions to Helms's campaign coffers (A/K/A, "the corporate roll of infamy"), during the same period of time, include Burlington Industries (textiles) @ $13,000; Amaco (petroleum) @ $12,000; RJR Nabisco (tobacco and food) @ $10,000; and Coors (beer) @ $5,000. Philip Morris has contributed almost twice as much as Helms's second biggest corporate sponsor. (3) At $200,000, Philip Morris is by far the largest corporate contributor to the Jesse Helms Museum, an attempt to glorify Helms's extremism and bigotry. b. I'm still not convinced that Marlboro is the best Philip Morris target. What about going after other Philip Morris products too? (1) It is best to start a boycott by focusing on a single product. Hence, Marlboro. (2) Marlboro dovetails between both Philip Morris (as its most profitable single product) and Helms (as a proponent of federal tobacco-subsidies for farmers and the industry, an unpopular issue during these budget-cutting times). To many people, North Carolina means two things: tobacco and Helms. (3) Tobacco is Philip Morris's most profitable product. Marlboro is Philip Morris's (and the world's) most profitable cigarette brand. Hit 'em where it hurts the most! (4) Smoking has become a nationally unpopular habit. (5) Marlboro advertising appears on billboards, in print media, and on transit displays -- perfectly accessible to the guerilla tactics of ACT UP. (6) The best politics are when the issues hit home. Many lesbians, gay men, people with AIDS, and their supporters smoke Marlboro. By forcing ourselves to stop smoking Marlboro, we can demonstrate personal commitment to our goals, and in so doing, try to hold Philip Morris accountable for its slavish support and funding of the demagogic and bigoted Helms. (7) No matter how stoic he appears, the Marlboro Man is vulnerable. The Real Marlboro Man Is The Bigoted Helms. (8) Philip Morris products are ubiquitous. It would be difficult to boycott them all. If the boycott is to expand, realistically it would only be able to encompass one additional product -- Lite Beer by Miller (modeled after the boycott of Coors beer). However, the effort to -7 -
About this Item
- Title
- Position Paper: Marlboro Boycott
- Author
- Petrelis, Michael | Goodman, Carl | Underwood, Emmett
- Canvas
- Page 7
- Publication
- 1990-04-28
- Subject terms
- reports
- Series/Folder Title
- Activism > Organizations > ACT UP
- Item type:
- reports
Technical Details
- Collection
- Jon Cohen AIDS Research Collection
- Link to this Item
-
https://name.umdl.umich.edu/5571095.0422.005
- Link to this scan
-
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/c/cohenaids/5571095.0422.005/7
Rights and Permissions
The University of Michigan Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes, with permission from their copyright holder(s). If you decide to use any of these materials, you are responsible for making your own legal assessment and securing any necessary permission.
Related Links
IIIF
- Manifest
-
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/t/text/api/manifest/cohenaids:5571095.0422.005
Cite this Item
- Full citation
-
"Position Paper: Marlboro Boycott." In the digital collection Jon Cohen AIDS Research Collection. https://name.umdl.umich.edu/5571095.0422.005. University of Michigan Library Digital Collections. Accessed June 23, 2025.