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 -

/ 10

Actions

file_download Download Options Download this page PDF - Pages 1-10 Image - Page 7 Plain Text - Page 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

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.

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.
Do you have questions about this content? Need to report a problem? Please contact us.