Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


1969 Give an inch, gain a decade

The Senate moves to ban cigarette advertising on TV and place health warnings in other ads. Philip Morris President Joseph Cullman sees the silver lining in the dark cloud over the industry’s head: Voluntarily agreeing to remove tobacco TV advertising would effectively end competition from new companies because, without TV, the introduction of new brands would prove prohibitively expensive. In the subsequent bargain Cullman cuts with Congress, specific references to cancer or other diseases are removed from warning label language, and industry lawyers quietly insert a “pre-emption” section in the law, essentially preventing states from awarding any damages in tobacco liability lawsuits. This section, along with package warning labels, becomes the companies’ key defense against liability lawsuits brought by smokers over the next 20 years.

1970 Dr. Auerbach’s beagles are turned on him

On February 6, 1970, a front-page New York Times article reports a breakthrough that panics tobacco apologists: “12 Dogs Develop Lung Cancer in Group of 86 Taught to Smoke.” The study, by Dr. Oscar Auerbach and Cuyler Hammond, proves that exposure to cigarette smoke produces malignant tumors in large animals. The American Cancer Society, which funded the study, claims the findings “effectively refute” the contention that there is no proven link between cigarettes and cancer. Every TV network news show leads with the story of the smoking beagles. Caught off guard, The Tobacco Institute initially appeals to offended animal lovers and then claims the findings are unrelated to human smokers.

The New England Journal, which carried earlier smoking studies by Auerbach and Hammond, has a policy of accepting only “unpublicized results,” and the beagle study has already been disclosed at a press conference. The Journal’s editor returns the paper, saying the decision to reject it on procedural–not substantive–grounds has been “agonizing.”

Though the paper is later published elsewhere, cigarette companies employ this technical rejection in a broad media campaign to discredit the study and its authors, calling it the “beagles fiasco.”

Kentucky Congressman Tim Lee Carter, a champion of the tobacco industry, claims the Journal “had rejected the [beagles] research papers outright.” The president of The Tobacco Institute declares the study “may be one of the great scientific hoaxes of our time.”

In early 1971, Philip Morris head Joseph Cullman tries to bury the beagles study for good. As a guest on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” he falsely claims that criticism has forced the researchers to back off their central finding that the beagles got lung cancer from smoking cigarettes. Cullman also states, “We do not believe that cigarettes are hazardous; we don’t accept that.” And when asked about another recent study, which found that smoking mothers gave birth to smaller babies, Cullman remarks, “Some women would prefer having smaller babies.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate