What's new

Are E-cigs Evil ? - Channel 5 phone in show !

Well I did watch it, immediate impression was I am gonna rip him to shreds, a smug c*nt (replace the * with a vowel of your choice) but but fast forwarded to the E Cig bit and in fairness he wasn't bad, abysmal directed production and very short as mentioned, the lanky strak of iss on the panel obviously had no clue. a badly produced programme and I lay content there as a member of the media. But can I lay blame with producers on daytime pish. Can't be an easy job.
 
Ok i know I commented before. Are Ecigs evil? Answer. No the people who critiicise what they know nothing about ARE!!!!!!!!!!! :banghead:All HOTSPOTS
 
I don't know what all the fuss is about, the question was loaded before the phone in to attract both for and against reactions, this is media, I work in the media so see this all the time. He went straight to the insanely gorgeous Kirsty Duffy to give her points for an ecig and spent more time getting her opinion than anything and during the topic was fairly neutral I thought.

At the end of the day we need topics done like that to raise awareness with those who do not know that they work, are legal, can use indoors and are a way to cut out the nasties while maintaining the habit, a good thing I thought. The doctor you can just dismiss as big pharma pays his salary but medically he should really have pointed out the cost of smoking to the NHS and that the chemical intake from an ecig negates this, to be fair though he got more positive comments than negative which is how a topic like this should be handled.

Yes he is opinionated, he is a journalist, yes he comes across as smug, but he also has his opinion swayed quite regularly when faced with a topic done right. I did feel that it wasnt a long enough segment though and more time could have been spent on it. Still it is prime daytime PR to improve awareness of ecigs and how many smokers might have a look at them now after seeing it was legal to smoke them indoors?
 
I don't know what all the fuss is about, the question was loaded before the phone in to attract both for and against reactions, this is media, I work in the media so see this all the time. He went straight to the insanely gorgeous Kirsty Duffy to give her points for an ecig and spent more time getting her opinion than anything and during the topic was fairly neutral I thought.

At the end of the day we need topics done like that to raise awareness with those who do not know that they work, are legal, can use indoors and are a way to cut out the nasties while maintaining the habit, a good thing I thought. The doctor you can just dismiss as big pharma pays his salary but medically he should really have pointed out the cost of smoking to the NHS and that the chemical intake from an ecig negates this, to be fair though he got more positive comments than negative which is how a topic like this should be handled.

Yes he is opinionated, he is a journalist, yes he comes across as smug, but he also has his opinion swayed quite regularly when faced with a topic done right. I did feel that it wasnt a long enough segment though and more time could have been spent on it. Still it is prime daytime PR to improve awareness of ecigs and how many smokers might have a look at them now after seeing it was legal to smoke them indoors?
Several excellent points made there bunglehaze. I suppose my main gripe was with the shortness of the segment and like all frustrated ecig users wishing to protect their Vaping I wanted all the good points to be put across. You're right though, it's still PR. Kinda ;)
 
One of the main problems with media portrayal of vaping (imho) is that it's usually seen as a 'total' cessation aid ... i.e. if you use a cigalike for a few months, you're expected to cut your nicotine usage to virtually nothing and then quit vaping too.

This is largely driven by the misconception that nicotine, in and of itself, is an evil that needs to be eradicated. One only has to look at the propaganda and conditioning that the anti smoking lobby has hammered the public with for the last 20-30 years. Constant references to 'nicotine stains' have helped to cement the idea in the minds of the public that nicotine is actually the tar produced by combustible cigarettes.

I think the public needs to be made aware that the 'dangers' of nicotine are about on a par with caffeine and they also need to recognise that not everyone wants to quit completely. Looking at the long term success rates of NRT, it's plain to see that a lot of people eventually return to cigarettes after a period of abstinence. If people manage to switch fully to vaping, given that it's generally accepted that vaping is much safer than combustible cigarettes, then carrying on vaping might well be a more effective long term strategy for preventing a return to traditional cigarettes.

What's even worse is the demonisation and vilification that has been heaped onto smokers in the last 20 years. It's become acceptable to view smoking and smokers as evil. This has enabled a huge amount of guilt to be placed on the shoulders of smokers and the disdain with which they are treated for not being able to quit is just cruelty for the sake of it.

There's nothing more odious than a holier than thou ex smoker smugly informimg someone who's had yet another failed quit attempt that quitting is 'easy' and that all it takes is 'will power'.

Given that vaping is much safer than smoking, 'will power' isn't a requirement and neither is quitting. If we're able to vape without hurting anyone else and minimise any possible damage to ourselves, then why is there still a perceived need to quit?

There needs to be a sea change in the way that smokers are portrayed. They are not evil, they are not sub human and they not less worthy of compassion or understanding than anybody else. Whilst nicotine is continued to be linked to the 'evils' of smokers and smoking, vaping will remain in the crosshairs of those people who think it's ok to vilify smokers.

When I've been vaping whilst out and about, I've had a few people say to me 'why don't you just quit?' I used to answer that I already had quit but this would inevitably lead to them saying 'aah.. but you're still using nicotine'. These days if someone asks me why I 'don't just quit', I tell them that I don't need to quit anymore ... I'm quite happy vaping and doing no harm to anyone else, so why would I want to quit?

It often makes people stop and pause for thought if you ask them why THEY want you to quit. ;)
 
When I've been vaping whilst out and about, I've had a few people say to me 'why don't you just quit?' I used to answer that I already had quit but this would inevitably lead to them saying 'aah.. but you're still using nicotine'. These days if someone asks me why I 'don't just quit', I tell them that I don't need to quit anymore ... I'm quite happy vaping and doing no harm to anyone else, so why would I want to quit?

My answer tends to be shorter, but far less eloquent :D
 
Back
Top Bottom