F E AT U R E
S
ome of the aspects of this are
clear – no paid for or sponsored
adverts may be broadcast on
radio or TV, or the equivalent
internet versions thereof.
The Department of Health have put
out a copy of the proposed text of
the legislation for comments, and it is
accompanied by some explanatory
notes. These give some perspective to
the items listed above, in particular a
distinction between providing information
and promotion. This allows, in the words
of this document:
“This would mean that where information
is provided that gives detail about a
product, or how to operate that product,
but is not ‘promotional’ in nature, the
restrictions would not apply.”
On this basis, a website could list
products for sale, and provide factual
information about them, but could not
have promotions such as ‘buy one get
one free’.
Similarly, the Department of Health
states: “The press and other printed
publications have been interpreted
72 ISSUE 03 VAPOUROUND MAGAZINE
narrowly in line with case law as limited
to publications such as ‘newspapers,
magazines periodicals’, not leaflets
and posters.”
The upshot of this is that point of sale
materials such as posters and leaflets
would be permitted, while publi cations,
such as this one will be prohibited
(except where “intended exclusively for
professionals in the trade”).
It is hard to see what justification there
can be for a prohibition on specialist
‘vape magazines’, since the people who
buy them have, just by doing so, already
indicated a strong interest in vaping
products.
There are some aspects that (at the
time of writing) are unknown. Email
promotion is prohibited – but what about
emails to existing customers about
new products? They would seem to be
permitted – but an email about a special
offer would appear to be prohibited.
Sending special offers by physical mail
to existing customers would seem to
be permitted, unlike email – another
area where the revisions to the TPD
don’t seem to fit well with environmental
protection requirements.
It all seems a bit confused and arbitrary,
and hopefully the ASA (Advertising
Standards Agency) will be able to
provide some clear guidance on exactly
where the lines are drawn. It may be
the case that some of the boundaries
between providing information about
products and promoting them will only
be defined as a result of court decisions
– a very unhelpful position for vaping
companies to be in.
What is clear is that the opportunities to
promote any business, brand or indeed
product relating to electronic cigarettes,
are going to become extremely limited.
What isn’t clear is why the promotion of
a safer alternative to smokers should be
explicitly prohibited. No one would argue
with some restrictions and regulation
of the advertising of vaping products,
but as the Directive makes clear, this is
not the regulation of advertising – it is a
prohibition of almost all advertising.