(antiMusic) You might not think that indie music, Rolling Stone magazine, cartoons, Camel cigarettes and advertisements disguised as editorial content have much in common. But they do. They've sparked a big controversy causing attorney generals from nine states to file litigation that could cost R.J. Reynolds more than $100 million for violating the cartoon ban contained in the 1998 Master Settlement Agreement. If you were flipping past all of the ads in the 40th Anniversary issue of Rolling Stone looking for some actual content, you may have come upon a four page pullout labeled "Indie Rock Universe". According to the Daily Swarm, "The fold-out poster – a bizarre illustration that lists dozens of Pitchfork-centric bands grouped around representations of various planets and animals – is nestled in between five pages of advertisements for 'The Farm,' Camel Cigarettes’ indie band and label-focused promotion. If you are like most indie music fans who paid any attention to those pages, you likely assumed that the 'Indie Rock Universe' poster was part and parcel of the Camel advertising campaign; if not, the message was clear…Camel’s got indie rock’s back."
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. said Wednesday that it has voluntarily halted promotions for "The Farm" and Winston-Salem Journal had this interesting tidbit "Reynolds and Rolling Stone have said that the tobacco company did not know that the magazine's editorial content in the pullout would contain cartoon images. [a spokesman] said that the company would not have allowed its ads to be placed in the pullout if it had known the magazine's editorial decision." Are they saying RS's editorial content is cartoonish? Not really, but they used cartoon like images in the advertorial without Joe Camel's prior knowledge.
“This is one great big cigarette ad,” said Matthew L. Myers, president of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids. “The fact that Rolling Stone produced the content, but displayed it in such a manner that it is indistinguishable from the Camel ad, only makes them an accomplice.”
Daily Swarm also reports: While both R.J. Reynolds and Rolling Stone spokesmen deny any collusion between the advertising and the “editorial,” its hard to take their statements seriously. The theme of the ads and the “editorial content” are one and the same. The color scheme of the ads and the drawing, while not identical, is complimentary. And while the legal ramifications could be quite serious for Camel if the anti-smoking people make a real case that this is a violation of the 1998 tobacco settlement with the states’ attorneys general, Rolling Stone has something to lose too: unmarked advertorial is a violation of the American Society of Magazine Editors’ editorial guidelines, and should Jann Wenner submit this issue for National Magazine Awards consideration, it will probably be disqualified.
Check The Daily Swarm for a lot more on this story as well see the advertorial that causes all of this mess. They also have a follow up article asking if the bands used in this advertorial (they have a long list) should file suit against Rolling Stone and the cigarette company.
