Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: damniseedemons who wrote (23187)	4/1/1999 11:09:00 AM
From: Thure Meyer	Respond to of 24154

Sal, I should rephrase that to say, blaming only the victim. I'm not sure why this particular case went against Phillip Morris, but I think its pretty clear that the tobacco companies hid their own research for years about how harmful smoking is; yet they promoted cigarettes shamelessly as glamorous, sexy, manly, etc. In my view that makes them irresponsible and an accomplice in this mans death. Of course it could be argued that it was his choice, that we need to inform ourselves of the possible repercussions of our actions and so on. Needless to say we are responsible for our own actions. Nevertheless, given corporate power in shaping perception, manufacturing consent through the media, generally controlling the information flow, and most importantly being the manufacturer of a product containing known carcinogens; it would be disingenious to simply say that Phillip Morris had nothing to do with the death of thousands of people by lung cancer. No one errs willingly and the bigger picture clearly implicates the tobacco companies. I think that reasonable people understand this and when acting as juries have made it clear that corporations must shoulder the blame as well. Finally, lets not forget what actually happened. A human being died using Phillip Morris products. Thure