Joe Camel

Joe Camel is an anthropomorphic camel who smokes cigarettes.Elliott, Stuart. [https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE2DF133CF931A25751C1A967958260&n=Top/News/Business/Small%20Business/Marketing%20and%20Advertising The Media Business: Advertising - Camel's Success and Controversy], December 12, 1991, The New York Times. He lacks many typical camelid traits such as a hump, hooves, or tail, appearing as a muscular humanoid with a camel's head."[http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/gfj54d00/pdf?search=%22camel%20mascot%22 Contemporary heroic camel mascot]" He is often outfitted in masculine wear like tuxedos, T-shirts, and hard hats, and is typically in a "heroic pose", surrounded by women or in a bar.

With television advertisements for cigarettes outlawed in the United States before Joe Camel's debut,{{Cite magazine |last=Whiteside |first=Thomas |date=1970-12-11 |title=The Fight to Ban Smoking Ads |language=en-US |magazine=The New Yorker |url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1970/12/19/the-fight-to-ban-smoking-ads |access-date=2023-08-09 |issn=0028-792X}} the character was often seen on billboards, magazines, clothing, and other promotional displays.Paul M. Fischer, MD; Meyer P. Schwartz, MD; John W. Richards Jr, MD; Adam O. Goldstein, MD; Tina H. Rojas [http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/393811 Brand Logo Recognition by Children Aged 3 to 6 Years], December 11, 1991, Journal of the American Medical Association. Early advertisements often depicted Joe alongside the motto "Smooth character." Camel brand owner, R. J. Reynolds (RJR), also ran promotions in which customers could redeem "Camel Cash" vouchers for Joe Camel gear including clothing, watches, mugs, lighters, and shower curtains.

Some critics claimed that Joe's nose was drawn in a phallic fashion, as to suggest that smoking is a virile pursuit. This was dismissed by its designer.{{Cite web |last=Dubin |first=Zan |date=October 1, 1996 |title=Joe Camel an Adults-Only Party Animal, Creator Says |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-10-01-mn-49328-story.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221002175030/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1996-10-01-mn-49328-story.html |archive-date=October 2, 2022 |access-date=2022-10-02 |website=Los Angeles Times}}

Camel is the oldest cigarette brand in the United States.{{Cite journal |last1=Weinberger |first1=Marc G. |last2=Spotts |first2=Harlan E. |last3=Markos |first3=Ereni |date=2010 |title=Joe Camel: Post-mortem of a brand spokesperson |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.2501/S0265048710201245 |journal=International Journal of Advertising |language=en |volume=29 |issue=3 |pages=401–430 |doi=10.2501/S0265048710201245 |s2cid=167322396 |issn=0265-0487|url-access=subscription }} Camel cigarettes were first released by RJR in 1913 featuring a plain camel drawing, known as "Old Joe", on the package. The camel theme was chosen because the cigarettes used Turkish tobacco, and Americans associated the animal with exotic Asian countries. The original drawing was made by Belgian artist Fred Otto Kleesattel, who had based it on a dromedary named Old Joe in the traveling Barnum & Bailey Circus.{{Cite web |last=Bhat |first=Harish |date=2021-03-07 |title=The Curious Marketer. Where have all the camels gone? |url=https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/catalyst/marketing-on-the-back-of-a-camel/article34013007.ece |access-date=2023-08-11 |website=BusinessLine |language=en}} For the next 60 years, RJR employed a series of marketing campaigns for the Camel brand; one notable campaign launched in 1946 maintained that doctors smoked Camels more than any other cigarette.{{cite journal |last1=Gardner |first1=Martha N. |last2=Brandt |first2=Allan M. |date=February 2006 |title='The Doctors' Choice Is America's Choice' |journal=American Journal of Public Health |volume=96 |issue=2 |pages=222–232 |doi=10.2105/ajph.2005.066654 |issn=0090-0036 |pmc=1470496 |pmid=16434689}} Camel was the leading brand in the early 1950s, but had dropped to sixth place by 1985. Philip Morris had also eclipsed RJR's market share by 1985 (35.8 to 31.7%), due primarily to the success of Marlboro.

File:French_joe_camel.jpg

The character Joe Camel was created in 1974 by British artist Nicholas Price for a French advertising campaign for Camel cigarettes. The new Joe Camel character was subsequently used in advertising in other countries throughout the 1970s. This European iteration of Joe Camel was first seen in the United States in 1988 when Greensboro, North Carolina company Trone Advertising used the character in promotional materials created for the Camel brand's 75th anniversary.

The American version of Joe Camel was created later by art designer Mike Salisbury working on contract for the brand's main agency, McCann-Erickson New York. The intent of the campaign was to compete with Marlboro and its successful Marlboro Man campaign. Salisbury was contacted because of his film advertisements and retro style;{{Cite journal |last=Dooley |first=Michael |date=July 1996 |title=Defending Joe Camel, sort of |journal=Print |volume=50 |issue=4}} McCann wanted his help to depict masculine heroes in old action films, like Humphrey Bogart and Gary Cooper, smoking Camels. Early advertisements were not successful because the audience was not familiar with films of that era, even after giving the characters camel heads. It was not until they gave the camel a look inspired by James Bond and James "Sonny" Crockett that they had a positive test response. Salisbury gave Joe expressive eyebrows like Sean Connery (Bond), and hair like Don Johnson (Sonny). The campaign promoted a "hip" lifestyle, which was typical advertising practice for the industry since the 1920s.

The success of the campaign made the character a key part of Camel's advertising. The New York Times wrote that Joe Camel was successful in changing the public's perception of a brand quickly, a typically difficult feat. They also wrote that the campaign helped protect Camel from the 5-8% annual decrease that full-price cigarette brand sales were feeling at the time as cheaper brands grew. Furthermore, the campaign had continued despite RJR changing advertisement agencies from McCann, to Young & Rubicam, and finally to Mezzina/Brown Inc..

In December 1991, the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) published a study in which young children were asked to match brand logos with products. The study showed that among children age six, 91.3% matched Joe Camel with cigarettes, nearly the same amount who matched the Disney Channel logo with Mickey Mouse. The researchers concluded that RJR (at the time operating as RJR Nabisco) was just as effective at reaching children as the Disney Channel. In the same JAMA volume, another study was published comparing how well Joe Camel was recognized among high school students versus adults over age 21. The study concluded that high school students were more likely to recognize Joe Camel (97.7% vs 72.2%), understand the product being advertised (97.5% vs. 67%), and identity the Camel brand (93.6% vs 57.7%). The study concluded that the Joe Camel campaign was far more successful at advertising to children than adults. The authors also wrote that Camel's share of smokers under 18 had risen from 0.5% to 32.8% during the campaign's three years at that point.DiFranza JR, Richards JW, Paulman PM, Wolf-Gillespie N, Fletcher C, Jaffe RD, Murray D. RJR Nabisco's cartoon camel promotes camel cigarettes to children. JAMA. 1991 Dec 11;266(22):3149-53. {{PMID|1956102}}

Among those who read the JAMA papers was San Francisco-based family law attorney Janet Mangini. In 1992, she sued RJR as a private citizen, challenging the company for targeting minors with the campaign.{{Cite web |title=Supreme Court -- Cigarette Maker Loses Ruling On Joe Camel Ads {{!}} The Seattle Times |url=https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19941128&slug=1944292 |access-date=2022-09-28 |website=archive.seattletimes.com}} In her complaint, Mangini alleged that Camel sales to teenagers increased from $6 million to $476 million over the four years since the campaign began.{{Cite web |last=Warren |first=Jenifer |date=July 1, 1994 |title=State High Court Clears Way for Suit Over Joe Camel Ads : Smoking: Plaintiff claims R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. uses the popular cartoon mascot to sell cigarettes to minors. In a separate case, jurists agree to consider reinstating campaign donation limits. |url=https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-07-01-mn-10783-story.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201111171354/https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-07-01-mn-10783-story.html |archive-date=November 11, 2020 |access-date=2022-10-03 |website=Los Angeles Times}} RJR attempted to dismiss the lawsuit, saying that only the federal government could regulate its advertising, but a California state court reviewed the case, and in 1994 permitted Mangini to proceed with the lawsuit.7 Cal. 4th 1057, 1073-74 (1994). R. J. Reynolds. [http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/tid/dyf53a00 Mangini v. R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.] RJR attempted to appeal to the United States Supreme Court to have the case thrown out, but their request was turned away.{{Cite web |date=November 28, 1994 |title=R.J. Reynolds Tobacco fumes over Joe Camel court case |url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1994-11-29-9411290204-story.html |access-date=2022-10-03 |website=Chicago Tribune}}

The JAMA studies did have their critics. The Journal of Advertising published a study in September 1994 in which five university professors, who specialized in marketing and advertising, criticized the ethical standards of the studies. By evaluating the papers against academic research standards, the reviewers identified major flaws with regards to reliability and validity, and accused the DiFranza study of using pre-determined results.{{Cite journal |last=Martin |first=Claude R. |date=1994 |title=Ethical Advertising Research Standards: Three Case Studies |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4188935 |journal=Journal of Advertising |volume=23 |issue=3 |pages=17–29 |doi=10.1080/00913367.1994.10673447 |jstor=4188935 |issn=0091-3367|url-access=subscription }} The designer of Joe Camel, Mike Salisbury, said there was never any intent to attract children. He explained that RJR rejected some designs on the grounds they would appeal too much to children, and that there was a conscious effort to make him look like a 30-year old.

In response to the JAMA studies, the American Heart Association, American Lung Association, and American Cancer Society wrote a joint letter in 1991 to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asking them to force RJR to end the Joe Camel campaign.{{Cite news |last=Brown |first=David |date=1991-12-11 |title=OLD JOE AND MICKEY NOSE TO NOSE |language=en-US |newspaper=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1991/12/11/old-joe-and-mickey-nose-to-nose/6debafe5-dce6-4fca-8a6b-714b44207255/ |access-date=2022-10-02 |issn=0190-8286}} The FTC investigated the case for two years,{{Cite journal |date=May 10, 1993 |title=FTC to decide whether to sue RJR Tobacco for Old Joe ad |journal=Marketing News |volume=27 |issue=10 |pages=6}} but in 1994 decided not to act after three of five commissioners could not find sufficient evidence that RJR violated federal law.{{Cite journal |last=Preston |first=Ivan L. |date=1995 |title=Unfairness Developments in FTC Advertising Cases |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/30000139 |journal=Journal of Public Policy & Marketing |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=318–321 |doi=10.1177/074391569501400213 |jstor=30000139 |s2cid=158600816 |issn=0743-9156|url-access=subscription }}{{Cite journal |last=Yang |first=Catherine |date=February 17, 1997 |title=BUSTING JOE CAMEL'S HUMP |journal=BusinessWeek |issue=3514 |pages=6}} After President Bill Clinton appointed new FTC chairman, Robert Pitofsky, and member Christine Varney,{{Cite journal |last=Teinowitz, Ira |first=Ira |date=March 31, 1997 |title=Joe Camel in FTC's sights again. |journal=Advertising Age |volume=68 |issue=13}} the FTC announced in February 1997 they would re-examine the case.

On May 28, 1997, the FTC concluded that the Joe Camel campaign was targeted to youth and requested a court order to end the campaign.{{Cite news |date=May 29, 1997 |title=FTC seeks to ban Joe Camel in ads |newspaper=Washington Post |volume=120 |issue=175 |pages=}}{{Cite journal |date=May 29, 1997 |title=Joe Camel ads illegally target kids, FTC says. |journal=Wall Street Journal |volume=229 |issue=104}} In the complaint, the FTC alleged that RJR was exploring ways to appeal to younger smokers and "first usual brand" smokers as early as 1984. They concluded that the health injuries to children from smoking were not "reasonably avoidable" given children's inability to understand the consequences of smoking. They concluded that the campaign violated federal law as an "unfair practice" under Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, which prohibits ‘‘unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce.’’{{Cite web |date=1997-05-28 |title=Joe Camel Advertising Campaign Violates Federal Law, FTC Says |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/1997/05/joe-camel-advertising-campaign-violates-federal-law-ftc-says |access-date=2022-10-02 |website=Federal Trade Commission |language=en}}

By March 1997, Joe Camel was already absent from Camel advertisements as a temporary measure by RJR while federal litigation was in progress.{{Cite journal |date=March 17, 1997 |title=Where's Joe? |journal=Advertising Age |volume=68 |issue=11 |pages=24}} RJR officially ended the Joe Camel campaign on July 10, 1997.{{Cite news |last=Elliott |first=Stuart |date=1997-07-11 |title=Joe Camel, a Giant in Tobacco Marketing, Is Dead at 23 |language=en-US |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/11/business/joe-camel-a-giant-in-tobacco-marketing-is-dead-at-23.html |access-date=2022-09-28 |issn=0362-4331 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181118083650/https://www.nytimes.com/1997/07/11/business/joe-camel-a-giant-in-tobacco-marketing-is-dead-at-23.html |archive-date=November 18, 2018}} The move came just weeks after the FTC complaint in May, and shortly after RJR and other tobacco companies agreed to pay a $368.5 billion settlement to states seeking to recover costs due to tobacco-related illnesses.{{cite book |last1=Cross |first1=Mary |url=https://archive.org/details/centuryofamerica00cros/page/204/ |title=A Century of American Icons: 100 Products and Slogans from the 20th-Century Consumer Culture |date=2002 |publisher=Greenwood Press |isbn=978-0313314810 |pages=204–206 |access-date=4 September 2020}} Additionally, the tobacco industry and 40 state attorney generals had just settled on a ban on the use of cartoon figures in cigarette ads, though the settlement had yet to be ratified by Congress or seen support from President Clinton.

Joe Camel was phased out of point-of-purchase advertising, followed soon by billboards and print ads. The campaign closure increased interest in Joe Camel memorabilia.{{Cite journal |last1=Burger |first1=Katrina |last2=Munk |first2=Nina |date=August 11, 1997 |title=Joe cashes in |journal=Forbes |volume=160 |issue=3 |pages=39}} The campaign was replaced with the ''What you're looking for" campaign which used the original plain camel from the pack design. In September, RJR agreed to pay $10 million to San Francisco and the other California cities and counties who intervened in the Mangini litigation. The money was earmarked primarily to fund anti-smoking efforts targeted at youth.{{Cite web |last=Lee |first=Jean H. |date=September 9, 1997 |title=R.J. Reynolds agrees to pay $10 million in Joe Camel lawsuit |url=https://apnews.com/article/ce9e3e9c7595bae5034193112a75bb7e |access-date=2022-10-03 |website=AP News |language=en}}

The Joe Camel campaign has been suspected of inspiring similar ad campaigns. In late 1991, Brown & Williamson ran marketing tests for a revival of their penguin mascot, Willie, for their Kool cigarette brand. The character had originally appeared in Kool advertisements from 1933 to 1960. The New York Times noted that the campaign was likely influenced by Joe Camel. Anti-smoking groups criticized the test campaign. Also, anti-drinking groups accused Anheuser-Busch of similar practices in 2004 for their "Bud-weis-er" frogs, and groups fighting childhood obesity criticized Ronald McDonald and other characters for promoting unhealthy foods. Litigation proceedings used the precedence of the Joe Camel to further their case. In 1996, Adbusters magazine published a subvertisement called "Joe Chemo", featuring a bedridden and dying Joe Camel.{{Cite web |last=Walker |first=Rob |date=January 29, 2006 |title=Tribute Brand |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/magazine/tribute-brand.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161022051654/https://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/29/magazine/tribute-brand.html |archive-date=2016-10-22 |website=The New York Times}}{{Cite news |last=Sommer |first=J. |date=December 22, 2012 |title=The War Against Too Much of Everything |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/23/business/adbusters-war-against-too-much-of-everything.html}} The parody was developed in collaboration with psychology professor Scott Plous, who initially proposed the concept.{{Cite web |date=2007 |title=Meet a professor of the year |url=https://www.apa.org/gradpsych/features/2007/plous |website=GradPSYCH Magazine |publisher=American Psychological Association}} The character was shared in the advertisement trade magazine Adweek.{{Cite magazine |last=Edwards |first=J. |date=August 18, 1997 |title=Notes from the underground |magazine=Adweek |pages=23–26}}

The success and effect of the Joe Camel campaign has been assessed by academics in retrospect. A paper in the International Journal of Advertising in 2010 found that campaign brought consumer attention to the brand and may have helped in the short term, but that the eventual negative publicity may have reinforced negative attitudes towards smoking. They noted that Joe Camel campaign was not as successful as the Marlboro Man, and Newport had no comparable mascot or spokesperson, yet achieved a similar market share and as young a demographic as Camel.

{{Reflist}}

{{Portal|1980s|1990s}}

• [https://tobacco.stanford.edu/cigarettes/cartoons/joe-camel-cartoons/ Joe Camel cartoon collection at the Stanford Research into the Impact of Tobacco Advertising (SRITA)]
• [http://toonopedia.com/joecamel.htm Joe Camel] at Don Markstein's Toonopedia. [https://archive.today/20240527235237/https://www.webcitation.org/6l6xhjOUq?url=http://toonopedia.com/joecamel.htm Archived] from the original on October 8, 2016.
• [https://archive.today/20130205182833/http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/joe-camel-ads A gallery of Joe Camel advertisements.]
• [http://www.joechemo.org/ Joe Chemo], an anti-smoking website based on an Adbusters character
• [https://web.archive.org/web/20070706083053/http://legacy.library.ucsf.edu/doc_research_mangini.jsp Internal documents produced in the Mangini vs. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company trial]

{{Authority control}}

{{DEFAULTSORT:Camel, Joe}}

Category:Tobacco advertising

Category:Male characters in advertising

Category:Fictional tobacco addicts

Category:Camel mascots

Category:Mascots introduced in 1974

Category:1997 disestablishments in the United States

Category:R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Category:American mascots

Category:Cartoon mascots

Category:Cartoon controversies

Category:Advertising and marketing controversies

Category:Fictional camelids