Beagle-Smoking Issues

The sensitivity of pharmaceutical industries to the perception that they are involved in objectionable activities.

Writing for The Guardian, Patrick Barkham commented on the potential P.R. problem facing the makers of Lucozade in the wake of headlines announcing the conviction of “The Lucozade Bombers” – the three men found guiltyof plotting to blow up seven airplanes using liquid bombs concealed inside soft drink bottles:

The spokeswoman for Lucozade at parent company GlaxoSmithKlinedid not answer her phone yesterday and P.R. guru Mark Borkowskipredicted they would be in crisis meetings.

Smaller brands might secretly welcome the association or at least make an irreverent joke about it, reckons Borkowski. “You can see ‘Mock The Week’ [a satirical television show in the U.K.] having great fun with it but it’s too uncomfortable for the parent company. The problem is these brands are owned by enormous companies who are incredibly nervous because of beagle-smoking issues.”*

Eh? Beagle smoking, Borkowski explains, is the perception that pharmaceutical behemoths are engaged in research that offends animal lovers. This puts “pharma P.R.” on a defensive footing. “Media have a morbid curiosity about kicking them,” he says.

Barkham noted that the would-be bombers also planned to use Oasis bottles, but suggested this has been less reported because “The Oasis Bombers” simply wasn’t as zany a headline.

(* In 1970, two scientists reported the findings of a tobacco study in which 86 beagles were taught to inhale cigarette smoke. 12 of the animals developed cancer. According to the Times: “It was said to be the first instance of tumors produced in large animals exposed to cigarette smoke.”)