Eraserheads Should Disclose Concert Sponsor?!?!

Note: All references to the names of tobacco companies and their brands have been replaced with ******.
In earlier posts and in the comments section of those posts, I’ve outlined my position on the Eraserheads reunion concert scheduled on Aug. 30. I have said countless times that I have no problem with whatever product or company sponsoring the Eheads’ concert, as long as the sponsorship does not deceive people and does not violate the law and its intent.

In this case, however, the buzz has been that ****** is sponsoring the concert and that one can only get a ticket by registering on the so-called “red list” at ****** .

The only problem, of course, is that ****** is not saying it is behind the concert and even the Eraserheads are mum about it. Which is kind of weird — a sponsor of a multimillion-peso event refusing to divulge that it is behind the event?

The reason, of course, is that if ******, or any of the Eheads, divulged that the tobacco company is the sponsor, ******, which makes ******, could run afoul of the law.

Section 26 of Republic Act 9211 (Tobacco Regulation Act) states the following:

    Ban on Sponsorships. - Beginning 1 July 2008, cigarette and tobacco companies are hereby prohibited from sponsoring any sport, concert, cultural art or event, as well as individual and team athletes, artists, or performers where such sponsorship shall require or involve the advertisement or promotion of any cigarette or tobacco company, tobacco product or tobacco use, name, logo or trademarks and other words, symbols, designs, colors or other depictions commonly associated with or likely to identify a tobacco product; Provided further, That no manufacturer may register a tobacco brand name as a company name after the passage of this Act

This section seems pretty clear and straightforward. It would seem that the mere mention of ******’s or ******’s name in relation to the reunion concert would constitute an “advertisement” of the company and its products and could, therefore, be illegal.

So what, you may ask, would ****** get out of the concert if it doesn’t even what its name associated with the event? Well, actually, if it is true that the only way to get a ticket to the concert is to register on marlboro.ph, then that might constitute promotion.

Also, the registration at ****** requires that you give your exact address, your email, your contact numbers, among others. ****** can use the information on this database in its direct marketing campaign, which it has been doing in other countries ever since countries banned advertisements and promotions in the mass media.

My beef against the Eraserheads, as I have repeatedly pointed out in the comments section, is that, if indeed ****** is behind the concert, then the group is party to a deception. Not only that, they will be party to a scheme to promote the use of tobacco and in luring younger people to smoke in order to replenish smokers who’ve since died or quit. According to the government, more than 20,000 Filipinos die each year of tobacco-related illnesses.

The organizers of the reunion concert know that the Eraserheads, despite the fact that they’ve disbanded, remain extremely popular (they’re not called the “Filipino Beatles” for nothing), especially among the young. The demographics of the Eraserheads’ audience fits perfectly with the demographics that tobacco companies are targeting in peddling their deadly product. And this market of mostly young people are Internet savvy, which is why tobacco companies are increasingly using the Internet to lure more smokers. Which is why you can only get a concert ticket through the Internet.
I, therefore, dare the Eraserheads: name your sponsors. You owe the public and your fans at least that. If you can’t, and there’s no logical or reasonable reason why you can’t, that would be irrefutable proof of your complicity in this deception. And there goes your legacy.

By Carlos H. Conde

Comment!!?!?!

Mukang mapupuryada pa ata tong concert na ito