Light cigs, heavy profits

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Getting the tobacco industry to speak truthfully about the dangers of its products is normally like convincing Lex Luthor to put warning labels on kryptonite. So it’s pretty ironic that British American Tobacco has been conducting a massive campaign to convince the Indonesian government to require all cigarette makers to list tar and nicotine levels on every pack, as the CHRISTIAN SCIENCE MONITOR reports.

An attack of conscience? Nope, more like a marketing strategy. Because of loose regulations and a lack of public education about the health risks of tobacco, Indonesians have developed a taste for high tar cigarettes — high enough to make Lucky Strikes taste like Virginia Slims. BAT, the world’s second-largest tobacco company, is pitching its product as the “healthier” alternative to locally produced coffin nails. “It may be ironic, but this is just business,” says one tobacco analyst.

Last year, the Indonesian government signed a law limiting nicotine and tar levels in cigarettes, giving BAT a huge advantage over local manufacturers. But now the government, under pressure from BAT’s competitors, is considering rewriting the law. BAT’s opponents say the implication that “lower tar = less health risk” has never been proven.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend