Philip Morris, Yes! Campaign For Tobacco-Free Kids, No!

Some years ago Mother Theresa was criticized for having accepted money from a reputed mafia kingpin. The money was given to help the indigent anywhere in the world. Her response to the criticism: what she did with the money is what would please God, not who gave it to her.

The idea that money corrupts and big money corrupts even more is true when the standards of an organization or individual are so low that corruption is allowed to occur. It is not true, however, when the ethical standards of an organization are high. So when the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids criticizes the National 4-H Council for accepting a $4.3 million grant from Philip Morris to combat youth smoking, the question that must be asked is: can 4-H use this money for good or will it be corrupted?

Why is it that the attorneys general for 46 states can reach a $206 billion settlement with the tobacco companies and no one asks whether those dollars will be corrupting to state governments?

If the logic raised by Tobacco-Free Kids holds, one should question the wisdom of using any tobacco money by states or anyone else for any tobacco cessation or anti-smoking campaigns, especially for the young. Yet no one does, not even Tobacco-Free Kids. Why is that? Because we have confidence that those in government who receive the funds will not be corrupted, and that their campaigns will truly helps kids.

Why shouldn't this be true for private organizations? Don't they have the same (or higher) level of integrity as government? Can't they bring in experts to develop youth anti-smoking campaigns? Why should they be singled out as unworthy of working in the interest of kids with dollars from tobacco companies?

Consider what happened when the Institute for Youth Development (IYD) held a dinner last year to benefit young people, particularly kids from disadvantaged communities. It is our corporate philosophy that companies which produce products that are marketed to kids or can be abused by kids have an added responsibility to America's youth. We solicited gifts from many companies, including tobacco companies and alcohol beverage producers. A few companies gave $10,000 each, prompting an attack on IYD from the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.

The campaign went after us without any effort to discern our values, philosophy or integrity. Matthew Myers, executive vice president of the campaign, later apologized to me for the attack, saying his group had assumed we were a front for tobacco companies. This assumption was irresponsible. We need to be careful when we disparage others' motivations or actions.

Isn't it time we learn to work together for the best interest of kids? I have no doubt that the Philip Morris grant to the National 4-H Council will be put to good use and will ultimately result in fewer kids smoking. Isn't that what Tobacco-Free Kids wants?

While putting kids first, we need to be vigilant in how all organizations deal with issues concerning youth. Constructive criticism can be helpful. One could be critical, in fact, of Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids advertisements that show young people smoking. Some think this is an exploitative and harmful use of the $70 million that Tobacco-Free Kids has received from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.

The question remains: can we learn to work together? Tobacco-Free Kids can undoubtedly offer the National 4-H Council substantial expertise. Rather than engaging in activities that divide us, let's find what will unite us in our efforts to protect kids from harm. The National 4-H Council has demonstrated in the past that it will go the extra mile to help young people and to work cooperatively with others in the process. The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids should exhibit the same ethic in response to limiting harm to young people.

Smith, Shepherd. "Philip Morris, Yes! Campaign For Tobacco-Free Kids, No!." Youth Today, May 1999, p. 58.

©2000 Youth Today. Reprinted with permission from Youth Today. All rights reserved.