These brands may have accidentally or knowingly decorated their bottles with logos designed in a way that could be considered child appealing or perhaps accused of Intellectual Property Theft.

Out of professional courtesy and maintaining balance by distancing biased journalism no names shall be listed as examples. If you’re reading this, I’m grateful, impressed and hopeful there are not as many apathetic people as I assumed there were. However, if you’re seriously reading closely and you are a vaper, you already know some, so no examples are necessary.

Agreement in Advocacy

Regardless, If the logos, labels and packaging in any way, shape or form resemble something that can easily be attributed to appealing to children, then vape advocates are all typically in agreement.

They agree that it is imperative to make sure that the company is notified that the Vaping community is displeased and have come to a conclusion for them to remove the designs that could be associated with marketing irresponsibly to those who are under age or those whose brands are being noticeably replicated as some eliquid brands so clearly are doing.

Advocates claim, “It’s nothing directly personal.” Nothing could be more true. This argument is not at all about singling out any one brand or any one individual. It’s about preserving an industry.

How exactly is this all about preserving an industry? The explanation is quite simple. What is the opposition’s only argument? There argument is that these brands are appealing to children. So, if your brand seems appealing to children, this is nothing but more ammunition for the opposing forces to destroy the vape industry.

No vaper wants this to occur. So, if the labels are rebranded, then there is no longer an argument for the opposition to latch onto. It’s their last and only point they can succeed in making. Why wouldn’t the industry prefer to silence these opposing arguments?

Even though, for the brand owners, I assume it certainly feels like an attack. Either way, advocates are consumers, the vape Industry is a consumer-based solution and the brands are often defined by consumer demand and those who make-up a Vaping brand’s ownership, typically consumes vapor products – a unique modern emerging industrial trend

Perhaps, brands should not interpret anything from an interior group as a personal matter, especially since it’s truly affecting the entire global industry. Of course many sympathizers and brand owners would argue that during these times of such polarization from the outside anti-vapor establishment, it is crucial now more than ever for everyone within the Vape industry, advocates and industrial professionals, alike, should focus more so on unity rather than finger-pointing.

However, this is a very defensive response fueled by emotion, actually advocates making such a suggestion of rebranding might be more unifying than others initially think.

In hindsight when all said and done it’s more of a warning to inform these brands that the authorities and the anti-vapor fanatics will target them use them as examples in congressional hearings local municipal Town Hall meetings about how they’re targeting children and even if you were logo was never designed with that intention it could be your logo they use is an example. How would this make you feel?

Maybe, just maybe, when you think of advocates from within the industry you operate  in, think of how every advocate is in favor of the preservation of the industry and your business.

It is understandable if the brand feels defensive threatened or insulted, but this is an adult industry so it is likely better to grow-up and act like adults and perhaps discuss solutions before there is an internal storm of epic proportions.

The overall profit of this industry has nearly tripled. What other industry has ever progressed in such a way during the information age, or more appropriately the misinformation era.

This Industry faces threats from the outside observers, then advocacy efforts are more like a favor. Why is this a favor? Because this whole “appealing to children” categorization is the last card that the anti-vape establishment has to play — and they will play it to the best tune they know, taking away more of what we have all grown to love.

Hence, the FDA flavor ban. Do you think it will stop there?

The attacks these anti-vapor fanatics use to damage the existence of our favorite flavors are not the key component to the major problem in hindsight. Vapers know that when it comes to protecting our children, eliquid flavors should be the least of our worries.

Vapers can comprehend that the effectiveness of these flavors allows our children to grow in a society where cigarettes are much less prevalent and so we feel like we are setting a far better example of how to realistically guarantee that all the children remain safe and healthy by not promoting cigarettes.

The Whole Point

Therefore, what matters most is what they can see, not what they like to eat. We’ve all made claims about how we love candy, desserts, and sweets all the same, and we do. Who doesn’t?

Over the years, many businesses continue to brand their adult consumer products in such a way without truly seeing the unfortunate ammunition they are providing for the anti-vape fanatics to use against the industry is problematic.

This is the whole point.

This is not about attacking the industry from within, it is about preventing further attacks from the outside. Who would you honestly rather deal with? Advocates for the vape industry or perhaps the anti-vape establishment?

Altogether, it’s safe to say no one in the vape industry would prefer working with the anti-vapor establishment as it has become clear they’re only motive and goal is to destroy this harm reduction tool. Where the only function vaping has ever meant to serve is to HELP people quit smoking — that’s it. So, it is essential to keep it alive.

Previous articleHealth Canada Orders Tobacco Shop to Remove IQOS Signs
Next articleVape Advocates Must Reassess Priorities
Master’s Degree in Sociology. I love anything and everything vape-related. All articles express my own opinion and do not necessarily reflect the Editor's view.