What responsibility does the cannabis industry have to keep their marketing away from children?
Partnership at Drugfree.com, formerly Partnership for a Drug-Free America, has decided against running ads critical of cannabis legalization in Colorado and Washington, but they will be staging an educational PR campaign focused on how legalization could affect minors.
Does free speech mean that cannabis sellers should be able to advertise wherever they want? Marketing restrictions are in place in both Washington and Colorado, but CEO of the Partnership Steve Pasierb has said he believes those restrictions will ultimately fall apart in court. It seems natural that cannabis marketing could go the way of liquor and cigarettes but it has been well argued that those restrictions don’t go far enough. Will it take a lawsuit settlement to restrict cannabis marketing for good?
http://adage.com/article/news/anti-drug-ad-group-fighting-legalized-pot/292263/
I suspect that bans on advertising clearly targeted at minors would be constitutional. (For instance, a ban on advertising on children's television shows.
But I suspect bans on advertising that is arguably directed at minors would be constitutionally infirm. (For instance, Camel cigarettes voluntarily agreed as part of a settlement to drop "Joe Camel". But I don't think the government could have banned him.)
"Does free speech mean that cannabis sellers should be able to advertise wherever they want?"
No. Next question?