In USA Today, Rita Rubin reports on the new action that FDA will be tackling in “FDA proposes graphic cigarette warnings” This report includes a video published from the Associated Press and has embedded links to the proposed images of the new warning labels. The reporter also states that Canada has already taken a step in this direction in 2000, when they placed graphics and a warning label on cigarette boxes. The reporter does not show a clear biased opinion when reporting on this issue however, Rubin does include supporting evidence that the new regulation of graphic warning labels could be a good thing.

The interesting thing I’ve noticed is that these news reports are categorized under the “Money” topics.

In The New York Times, Gardiner Harris writes in “F.D.A. Unveils Proposed Graphic Warning Labels for Cigarette Packs” a more of an in-dept story. It starts with the purpose of why the F.D.A might regulate a new warning label and then provides scary statistics of children to young adults who are regular smokers. It also provides the estimated number of deaths due to tobacco related health problems. The reporter also takes into consideration the business owners who are inclined to object to the warning labels which can cause a decrease in profits.

Rob Kasper, reporter from The Baltimore Sun, expresses his opinion in his report “FDA goes for gruesome on proposed tobacco warnings.” He is skeptical of the drastic measures that the FDA considering in changing the warning labels on cigarette packets. He questions whether or not this is really going to solve the smoking problems we have in the United States. Kasper talks about whether or not if this warning label is a scare tactic/advertisement in hopes to reduce smoking. Overall, the reporter is cynical and not entirely sold on the label warnings.