Taking into account everyone who would get lung cancer no matter what, some 80% of cases would never have happened without active or passive smoking. It's stupid to suggest there is no connection between smoking and this disease. Furthermore, this ad misses the point. People don't feel sorry for smokers or ex-smokers with lung cancer for the same reason they don't feel sorry for drunk drivers who put themselves instead of someone else into a wheelchair or an urn for a change. I know too much about tobacco marketing tactics to say that smokers deserve lung cancer or dance on their death beds. However, I also wouldn't give money to research a cure or even much thought to the plight of anyone who has caused as much significant and preventable suffering to others as 99.99% of smokers have. On the other hand, passive smokers and those with any illness unrelated to smoking have my full sympathy. A better advertising idea might be to point out that 15% of lung cancer patients didn't get it in a manner that needlessly harmed others.

I didn't know what a hipster was. I once heard Elaine call Kramer a Hipster Dufas.

Well they did exactly what they set out to do. Get attention. There's nowhere on this ad from the picture provided that gives even a hint that it's about lung cancer. They relied on media coverage and public outrage in order to educate on their campaign. While I think it's a great cause because people develop lung cancer from a number of different factors than just smoking, I think the ad is disgusting. What if it pictured a mother holding her child and it said "Single moms deserve to die" or a picture of a soldier in full gear and said "Soldiers deserve to die" a lovely family photo of everyone in their Sunday best “Mormons deserve to die”? Certainly they’re at risk just as everyone else. They picked hipsters because they're an easy or safe target because it’s the cool thing to pick on hipsters right now (no I'm not a hipster). However I see no difference in singling out one group or another as they did. I think there would have been a better way to get their message across than a shock campaign designed only toward the negative reaction of people. But hey, while most will think it’s in poor taste it’s still a success because it got people talking about it. I personally hate these types of ad campaigns so this is the only attention they’ll receive from me. Wonder if it’s the same agency that put together the “Bomb Iraq” billboards?