It should come as no surprise to the reader that Cancer Research UK (CRUK) isn’t at the top of my Christmas card list. However, I am considering reviewing that decision because, of late, they have become an excellent source of light merriment, publishing a seemingly endless supply of tanning bed “research studies”.
But it’s not just the content of the “research studies” (and I have genuinely lost count of how many they have published so far this year), that has raised a wry smile. No, the merriment factor has much more to do with the humour and spirited sarcasm contained within the subsequent comments posted by Joe Public when the stories are published online.
Ordinarily, I may have viewed these studies as attacks on our industry and for all intents and purposes, they are meant to be exactly that. Yet, it seems clear to me that Joe Public is becoming increasingly fatigued with the incessant pointing of fingers at the tanning bed industry and the people who use them.
Of course, there’s a smattering of anti-tanning supporters who appear to have more time on their hands than the average hardworking individual, frittering it away posting predictable comments in support of all things anti-tanning. Thankfully, on many fronts, they are in the minority.
The latest “research study” tried to pitch statistical findings that claimed tanning bed users were more unhappy with their looks than those who didn’t use tanning beds. So, where shall I start with that one? Even better, take a look at some of the posts by Joe Public:
“People are going to tanning salons because they’re unhappy with their appearance. Well, yes, I expect so, else they wouldn’t be trying to change their looks by tanning themselves.”
“Cancer Research has just discovered that people who eat McDonalds are more likely to crave fast food. Another research had shown that Popes are more likely to be Catholic, and bears are more likely to defecate in the woods.”
“Almost half of young adults who have used a sunbed are unhappy with their looks, according to new research. I would say more than half of young adults are unhappy with their looks, but that has nothing to do with them using a sunbed or not!”
“Looks like a story being twisted to suit a headline, i.e. somewhere between 40-50% of all young adults are unhappy with their appearance – presumably most just put up with it, while those who use sunbeds are trying to change it.”
Backlash? I would say so. It would seem that the PR department is scraping the barrel for new angles on attacking tanning beds. Are these campaigns a good use of CRUK’s funds? I would say not. Has their attack run out of steam? I would very much doubt that. However, what is not in doubt is the fact that tanning salon operators who have invested in improving their professionalism are busy, busy, busy.
However, whilst I can adopt a more conciliatory view on the above, I take great exception to the cheap shots of commercial organisations whose actions demonstrate jumping on a PR bandwagon they know nothing about. Take a look at an extract from a study undertaken by an online budget holiday company:
“When asked ‘Have you ever used a tanning bed to achieve a ‘base tan’ before going on a hot holiday abroad in the past?’ 19%, almost a fifth, of those taking part said ‘yes’. That’s scary stuff considering how dangerous tanning beds have been proven to be! What’s worse is that the women using tanning beds to build a base tan before holidays confessed to spending as many as 30 minutes baking themselves on the beds before going away!”
I wonder how much time the customers of this ‘holidays in the sun’ company actually spend on the beaches or by the pools during the holidays they sell – I guarantee it would be significantly more than the equivalent of 30 minutes on a tanning bed. But then again, maybe not. Somewhat bizarrely, quoting on his company’s study, the co-founder said, “Holidays shouldn’t be about getting a suntan.” Before criticising others, perhaps a study to understand their own industry would be in order!
