The various debates about smoking have started me thinking about something similar. I don't know about you, but I absolutely hate opening up a newspaper or magazine or junk mail and being assaulted by an advertisement for perfume or some other scented item which includes a sample. These things make me feel very, very sick. I can't even put them in the garbage can or the recycle bin; I have to let them sit outside until the scent dies away enough to allow me to handle the thing. It's bad enough when people choose to wear various scents in public; I can usually avoid them. However, with advertisements, it's hard to avoid unless I choose not to read my newspaper, or read a magazine I wanted to look at, or let my mail sit in my mailbox forever.

To be debated: Should there be some sort of restriction on scented advertisements as unsolicited health hazards? Or is this situation too trivial to require any such action?

Its not too trivial, its simply that the solution you propose is the wrong one. Frankly, there's no reason whatsoever for involving the government in a voluntary transaction between you and the publisher simply because you're annoyed with something the publisher is doing.

I know my take sounds kinda cold, but that's what the issue comes down to. Write the publisher. Get all your friends to write the publishers as well. Write the ADVERTISERS also, not just the one's who put the scents in, but also the other advertisers, and let them know that you'll no longer be exposed to the ads that they're paying good money for because the publication is too stinky for you.

Finally, realize that most fashion magazines and their near relatives will probably never be scent free, simply because the vast majority of people who buy those magazines also use scents, which means the advertisers will continue to target them.

FWIW, I detest the cardstock inserts that are bound into the magazines! Do we need a law? naahhh What about a magazine where the first 20 pages are nothing but advertisments? Rolling Stone, just checked it out at the newstand and was appalled by the frontloading of the ads! A guy could go postal trying to find the Table of Contents!

It's not too trivial to be more than annoyed at perfume and cologne ads that quite literally choke up the pages of magazines.

Typically, I flip through the magazine and tear out the perfumed ads and subscription cards before I can sit down and actually read it.

Bikerdad is right that the way to shake 'em up is to let the advertisers know that you don't like their scented ads and you won't be buying their product and you're cancelling your subscription to any magazine that carries it.

These scented ads remind me of walking past the perfume counter in a department store and some eager young saleslady wants to spritz you with some overpriced spray, splash or cologne. There, you have the opportunity to say, "No thanks." You're not given that option when you turn the page in a magazine and start gagging.

Now what can we do about those darn America Online discs stuck in the middle of tech magazines?

Stick 'em to the ceiling, make mobiles for babies, use 'em as coasters, sharpen em up and practice your "odd jobs", etc.

Skeet shooting!

Could we please try and get back to having a constructive debate?

I don't see how writing to the advertisers would work - if the mere scent of the inserts is enough to make you queasy, there is little chance that you would ever buy the perfume itself, as this would be just as likely to make you nauseous. So, you aren't the target market the advertiser is trying to get at anyway. Why would they care whether you threaten to remove custom from them that is worth precisely zero anyway?

Market forces might be more sensibly applied by writing to the offending publications and refusing to buy them in the future. You can sniff them at the newsstand to make a decision easily enough, but news stand sales are less than 40% of the circulation of most US magazines (compared to over 70% for UK consumer magazines). If you subscribe, you can never tell until it turns up in your mailbox, by which time it's too late anyway - the publishers have already got your money.

So I'm afraid this leaves the government regulation route. This might have some value anyway, since so many people shake out all of the loose inserts. I know that the British government has considered regulating the amount of these (I used to work in the magazine industry here) and many newsstand retailers provide bins so you can remove them at the point of sale.

Perhaps a class action law suit? Sure, you can complain and get your friends to join in, but if you really want to make advertising agencies squirm, hit their pocketbooks.

I suppose this will bring a lot of criticism about misusing the legal system. But let's face it, annoying people is what advertising is all about. When there's a strong reaction like Victoria's, there might be a bona fide basis for a law suit.

On fall-out subscription cards: Mail them back blank. Alternatively, they make good bookmarks.

I'm annoyed by changes in sound levels when TV ads come on. That could be solved through electronics or as we do, mute buttons. Guess that is electronics, but I'm thinking a loop-back thing with a microphone. Keep decible levels constant and I might watch your commercials. Yell at me and I hit mute.

Some government actions do help, such as controlling the size of signage in resort areas to retain views.

AOL discs go in the trash, automatically. Sometimes I save the jewel case if there is one.

I don't disparage the right of businesses to advertise. It is just that some are socially responsible and others are not. I use low-key stuff myself for drumming up business, but then writing for a living is a lot different than pushing perfume.

Speaking of which, what is that gosh aweful stuff some women wear? Smells like spoiled meatloaf. I'm sure it has some celeb's name associated. And finally, I feel sorry for women who are assaulted near perfume counters with uninvited sprits. You should be able to sprit right back with skunk musk.

Maybe not. Could start a fad.