The reading passage explores the issue of the positive affects from smoking prevention campaigns, and several reasons are offered in support of the argument. However, the lecture casts doubt on it and contradicts to the ideas in the reading passage with the following reasons. First of all, the reading passage claims that the surveys shows people who have seen the smoking prevention ads are less likely to smoke. Nonetheless, the lecture argues that the time of the survey is too close to the campaigns. That is to say, after several months, the statistics may change. Therefore, the results of the survey may not be reliable. In the second place, even though the reading passage suggests that the program of smoking prevention campaigns advertise the non-smoking idea successfully, the lecture argues that people's awareness doesn't promise the long term impact. The lecture gives out a concrete proof that 3 months after the campaign, the numbers of the people's awareness drop dramatically. Obviously, the lecture point out that the institution should take honest look on all figure. In conclusion, it is obvious that the stances of the reading passage and the lecture are contradictory to each other. Although the reading passage is somewhat convincing, the lecture provides more evidences that indicates the truth.