Culture Council: Debunking Cannabis Myths: 3 Ways To Change the Narrative

May 27, 2025

Storytelling changes the world.

This is especially true for cannabis. The narrative around this cash crop is so impactful, as we’ve witnessed the opposite end of that coin — damaging effects of the War on Drugs over the last century. As a consequence of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, cannabis was removed from the U.S. Pharmacopeia in 1942 and prohibited. Anti-weed propaganda called “Reefer Madness” has been potent ever since.

The truth about cannabis was suppressed by fear-mongering propaganda which exaggerated its negative claims. These types of media, often posters and articles, “demonized” the plant, stoking fear by publishing drug busts and punitive news for low-level weed offenders. They also often ran with surveys that were alleged to show the harms of cannabis without offering balanced reporting on the peer-reviewed studies that show the health benefits of cannabis.

For most of the last century, scientists’ hands were tied. They couldn’t debunk the myths around the plant because there was a ban on studying weed in the U.S. since 1970 (with a few exceptions, including ditch weed grown by the DEA themselves). Because of the plant’s criminalization, there was a freeze on studies looking at whether cannabis was beneficial or harmful for decades.

Why? Money. A targeted anti-cannabis effort began with Harry Anslinger and William Randolph Hearst (yep, that Hearst). The newspaper mogul had a massive stake in the paper industry, which was industrial hemp’s direct competitor. Hemp and cannabis (both are the same plant — cannabis sativa L.) were not only used in the pharmacopeia as a reasonable pain treatment of the time, but also used industrially, for paper, cloth and more. Hearst needed to change the narrative to show the harms of cannabis, pushing its prohibition so he could make money on paper.

A bias against cannabis still exists today. While the roots of weed prohibition have many unfortunate layers, storytelling played a huge role in negative public opinion around the plant. Some publications continue to feed into the modern version of “Reefer Madness,” what I call Reefer Madness 2.0. One article from a respected legacy publication just last year centered on how to get your neighbor evicted for smelling like weed. Not only is this type of storytelling cruel and inhumane (what if they are a medical patient, or a child with epilepsy?), most importantly, it’s not based on science.