Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin: destroying tobacco control activism from the inside
Open accessAbstract
Mongoven, Biscoe & Duchin, a specialist firm based in Washington DC, has honed a niche as expert intelligence gatherers, helping tobacco companies such as Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds to damage tobacco control efforts, including the WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The companies were specifically interested in weakening the FCA by engaging member organisations individually at the local level.
“The companies were specifically interested in weakening the FCA by engaging member organisations individually at the local level47, 49, 50(Carter 2002).”
From Civil society and the negotiation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2009) · cites this paper as Carter 2002
The Conclusion (page not available) says MBD sought to undermine the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and recommended involving countries and NGOs, with some attention to regions. It does not say the companies targeted the FCA by engaging its member organisations individually at the local level. (LLM, conf=0.81)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredPhilip Morris and RJ Reynolds used a Washington, DC-based public relations firm to gather intelligence and provide strategic advice concerning the activities of tobacco control NGOs during the negotiation.
“For instance, Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds used a Washington, DC-based public relations firm to gather intelligence and provide strategic advice concerning the activities of tobacco control NGOs during the negotiation (Carter 2002).”
From Civil society and the negotiation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (2009) · cites this paper as Carter 2002
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Stauber J, Rampton S. Toxic sludge is good for you! Lies, damn lies and the public relations industry. Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press; 1995.
- Philip Morris technical synergy symposium on the environment preliminary program draft agenda. 19930200. Philip Morris. Access Date: 20020129. Bates No.: 2046597255/7256.URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2046597255_7256.PDF.
- Bialous S, Yach D. Whose standard is it, anyway? How the tobacco industry determines the International Organisation for Standardization (ISO) standards for tobacco and tobacco products. Tobacco Control 2001;10:96-104.
- Kush A. Email re: International Policy Conference on Children and Tobacco. 19990625. Philip Morris. Access Date: 20020129. Bates No.: 2065560545.URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/ 2065560545.PDF.
- Winokur M. Email to Anne Kush re: International Policy Conference on Children and Tobacco. 19990628. Philip Morris. Access Date: 20020129. Bates No.: 2065560544.URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/ PDF/2065560544.PDF. 46 Personal communication to the author from Mary Assunta, participant.
- Mongoven J. International policy conference on children. 19990303. Philip Morris. Access Date: 20020129. Bates No.: 2070740803/ 0809.URL: http://www.pmdocs.com/PDF/2070740803_0809.PDF.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Civil society and the negotiation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control
Mamudu, H. M., & Glantz, S. A. (2009) · Global Public Health · doi:10.1080/17441690802095355 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
- Authors
- Carter, S. M.
- Affiliations
- The University of Sydney (AU)
- Corresponding author
- Carter, Stacy M
- ORCID
- Carter, Stacy M
- Venue
- Tobacco Control
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 2002-06
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 112-118
- ISSN
- 0964-4563 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-3318
- PMC
- PMC1763840
- OpenAlex
- W2126731628
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 4.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- doi.org
- Locations
- Tobacco Control (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Sydney
- National Institutes of Health
- Medical Research Council
- National Cancer Institute (1 R01 CA87110-01A1, R01CA087110)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management › Global Public Health Policies and Epidemiology
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Smoking Behavior and Cessation
- Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
- Keywords
- tobacco industry, intelligence gathering, Philip Morris, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, anti-tobacco advocacy, corporate lobbying
- MeSH terms
- Smoking Prevention, Air Pollutants, Community Participation, Environmental Health, Humans, Tobacco Industry
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
