CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 255Global Public Health Policies and EpidemiologySmoking Behavior and CessationPolitical Influence and Corporate Strategies

How Does the Tobacco Industry Attempt to Influence Marketing Regulations? A Systematic Review

Open access
Savell, Emily, Gilmore, Anna B., Fooks, Gary·2014·PLoS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0087389PMC PMC3914831
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control makes a number of recommendations aimed at restricting the marketing of tobacco products. Tobacco industry political activity has been identified as an obstacle to Parties' development and implementation of these provisions. This study systematically reviews the existing literature on tobacco industry efforts to influence marketing regulations and develops taxonomies of 1) industry strategies and tactics and 2) industry frames and arguments. METHODS: Searches were conducted between April-July 2011, and updated in March 2013. Articles were included if they made reference to tobacco industry efforts to influence marketing regulations; supported claims with verifiable evidence; were written in English; and concerned the period 1990-2013. 48 articles met the review criteria. Narrative synthesis was used to combine the evidence. RESULTS: 56% of articles focused on activity in North America, Europe or Australasia, the rest focusing on Asia (17%), South America, Africa or transnational activity. Six main political strategies and four main frames were identified. The tobacco industry frequently claims that the proposed policy will have negative unintended consequences, that there are legal barriers to regulation, and that the regulation is unnecessary because, for example, industry does not market to youth or adheres to a voluntary code. The industry primarily conveys these arguments through direct and indirect lobbying, the promotion of voluntary codes and alternative policies, and the formation of alliances with other industrial sectors. The majority of tactics and arguments were used in multiple jurisdictions. CONCLUSIONS: Tobacco industry political activity is far more diverse than suggested by existing taxonomies of corporate political activity. Tactics and arguments are repeated across jurisdictions, suggesting that the taxonomies of industry tactics and arguments developed in this paper are generalisable to multiple jurisdictions and can be used to predict industry activity.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pone.0087389

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 majority of the substantial body of literature on TII is based on HICs.

    “Furthermore, while there is a substantial body of literature on TII, the majority is based on HICs.13–15”

    From Needs of LMIC-based tobacco control advocates to counter tobacco industry policy interference: insights from semi-structured interviews (2020) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Background describes an extensive body of literature on tobacco-industry political activity. The Results (Geography) report that 56% of the 48 articles reviewed focused on North America, Europe or Australasia. That supports the general geographic pattern, but the review covers influence on marketing regulation rather than all tobacco-industry interference (TII) literature, and it does not classify those articles by country income level. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The tobacco industry is now turning its focus toward emerging markets in sub-Saharan Africa.

    “The tobacco industry is now turning its focus toward emerging markets in sub-Saharan Africa, seeking to exploit the continent's patchwork tobacco control regulations and limited resources to combat industry marketing advances.69, 70”

    From Smoking prevalence and attributable disease burden in 195 countries and territories, 1990–2015: a systematic analysis from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2015 (2017) · cites this paper as [70]

    The Results > Geography section reports that only one reviewed article focused on Africa and that a transnational study also mentioned industry arguments against proposed regulations there. It does not address whether the industry is now shifting its focus toward emerging markets in sub-Saharan Africa. Searches for that shift and for exploitation of limited regulatory resources found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.72)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 65

  1. [1]Smith KE, Savell E, Gilmore AB (2013) What is known about tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax? A systematic review of empirical studies. Tobacco Control 22. PMC3701860 22887175
  2. [2]Hurt RD, Ebbert JO, Muggli ME, Lockhart NJ, Robertson CR (2009) Open doorway to truth: legacy of the Minnesota tobacco trial. Mayo Clinic Proceedings 84 (5): 446– 456. PMC2676127 19411441
  3. [4]Lee S, Ling PM, Glantz SA (2012) The vector of the tobacco epidemic: tobacco industry practices in low and middle-income countries. Cancer Causes and Control: 1–13. PMC3332051 22370696
  4. [10]DiFranza JR, Wellman RJ, Sargent JD, Weitzman M, Hipple BJ, et al (2006) Tobacco promotion and the initiation of tobacco use: assessing the evidence for causality. Pediatrics 117: e1237– e1248. 16740823
  5. [11]Slater SJ, Chaloupka FJ, Wakefield M, Johnston LD, O’Malley PM (2007) The impact of retail cigarette marketing practices on youth smoking uptake. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine 161: 440. 17485618
  6. [12]Weiss JW, Cen S, Schuster DV, Unger JB, Johnson CA, et al (2006) Longitudinal effects of pro-tobacco and anti-tobacco messages on adolescent smoking susceptibility. Nicotine & Tobacco Research 8: 455– 465. 16801303
  7. [13]Pucci LG, Siegel M (1999) Exposure to brand-specific cigarette advertising in magazines and its impact on youth smoking. Preventive Medicine 29: 313– 320. 10564621
  8. [14]Pierce JP, Choi WS, Gilpin EA, Farkas AJ, Berry CC (1998) Tobacco industry promotion of cigarettes and adolescent smoking. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association 279: 511– 515. 9480360
  9. [15]Schooler C, Feighery E, Flora JA (1996) Seventh graders’ self-reported exposure to cigarette marketing and its relationship to their smoking behavior. American Journal of Public Health 86: 1216– 1221. 8806371 PMC1380582
  10. [18]Ennew CT (1993) The Marketing Blueprint. Oxford: Blackwell Business.
  11. [21]Hillman AJ, Hitt MA (1999) Corporate political strategy formulation: A model of approach, participation, and strategy decisions. Academy of Management Review: 825–842.
  12. [22]Menashe CL, Siegel M (1998) The power of a frame: an analysis of newspaper coverage of tobacco issues-United States, 1985–1996. Journal of Health Communication 3: 307– 325. 10977260
  13. [24]Tannen D, editor (1993) Framing in discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
  14. [25]Wakefield M, Mcleod K, Smith KC (2003) Individual versus corporate responsibility for smoking-related illness: Australian press coverage of the Rolah McCabe trial. Health Promotion International 18: 297– 305. 14695361
  15. [26]Champion D, Chapman S (2005) Framing pub smoking bans: an analysis of Australian print news media coverage, March 1996–March 2003. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59: 679– 684. 16020646 PMC1733106
  16. [27]Wackowski OA, Lewis MJ, Hrywna M (2011) Banning smoking in New Jersey casinos-a content analysis of the debate in print media. Substance Use & Misuse 46: 882– 888. 21599503
  17. [28]Harris JK, Shelton SC, Moreland-Russell S, Luke DA (2010) Tobacco coverage in print media: the use of timing and themes by tobacco control supporters and opposition before a failed tobacco tax initiative. Tobacco Control 19: 37– 43. 19965799 PMC2921260
  18. [29]Magzamen S, Charlesworth A, Glantz SA (2001) Print media coverage of California’s smokefree bar law. Tobacco Control 10: 154– 160. 11387536 PMC1747550
  19. [33]Daviter F (2007) Policy framing in the European Union. Journal of European Public Policy 14: 654– 666.
  20. [34]Labonté R, Gagnon ML (2010) Framing health and foreign policy: lessons for global health diplomacy. Globalization and Health 6: 1– 19. 20727211 PMC2936293
  21. [38]Tumwine J (2011) Implementation of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control in Africa: Current Status of Legislation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 8: 4312– 4331. 22163209 PMC3228573
  22. [39]Alechnowicz K, Chapman S (2004) The Philippine tobacco industry: “the strongest tobacco lobby in Asia”. Tobacco Control 13 (Suppl. 2) ii71– 78. 15564224 PMC1766154
  23. [40]Assunta M, Chapman S (2004) A mire of highly subjective and ineffective voluntary guidelines: Tobacco industry efforts to thwart tobacco control in Malaysia. Tobacco Control 13 (Suppl. 2) ii43– ii50. 15564220 PMC1766167
  24. [41]Lambert A, Sargent JD, Glantz SA, Ling PM (2004) How Philip Morris unlocked the Japanese cigarette market: lessons for global tobacco control. Tobacco Control 13: 379– 387. 15564622 PMC1747921
  25. [42]MacKenzie R, Collin J, Sopharo C, Sopheap Y (2004) “Almost a role model of what we would like to do everywhere”: British American Tobacco in Cambodia. Tobacco Control 13 (Suppl. 2) ii112– 117. 15564213 PMC1766168
  26. [43]Nakkash R, Lee K (2009) The tobacco industry’s thwarting of marketing restrictions and health warnings in Lebanon. Tobacco Control 18: 310– 316. 19633145 PMC2709907
  27. [44]O’Sullivan B, Chapman S (2000) Eyes on the prize: transnational tobacco companies in China 1976–1997. Tobacco Control 9: 292– 302. 10982573 PMC1748382
  28. [45]Gilmore AB, Collin J, McKee M (2006) Public health: British American Tobacco’s erosion of health legislation in Uzbekistan. BMJ 332: 355. 16470061 PMC1363921
  29. [47]Carter SM (2003) From legitimate consumers to public relations pawns: the tobacco industry and young Australians. Tobacco Control 12 (Suppl. 3) iii71– 78. 14645951 PMC1766123
  30. [48]Chapman S, Carter SM (2003) “Avoid health warnings on all tobacco products for just as long as we can”: a history of Australian tobacco industry efforts to avoid, delay and dilute health warnings on cigarettes. Tobacco Control 12: iii13– iii22. 14645944 PMC1766129
  31. [49]Hoek J, Vaudrey R, Gendall P, Edwards R, Thomson G (2012) Tobacco retail displays: a comparison of industry arguments and retailers’ experiences. Tobacco Control 21: 497– 501. 21849671
  32. [51]Szilagyi T, Chapman S (2004) Tobacco industry efforts to erode tobacco advertising controls in Hungary. Central European Journal of Public Health 12: 190– 196. 15666456
  33. [52]Shirane R, Smith K, Ross H, Silver KE, Williams S, et al (2012) Tobacco Industry Manipulation of Tobacco Excise and Tobacco Advertising Policies in the Czech Republic: An Analysis of Tobacco Industry Documents. PLoS Medicine 9: e1001248. 22745606 PMC3383744
  34. [53]Neuman M, Bitton A, Glantz S (2002) Tobacco industry strategies for influencing European Community tobacco advertising legislation. Lancet 359: 1323– 1330. 11965294
  35. [55]Apollonio DE, Malone RE (2010) The “We Card” Program: Tobacco Industry “Youth Smoking Prevention” as Industry Self-Preservation. American Journal of Public Health 100: 1188– 1201. 20466965 PMC2882417
  36. [56]Bond L, Daube M, Chikritzha T (2009) Access to confidential alcohol industry documents: from ‘Big Tobacco’ to ‘Big Booze’. Australasian Medical Journal 2: 1– 26.
  37. [57]Cohen JE, Sarabia V, Ashley MJ (2001) Tobacco commerce on the Internet: a threat to comprehensive tobacco control. Tobacco Control 10: 364– 367. 11740029 PMC1747600
  38. [58]DiFranza JR, Godshall WT (1996) Tobacco industry efforts hindering enforcement of the ban on tobacco sales to minors: actions speak louder than words. Tobacco Control 5: 127– 131. 8910994 PMC1759502
  39. [59]Goldberg ME, Davis RM, O’Keefe AM (2006) The role of tobacco advertising and promotion: themes employed in litigation by tobacco industry witnesses. Tobacco Control 15: 54– 67. PMC2563582 17130625
  40. [60]Ling PM, Haber LA, Wedl S (2010) Branding the Rodeo: A Case Study of Tobacco Sports Sponsorship. American Journal of Public Health 100: 32– 41. 19910357 PMC2791245
  41. [61]McDaniel PA, Malone RE (2009) Creating the “Desired Mindset”: Philip Morris’s Efforts to Improve Its Corporate Image Among Women. Women & Health 49: 441– 474. 19851947 PMC2791497
  42. [62]Mekemson C, Glantz SA (2002) How the tobacco industry built its relationship with Hollywood. Tobacco Control 11: I81– I91. 11893818 PMC1766059
  43. [71]McDaniel PA, Malone R (2005) Understanding Philip Morris’s pursuit of US government regulation of tobacco. Tobacco Control 14. PMC1343526 15923470
  44. [72]Outterson K (2011) Smoking and the First Amendment. New England Journal of Medicine 365: 2351– 2353. 22149735
  45. [74]Sebrie EM, Barnoya J, Perez-Stable EJ, Glantz SA (2005) Tobacco industry successfully prevented tobacco control legislation in Argentina. Tobacco Control 14. PMC1748093 16183967
  46. [75]Mackey TK, Liang BA, Novotny TE (2013) Evolution of Tobacco Labeling and Packaging: International Legal Considerations and Health Governance. American Journal of Public Health 103 (4). PMC3673250 23409884
  47. [76]Sebrie EM, Glantz SA (2007) Tobacco industry “Youth smoking prevention” programs to undermine meaningful tobacco control in Latin America. American Journal of Public Health 97: 1357– 1367. 17600260 PMC1931455
  48. [78]Freeman B, Chapman S, Rimmer M (2008) The case for the plain packaging of tobacco products. Addiction 103: 580– 590. 18339104
  49. [80]Hammond D (2010) “Plain packaging” regulations for tobacco products: the impact of standardizing the color and design of cigarette packs. Salud Pública de México 52: S226– S232. 21243193
  50. [81]Mamudu HM, Hammond R, Glantz SA (2008) Project Cerberus: Tobacco industry strategy to create an alternative to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. American Journal of Public Health 98: 1630– 1642. 18633079 PMC2509616
  51. [82]Hiilamo H, Crosbie E, Glantz SA (2012) The evolution of health warning labels on cigarette packs: the role of precedents, and tobacco industry strategies to block diffusion. Tobacco Control online first. PMC3725195 23092884
  52. [83]Landman A, Ling PM, Glantz SA (2002) Tobacco Industry Youth Smoking Prevention Programs: Protecting the Industry and Hurting Tobacco Control. American Journal of Public Health 92: 917– 930. 12036777 PMC1447482
  53. [85]Wakefield M, Terry-McElrath Y, Emery S, Saffer H, Chaloupka FJ, et al (2006) Effect of televised, tobacco company-funded smoking prevention advertising on youth smoking-related beliefs, intentions, and behavior. American Journal of Public Health 96: 2154. 17077405 PMC1698148
  54. [86]Wakefield M, Balch GI, Ruel E, Terry-McElrath Y, Szczypka G, et al (2005) Youth Responses to Anti-Smoking Advertisements From Tobacco-Control Agencies, Tobacco Companies, and Pharmaceutical Companies1. Journal of Applied Social Psychology 35: 1894– 1910.
  55. [87]Mitchell A (2010) Australia’s move to the plain packaging of cigarettes and its WTO compatibility. Asian Journal of WTO & International Health Law and Policy 5 (2): 405– 426.
  56. [88]Bayer R, Kelly M (2010) Tobacco Control and Free Speech - An American Dilemma. New England Journal of Medicine 362: 281– 283. 20071696
  57. [89]Charlesworth A, Glantz SA (2005) Smoking in the movies increases adolescent smoking: a review. Pediatrics 116: 1516. 16322180
  58. [90]Titus-Ernstoff L, Dalton MA, Adachi-Mejia AM, Longacre MR, Beach ML (2008) Longitudinal study of viewing smoking in movies and initiation of smoking by children. Pediatrics 121: 15. 18166552
  59. [91]Sargent JD, Stoolmiller M, Worth KA, Dal Cin S, Wills TA, et al (2007) Exposure to smoking depictions in movies: its association with established adolescent smoking. Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine 161: 849. 17768284
  60. [93]Smith KE, Fooks G, Collin J, Weishaar H, Mandal S, et al (2010) “Working the System”–British American Tobacco’s Influence on the European Union Treaty and Its Implications for Policy: An Analysis of Internal Tobacco Industry Documents. PLoS Medicine 7: e1000202. 20084098 PMC2797088
  61. [94]Smith KE, Fooks G, Collin J, Weishaar H, Gilmore AB (2010) Is the increasing policy use of Impact Assessment in Europe likely to undermine efforts to achieve healthy public policy? Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 64: 478– 487. 20466716
  62. [95]Cairney P (2012) Understanding public policy: theories and issues: Palgrave Macmillan.
  63. [96]Landman A, Glantz SA (2009) Tobacco industry efforts to undermine policy-relevant research. American Journal of Public Health 99: 45. 19008508 PMC2600597
  64. [103]Fooks G, Gilmore A (2013) International trade law, plain packaging and tobacco industry political activity: the Trans-Pacific Partnership. Tobacco Control online first. PMC3888632 23788606
  65. [104]Shaffer ER, Brenner JE, Houston TP (2005) International trade agreements: a threat to tobacco control policy. Tobacco Control 14: II19– II25. 16046697 PMC1766197

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Savell, E., Gilmore, A. B., & Fooks, G.
Affiliations
UK Centre for Tobacco & Alcohol Studies (GB)
Corresponding author
Savell, Emily
ORCID
Venue
PLoS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2014-02-05
Volume
9
Issue
2
Pages
e87389
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0087389
PMC
PMC3914831
OpenAlex
W1977588871
Cited by
255
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 18 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 32 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 39 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1
FWCI
4.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aston Publications Explorer (Aston University) (submittedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • Medical Research Council (MR/K023195/1)
  • Economic and Social Research Council (ES/G007489/1, ES/I900284/1)
  • National Cancer Institute (R01CA160695)
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, tobacco marketing regulation, Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, corporate political activity, lobbying, voluntary codes, industry partnerships, youth marketing, tobacco control
MeSH terms
Humans, Politics, Tobacco Industry, Marketing

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