Food industry messaging pulled from Big Tobacco playbook

printer friendlyprinter friendly

"Is Big Food the new tobacco?" wondered a group of food and beverage industry executives at a recent New York conference dedicated to addressing legal challenges to their industries. We don't often hear it from industry representatives themselves, but it's not the first time in recent memory a major industry has faced comparisons to the tobacco industry. Debates around estrogenic chemicals in children's products, gun control and climate change, for example, have prompted advocates to argue that chemical companies and the gun lobby, among others, are taking a page from the tobacco industry's playbook, a series of tactics the industry designed to spread misinformation about, undermine regulation of, and thwart litigation against its harmful products.

A cornerstone of the tobacco industry's playbook involved using personal responsibility rhetoric — that is, arguments that shifted the responsibility for tobacco-related health harms solely to those who smoke, rather than the companies that produced and marketed toxic (and deadly) products. At BMSG, we have dedicated several years to exploring when and how the tobacco industry first started using personal responsibility arguments in their public conversations.

Our first study of the issue, an analysis of news, legislative testimony and industry documents from the early 1950s and 60s, found that early tobacco control arguments — including those made on the heels of the 1964 Surgeon General's report that declared smoking a public health problem — were striking for their absence of appeals to personal responsibility. Instead, the tobacco industry used the news primarily to raise doubt about whether or not their products were truly harmful.

Our latest study revealed that it wasn't until 1977 that the tobacco industry started using the news to disseminate personal responsibility messages. Those messages became more and more common in the news over time, eventually becoming the industry's main public argument in the 1980s.

Over the course of the more than two decades of news coverage we studied, the industry refined its messages around individual responsibility to address the political challenges it faced: In the early 1970s, Big Tobacco used arguments that characterized smoking as an issue of personal freedom and, therefore, claimed that any efforts to regulate smoking were a violation of that freedom. By the 1980s, when the industry was facing legal challenges from smokers and their families, Big Tobacco framed smoking as an informed choice that consumers knowingly made — a framing that neatly ignored tobacco addiction. Consequently, the argument held, smokers themselves, not the industry, were responsible for the health consequences of that choice.

Again and again, we've seen Big Food use similar arguments that portray consumers as solely responsible for health harms that result from consuming their products. Food and beverage companies often subtly invoke individual choice and personal responsibility, as the American Beverage Association does with its slogan "Delivering Choices." At other times, industry attempts to deflect blame are more direct. For example, industry representatives often blame consumers for failing to exercise moderation, like the National Restaurant Association did when one of its executives declared, "People who have a weight problem are making bad decisions. Overeating is a choice." More recently, Coca-Cola CEO Muhtar Kent defended his company in the Wall Street Journal, arguing "Americans need to be more active and take greater responsibility for their diets."

So is Big Food the next Big Tobacco? And what do our findings mean for public health and social justice advocates going forward? Much research and scholarship has compared the food industry's tactics to Big Tobacco's playbook. Our work brings the origin and impact of a key element of that playbook into sharper focus and illuminates how the industry strategically adapted its personal responsibility messaging over time. Advocates working on policies that challenge the many industries harming health, from food to guns, should continue to boldly confront this strategy for blocking regulation and insist that the companies themselves exercise some personal responsibility for the products they foist upon the marketplace.


tobacco industry (2) target marketing (9) food marketing (5) social media (2) social change (1) prison phone calls (1) community health (1) news coverage (1) prison system (1) auto safety (1) Newtown (1) Bill Cosby (1) mental health (2) Marion Nestle (1) sexual health (1) food (1) McDonald's (1) El Monte (3) Colorado (1) food access (1) junk food marketing (4) Michelle Obama (1) george lakoff (1) cancer research (1) tobacco tax (1) social justice (2) SB-5 (1) strategic communication (1) cancer prevention (1) Whiteclay (4) Rachel Grana (1) summer camps (1) gun violence (1) Joe Paterno (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) front groups (1) cosmetics (1) Sandy Hook (2) personal responsibility (3) soda warning labels (1) SB 1000 (1) soda (12) soda tax (11) marketing (1) elephant triggers (1) junk food marketing to kids (2) built environment (2) food industry (4) cap the tap (1) emergency contraception (1) ssb (1) Proposition 29 (1) Pine Ridge reservation (1) food swamps (1) gun control (2) cervical cancer (1) sugary drinks (10) Amanda Fallin (1) soda industry (4) choice (1) Black Lives Matter (1) Connecticut shooting (1) sandusky (2) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) violence prevention (8) Jerry Sandusky (3) food environment (1) liana winett (1) obesity (10) media advocacy (23) Richmond (5) SB 402 (1) childhood obestiy conference (1) news (2) safety (1) media (7) suicide nets (1) American Beverage Association (1) journalism (1) Chile (1) snap (1) measure N (2) education (1) campaign finance (1) abortion (1) childhood obesity (1) messaging (3) language (6) ACEs (2) institutional accountability (1) Telluride (1) PepsiCo (1) news analysis (3) public health data (1) Catholic church (1) San Francisco (3) genital warts (1) FCC (1) Gardasil (1) Measure O (1) healthy eating (1) reproductive justice (1) tobacco control (2) environmental health (1) Twitter (1) apha (3) paula deen (1) weight of the nation (1) food deserts (1) inequities (1) media bites (1) default frame (1) democracy (1) prevention (1) election 2016 (1) Bloomberg (3) values (1) industry appeals to choice (1) public health policy (2) new year's resolutions (1) sports drinks (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) sexual assault (1) community safety (1) paper tigers (1) Big Soda (2) physical activity (1) political correctness (1) Coca-Cola (3) Berkeley (2) junk food (2) Wendy Davis (1) sexual violence (2) childhood adversity (1) soda taxes (2) regulation (2) cannes lions festival (1) california (1) vaccines (1) privilege (1) breastfeeding (3) alcohol (5) authentic voices (1) race (1) nonprofit communications (1) health care (1) SSBs (1) children's health (3) filibuster (1) Big Food (2) corporate social responsibility (1) advocacy (3) community violence (1) sanitation (1) food justice (1) Proposition 47 (1) suicide prevention (2) world water day (1) childhood trauma (3) Dora the Explorer (1) youth (1) cigarette advertising (1) structural racism (1) collaboration (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) HPV vaccine (1) nanny state (2) media analysis (6) Merck (1) water security (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) digital marketing (3) childhood lead poisoning (1) naacp (1) framing (14) violence (2) Tea Party (1) government intrusion (1) Donald Trump (2) sexism (2) community (1) Nickelodeon (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) Penn State (3) white house (1) Happy Meals (1) Let's Move (1) news strategy (1) suicide barrier (2) Sam Kass (1) Big Tobacco (3) diabetes (1) stigma (1) beauty products (1) diabetes prevention (1) tobacco (5) Johnson & Johnson (1) Texas (1) social math (1) gatorade bolt game (1) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) food and beverage marketing (3) autism (1) communication strategy (1) public health (71) Citizens United (1) chronic disease (2) obesity prevention (1) seat belt laws (1) health equity (10) water (1) communication (2) news monitoring (1) community organizing (1) racism (1) online marketing (1) women's health (2) child sexual abuse (5) indoor smoking ban (1) Oglala Sioux (3) beverage industry (2) Aurora (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) gender (1) equity (3) product safety (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: