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.


soda (12) nanny state (2) Proposition 29 (1) adverse childhood experiences (3) Bill Cosby (1) childhood obesity (1) Twitter (1) public health (66) world water day (1) food justice (1) physical activity (1) childhood trauma (3) sexism (2) abortion (1) healthy eating (1) Penn State (3) Whiteclay (4) Amanda Fallin (1) gatorade bolt game (1) childhood obestiy conference (1) public health data (1) privilege (1) front groups (1) water security (1) Big Tobacco (3) food (1) paper tigers (1) authentic voices (1) racism (1) institutional accountability (1) suicide prevention (2) indoor smoking ban (1) cervical cancer (1) Coca-Cola (3) violence (1) soda industry (4) food deserts (1) SSBs (1) Measure O (1) auto safety (1) genital warts (1) community health (1) Bloomberg (3) junk food marketing to kids (2) autism (1) mental health (2) Marion Nestle (1) Pine Ridge Indian Reservation (2) prison phone calls (1) Sam Kass (1) weight of the nation (1) news monitoring (1) Berkeley (2) election 2016 (1) news coverage (1) naacp (1) Big Soda (2) sugary drinks (10) digital marketing (2) food marketing (3) food and beverage marketing (3) soda warning labels (1) cigarette advertising (1) HPV vaccine (1) youth (1) news strategy (1) childhood lead poisoning (1) sexual health (1) social media (2) Wendy Davis (1) junk food marketing (3) SB 1000 (1) chronic disease (2) language (6) education (1) obesity prevention (1) emergency contraception (1) vaccines (1) structural racism (1) cancer research (1) industry appeals to choice (1) children's health (3) media analysis (5) product safety (1) equity (3) personal responsibility (3) ssb (1) paula deen (1) sandusky (2) public health policy (2) ACEs (2) suicide barrier (2) Jerry Sandusky (3) sexual violence (2) elephant triggers (1) tobacco (5) soda taxes (2) democracy (1) apha (2) El Monte (3) Nickelodeon (1) tobacco control (2) childhood adversity (1) Tea Party (1) Citizens United (1) suicide nets (1) Proposition 47 (1) sanitation (1) liana winett (1) Golden Gate Bridge (2) tobacco industry (2) cosmetics (1) breastfeeding (3) Oglala Sioux (3) Happy Meals (1) community violence (1) child sexual abuse (5) violence prevention (8) communication (2) social math (1) sexual assault (1) women's health (2) Rachel Grana (1) summer camps (1) measure N (2) Pine Ridge reservation (1) Catholic church (1) SB 402 (1) Campaign for Safe Cosmetics (1) gun violence (1) PepsiCo (1) community safety (1) soda tax (11) prison system (1) values (1) diabetes prevention (1) cancer prevention (1) target marketing (7) environmental health (1) default frame (1) corporate social responsibility (1) health care (1) social justice (1) Twitter for advocacy (1) media (7) diabetes (1) community organizing (1) california (1) cap the tap (1) media advocacy (21) advocacy (3) sugar-sweetened beverages (2) filibuster (1) gun control (2) journalism (1) Gardasil (1) health equity (10) george lakoff (1) personal responsibility rhetoric (1) Michelle Obama (1) Connecticut shooting (1) Joe Paterno (1) white house (1) alcohol (5) marketing (1) Donald Trump (2) snap (1) tobacco tax (1) news analysis (2) American Beverage Association (1) food swamps (1) Merck (1) government intrusion (1) Community Coalition Against Beverage Taxes (1) SB-5 (1) Colorado (1) prevention (1) food industry (4) built environment (2) social change (1) Texas (1) junk food (2) political correctness (1) race (1) collaboration (1) Aurora (1) Food Marketing Workgroup (1) stigma (1) seat belt laws (1) water (1) Let's Move (1) food access (1) McDonald's (1) media bites (1) Johnson & Johnson (1) San Francisco (3) new year's resolutions (1) food environment (1) campaign finance (1) sports drinks (1) Big Food (2) framing (14) gender (1) Richmond (5) FCC (1) news (2) inequities (1) Sandy Hook (2) reproductive justice (1) Newtown (1) Telluride (1) Dora the Explorer (1) Oakland Unified School District (1) messaging (3) online marketing (1) obesity (10) choice (1) beverage industry (2) regulation (2) beauty products (1) Chile (1)
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Twitter
  • Join Us On Youtube
  • BMSG RSS Feed

get e-alerts in your inbox: