Search

Objectives. We sought to learn how employees reacted to changes in the corporate narrative of Philip Morris Companies (PMC) in the late 1990s and early 2000s. Methods. We analyzed archival internal tobacco industry documents about PMC's creation of a new corporate story. Results. In response to litigation and public opprobrium, PMC replaced its market success-oriented corporate narrative with a new one centered on responsibility. Although management sought to downplay inconsistencies between the old and new narratives, some employees reportedly had difficulty reconciling them, concerned that the responsibility focus might affect company profitability. However, others embraced the new narrative, suggesting radical ideas to prevent youth smoking. These ideas were not adopted. Conclusions. PMC's new narrative was unconvincing to many of its employees, who perceived it either as a threat to the company's continued profits or as incongruous with what they had previously been told. As it had done with the public, PMC misled its employees in explaining a narrative repositioning that would help the company continue business as usual. Moving toward a tobacco endgame will require ongoing discursive and symbolic efforts to disrupt this narrative. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contemporary health care reformers, like those who promoted the failed Clinton era plan, face opposition from multiple corporate interests. However, scant literature has examined how relationships between corporations and other stakeholders, such as think tanks and advocacy groups, shape health care reform debate. We show how the 2 biggest US tobacco companies, Philip Morris and RJ Reynolds, and their trade association coordinated in mobilizing ideologically diverse constituencies to help defeat the Clinton plan. Unwittingly perhaps, some reform supporters advanced the tobacco industry's public relations blitz, contributing to perceptions of public opposition to the plan. As the current reform debate unfolds, this case highlights the importance of funding transparency for interpreting the activities of think tanks, advocacy groups, and "grassroots" movements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Deployment of young Americans in military engagements places them at increased risk for not only war hazards but also tobacco addiction and disease. Tobacco use diminishes troop health and readiness, and increases medical and training costs. Military tobacco control efforts began in 1986, yet tobacco use remains high. To determine whether and how the tobacco industry targets military personnel in wartime, we analyzed internal industry documents about the Gulf War (1990-1991) and constructed a historical case study. During this conflict, tobacco companies targeted troops with free cigarettes, direct advertising, branded items, ways to communicate with family, and "welcome home" events. Military authorities sometimes restricted this activity, but frequently enabled it; tobacco companies were regarded as benefactors. Considering tobacco use a benefit undermines military health priorities. Stronger policy is needed to reframe tobacco use as incompatible with military ideals. (Am J Public Health. 2009;99:1595-1602. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2008.152983) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. We explored what corporate "credibility" means to tobacco companies to determine why it matters to companies and what a lack of credibility means to them. Methods. We collected documents from an online tobacco industry document archive and analyzed them with an interpretive approach. Results. Tobacco companies conceptualized credibility not as being worthy of belief or confidence but as inspiring it. Thus, credibility was understood primarily as altering public perception of the industry. "Truth" was largely absent from tobacco industry conceptualizations of credibility, which were linked with "responsibility" and "reasonableness." However, industry research found that the public regarded credibility and responsibility differently, expecting these to entail truth telling, advertising reductions, less harmful products, apologies for deception, making amends, or exiting the tobacco business altogether. Overall, industry credibility-building projects failed repeatedly. Conclusions. Public health discourse increasingly attends to the roles of corporations in promoting disease. Industries such as tobacco and alcohol have been identified as profiting from harmful products. Yet corporations' ability to continue business as usual requires sustaining an implicit societal assent to their activities that depends on corporate credibility. For public health to address corporate disease promotion effectively, undermining corporate credibility may be strategically important. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To counter negative publicity about the tobacco industry, Philip Morris has widely publicized its philanthropy initiatives. Although corporate philanthropy is primarily a public relations tool, contributions may be viewed as offsetting the harms caused by corporate products and practices. That such donations themselves have harmful consequences has been little considered. Drawing on internal company documents, we explored the philanthropy undertaken as part of Philip Morris's PM21 image makeover. Philip Morris explicitly linked philanthropy to government affairs and used contributions as a lobbying tool against public health policies. Through advertising, covertly solicited media coverage, and contributions to legislators' pet causes, Philip Morris improved its image among key voter constituencies, influenced public officials, and divided the public health field as grantees were converted to stakeholders. (Am J Public Health. 2008;98: 2123-2133. doi:10.2105/AJPH. 2007,128231) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. To better understand how the tobacco industry responds to tobacco control activists, we explored Philip Morris's response to demands that consumers in developing countries be informed about smoking risks, and analyzed the implications of negotiating with a tobacco company. Methods. We reviewed internal tobacco industry documents and related materials, constructed a case history of how Philip Morris responded to a shareholder campaign to require health warnings on cigarettes sold worldwide, and analyzed interactions between (1) socially responsible investment activists, (2) Philip Morris management, (3) institutional investors, and (4) industry competitors. Results. After resisting for 11 years, Philip Morris unilaterally reversed direction, and proposed its own labeling initiative. While activists celebrated, Philip Morris's president detailed privately how the company would yield little and benefit disproportionately. Activists portrayed the tobacco industry as preying on the poor and uneducated and used delegitimization to drive a wedge between the industry and its financial and political allies. When Philip Morris "gave in" to their demands, it exchanged negative publicity for positive public relations and political credibility. Conclusions. Tobacco companies can appear to accommodate public health demands while securing strategic advantages. Negotiating with the tobacco industry can enhance its legitimacy and facilitate its ability to market deadly cigarettes without corresponding benefits to public health. (Am J Public Health. 2006;96:2048-2054. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2005.075119) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. This case study describes the events surrounding the first time a major tobacco company advertised in gay media. Methods. We analyzed internal tobacco company documents, mainstream newspapers, and the gay press. Results. Philip Morris was unprepared for the attention its entry into the gay market received. The company's reaction to this incident demonstrates that its approach to the gay community both parallels and diverges from industry strategies toward other marginalized communities. Conclusions. The tobacco industry's relationship to the gay community is relatively undeveloped, a fact that may provide tobacco control advocates an opportunity for early intervention. The gay community's particular vulnerabilities to the industry make development of gay tobacco control programs crucial to reducing gay smoking prevalence and industry presence in the community. (Am J Public Health. 2003;93:988-993) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Philip Morris Companies, the world's largest and most profitable tobacco seller, has changed its corporate name to The Altria Group. The company has also embarked on a plan to improve its corporate image. Examination of internal company documents reveals that these changes have been planned for over a decade and that the company expects to reap specific and substantial rewards from them. Tobacco control advocates should be alert to the threat Philip Morris's plans pose to industry-focused tobacco control campaigns. Company documents also suggest what the vulnerabilities of those plans are and how advocates might best exploit them. (Am J Public Health. 2003;93:553-556) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. The goal of this study was to describe how the tobacco industry collects information about public health groups. Methods. Publicly available internal tobacco industry documents were reviewed and analyzed using a chronological case study approach. Results. The industry engaged in aggressive intelligence gathering, used intermediaries to obtain materials under false pretenses, sent public relations spies to the organizations' meetings, and covertly taped strategy sessions. Other industry strategies included publicly minimizing the effects of boycotts, painting health advocates as "extreme," identifying and exploiting disagreements, and planning to "redirect the funding" of tobacco control organizations to other purposes. Conclusions. Public health advocates often make light of tobacco industry observers, but industry surveillance may be real, intense, and covert and may obstruct public health initiatives. (Am J Public Health. 2002;92:955-960) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the United States, companies that use their own funds to test consumer products on their employees are subject to few regulations. Using previously undisclosed tobacco industry documents, we reviewed the history of that industry's efforts to create internal guidelines on the conditions to be met before employee taste testers could evaluate cigarettes made from tobacco treated with experimental pesticides. This history highlights 2 potential ethical issues raised by unregulated industrial research: conflict of interest and lack of informed consent. To ensure compliance with accepted ethical standards, an independent federal office should be established to oversee industrial research involving humans exposed to experimental or increased quantities of ingested, inhaled, or absorbed chemical agents. (Am J Public Health. 2006;96: 37-46.) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1986, the US Navy announced the goal of becoming smoke-free by 2000. However, efforts to restrict tobacco sales and use aboard the USS Roosevelt prompted tobacco industry lobbyists to persuade their allies in Congress to legislate that all naval ships must sell tobacco. Congress also removed control of ships' stores from the Navy. By 1993, the Navy abandoned its smoke-free goal entirely and promised smokers a place to smoke on all ships. Congressional complicity in promoting the agenda of the tobacco industry thwarted the Navy's efforts to achieve a healthy military workforce. Because of military lobbying constraints, civilian pressure on Congress may be necessary to establish effective tobacco control policies in the armed forces. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the public health literature, it is generally assumed that the perception of "targeting" as positive or negative by the targeted audience depends on the product or message being promoted. Smoking prevalence rates are high among lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) individuals, but little is known about how they perceive tobacco industry targeting. We conducted focus groups with LGBT individuals in 4 US cities to explore their perceptions. Our findings indicated that focus group participants often responded positively to tobacco company targeting. Targeting connoted community visibility, legitimacy, and economic viability. Participants did not view tobacco as a gay health issue. Targeting is a key aspect of corporate — community interaction. A better understanding of targeting may aid public health efforts to counter corporate disease promotion. (Am J Public Health. 2008;98:99&-1003. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.118174) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]