Tobacco Documents Online

A Review of and Recommendations on Passive Smoking and Social Acceptability of Smoking

Abstract

This 20-page Australian tobacco industry document from 1976 outlines how the industry grappled with the declining social acceptability of smoking and the passive smoking issue. It shows that the industry refused to accept public health conclusions about the harms caused by tobacco and that the industry further acted on this opinion by planning detailed schemes, programs and activities to affect public, political and media opinion of its products and reverse the decline of smoking. The Australian tobacco industry had the lofty goal of reversing well-accepted public opinion about the link between tobacco and health, and actually re-creating and preserving controversy on the subject:

"...[W]hat positive action should to taken to change the smoking and health question from one that already has been decided, to one which is still open to debate?... What should [the industry] do to guard against more effective attacks by its opponents and what should it do to prevent the habit itself becoming socially unacceptable?"

The document also shows that the Australian tobacco companies colluded in their efforts to oppose public health:

"In January, 1975, a Co-ordinating Committee, comprising representatives of the three Australian manufacturers, was re-activated and a mutually acceptable set of objectives established.

The agreed objectives are:

(i) Preserve an outward face of unanimity of approach to all problems and/or situations affecting the questions of smoking and health.

(ii) Agree on an overall Industry policy and philosophy as a framework within which the Co-ordinating Committee will work.

(iii) Accept the fact that smoking and health is an industry problem in the face of which the three companies must operate in complete concert."

The industry's strategy of "buying time" and avoiding medical arguments is disclosed, as well as its clandestine manipulation of sports organizations to help it oppose public health activities in Australia:

[From Page 5] "PAST STRATEGIES AND TACTICS

...The fundamental policy of the Industry up until 1974 was to buy time and avoid where possible confrontation with Governments or anti-smoking organizations on strictly medical arguments..."

[From Page 6, under section entitled "POLITICAL AREA"]

"...Pressure from sporting organisations was vital in protecting their right, and the industry's, to continue negotiating sponsorships...The Industry has played its part in the sportsmen's protests by acting as behind-the-scenes initiator and advisor. Industry representatives have taken part in nearly all discussion, but have carefully avoided public projection. So far our opponents have been able to voice no more than suspicion that the Industry is playing a part..."

This document discusses a wide range of tobacco industry strategies for influencing public and political opinion about tobacco products, many of which have been employed not just in Australia, but around the world, and many of which were long-employed by the industry and may still in use today:

"Other activity worthy of extension or development includes:

"--Continuing involvement in activities representative of good corporate citizenship, i.e., activities seen by the public as beneficial in that they enhance or bring about cultural, sporting or other social events which would not have been possible or as successful without our support..."

"--Active encouragement of well-known personalities who smoke, to speak up in support of the benefits and pleasure they derive from smoking."

"--Establish a closer association with fashion houses, shows...and fashion parades and encourage their use openly of our products..."

"...--[Encourage] the use of cigarette brands in films, T.V., productions, newspapers, photographs of prominent people and advertisements for make and female fashion garments..."

Fields

Notes

Copy is poor and much more legible when viewed in "large" mode or in PDF format.

Quotes

1. INTRODUCTION

This report deals primarily with two specific aspects of smoking and health:

a) The threat that smoking could become anti-social and unfashionable;

b) Passive smoking.

These two inter-related and serious threats to the industry, paradoxically are also subjects on which it is better equipped to resist than it was when the smoking and health controversy was confined wholly to disease causation.

...In essence, the problem poses the questions: what positive action should to taken to change the smoking and health question from one that already has been decided, to one which is still open to debate? What whould the industry do to provide supportive arguments to smokers? What should it do to prevent further erosion of its freedom of action and that of its consumers? What should it do to guard against more effective attacks by its opponents and what should it do to preven the habit itself becoming socially unacceptable?

...the Industry has achieved a high degree of access to government on the relevant issues and a considerable ability to delay and/or amend proposed restrictive legislation and regulation.

We aim to preserve this situation...

[From Page 2]

In January, 1975, a Co-ordinating Committee, comprising representatives of the three Australian manufacturers, was re-activated and a mutually acceptable set of objectives established.

The agreed objectives are:

(i) Preserve an outward face of unanimity of approach to all problems and/or situations affecting the questions of smoking and health.

(ii) Agree on an overall Industry policy and philosophy as a framework within which the Co-oordinating Committee will work.

(iii) Accept the fact that smoking and health is an industry problem in the face of which the three companies must operate in complete concert.

[From Page 5}

The Industry in Australia some time ago recognized the need to examine the strategy and tactics it had been following and to evalaute whether they should be continued, modified or discarded and replaced.

The fundamental policy of the Industry up until 1974 was the

buy time

and avoid where possible confrontation with Governments or anti-smoking organisations on strictly medical arguments...

Company

W.R. & H.O. Wills

Author

Not stated

Recipient

Not stated

Region

Australia

Named Organization

Australian Medical Assn

Australian Tobacco Research Foundation

BAT, British American Tobacco

Confederation of Motor Sport

Council for Civil Liberties

Independent Scientific Advisory Comm

Journal of Natl Heart Foundation of Aust

Journal of Royal College of General Prac

Natl Heart News

Racing Car News

Roy Morgan Research Centre

Royal College of Physicians

Sydney Morning Herald

Tobacco Research Foundation

Univ of Sydney

Australian Council on Smoking + Health

Litigation

Stmn/Produced

Named Person

Doll, Sir William Richard, M.D. (Epidemiologist, Oxford U, Plaintiff's Expert)

Dr. Doll is an eminent physician from the University of Oxford in the United Kingdom.

Reid, B.

Type

REPT, REPORT, OTHER

Subject

smoking prevalence

Social Acceptability (Social acceptability of smoking)

The industry fought the decline in social acceptability of smoking through public relations campaigns, legislation, etc.

social behavior

social cost

social influence

social policy

taxation

sports sponsorship

Corporate philanthropy (Company giving behavior)

The giving of money to causes by a company, usually in a manner that makes the company appear altruistic to the public. Corporate philanthropy is usually done to achieve public relations or political gains.

Corporate strategy

industry activity

industry front group

industry influence

industry response

industry strategy