Court-Ordered Corrections of Tobacco Industry Lies: Informing Earned Media Campaigns

Background:  In 2006, a federal court found that major U.S. cigarette companies violated civil racketeering laws and ordered them to disseminate through newspapers, television, package onserts, and corporate websites, “corrective statements” about addiction; the adverse health effects of smoking; the adverse health effects of exposure to secondhand smoke; the manipulation of physical and chemical designs of cigarettes; and light and low tar cigarettes. Pending final resolution of legal appeals, publication of the court-ordered corrective statements could begin in Fall 2017.

Program background:  A cross-sectional survey was administered in April 2017 to measure U.S. adults’ awareness of the corrective statements and key court findings; attitudes regarding selected public policies; and beliefs related to trust in tobacco companies and their potential use of misinformation to influence lawmaking. Data were collected using the web-enabled KnowledgePanel, a probability-based panel designed to be representative of the U.S. population. Respondents included a national sample of 2,800 adults, including oversamples of smokers and of Oklahomans. Participants were requested to read the full text of the court-ordered preambles and corrective statements for each of the five topic areas and asked if, prior to reading the text, they had heard of the information in the individual statements. Respondents’ awareness of other major court findings – that tobacco companies violated federal laws against racketeering; are likely to continue to commit fraud; concealed scientific research; and marketed cigarettes to young people – were also examined. Half of the respondents were asked about their attitudes and beliefs before being introduced to the corrective statements and court findings, and half after.

Evaluation Methods and Results:  Survey results and preliminary analyses will be available in May 2017. Research hypotheses include that most U.S. adults are unaware of the racketeering verdict and much of the information in the corrective statements. Further, that public awareness of the statements and court findings predicts support for graphic warning labels, reduced nicotine levels, and lawmakers' rejection of potential tobacco industry influences.

Conclusions:  In addition to providing a baseline measurement of public awareness of the corrective statements and major court findings, the study results are expected to offer insights into how public attitudes and beliefs towards tobacco control policies and tobacco industry influence in the lawmaking process may be affected by exposure to the corrective statements and supplemental earned media campaigns.

Implications for research and/or practice: Findings from this study are expected to help inform the development, implementation and evaluation of anticipated national, state and local educational campaigns designed to enhance and amplify the corrective statements. Media advocacy toolkits could be developed in collaboration with public health practitioners to assist in gaining earned media at the state and local level. Toolkit components might include background information, reference links, and samples of message maps, press release templates, social media tips, infographics, presentation templates, and FAQ’s. Evaluation indicators for public education interventions might include Google news alerts for relevant keywords, state or local clipping service subscriptions, and follow-up public opinion surveys.