Consent and Counter-Mobilization: The Case of The National Smokers Alliance

Abstract

Throughout the 1990s, health advocates engaged in a significant mobilization against the dangers of tobacco use and the tobacco industry. In 1993, the tobacco industry counter-mobilized through the National Smokers Alliance (NSA), a public relations created front group funded by the tobacco industry, which operated nationally from 1994 to 1999 to advocate for adults using tobacco products without vigorous regulation or increased tobacco taxes. The mobilization by health groups utilized traditional political lobbying and education of the public and public officials without a national public relations created front group to mold public opinion. The counter-mobilization by the NSA was based on traditional lobbying approaches in conjunction with the use of the public relations oriented consent engineering theory of Edward Bernays, Harold Lasswell, and others. This consent engineering theory calls for public relations specialists using public relations to mold public opinion to support a client's preferred public policy outputs. Despite the use of traditional lobbying in conjunction with the use of public relations efforts, attempts by the NSA to dominate public policy to weaken or neutralize stronger tobacco regulations and taxes were effective only for some campaigns.

What is known about tobacco industry efforts to influence tobacco tax? A systematic review of empirical studies

“…A total of 16 studies found the tobacco industry used media/publicity campaigns to raise public awareness about tax proposals and create/increase public support for the industry's position 19 26–31 34 37 38 41 42 44 48–50 52 53…”

“…A total of 12 studies demonstrate that, to gain advice and assistance with tax lobbying and publicity campaigns, the industry employed consultancy, public relations, lobbying and/or advertising firms/staff 14 16 17 19 24 25 33 34 41 48 50 52–54…”

“…Seven studies (all in the USA) reported industry efforts to mount legal or other official challenges to combat excise legislation 25 34 37 38 41 42 45 53 56…”

“Nicotine Nazis strike again”: a brief analysis of the use of Nazi rhetoric in attacking tobacco control advocacy

“…FORCES, a smokers’ rights organisation, uses similar strategies, as their tactics include “constantly linking anti-tobacco activists either to fascism/Nazism/communism or to some sort of criminal conspiracy against smokers and those people sympathetic towards FORCES’ causes” 75. (Unlike earlier “smokers’ rights” groups where information in tobacco industry documents demonstrates often undisclosed funding and management by the tobacco industry, the documents are silent on FORCES 23 24 76 – 78http://www.forces.org/Archive/) documented this endeavour with 85 online newspaper articles or commentaries including the word “Nazi”, 61 including “fascism”, 31 including “Hitler” and 23 including “Gestapo” (out of a total of 3724 articles on the tobacco debate) 79.…”

‘Balancing acts’: The politics and processes of smokefree area policymaking in a small state

“…'Concern about smokers' and about other groups is a traditional industry strategy to deflect policy attention from its responsibility [35,36].…”