- Gerard Hastings (g.hastings@strath.ac.uk), director,
- Lynn MacFadyen, research officer
- Centre for Tobacco Control Research, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow G4 0RQ
- Correspondence to: G Hastings
- Accepted 12 June 2000
In July 1999 the Health Select Committee began an investigation into the British tobacco industry to determine what action it had taken and was taking in response to the known harmful effects of smoking and the addictive nature of tobacco. One of the committee's key achievements was to force the disclosure of a large quantity of internal company documents, including—for the first time—material from the UK tobacco industry's leading advertising agencies.
These documents cover all matters to do with tobacco promotion. They shed a unique light on the social research that has been done over the past 20 years to establish if and how tobacco promotion affects smoking behaviour. This research has been extensive but by necessity limited to studying observable outputs. The documents complete the picture by disclosing the inputs. In the process the documents corroborate the key findings of research and also yield much about the motivations and mindset of the UK tobacco industry.
Summary points
Tobacco advertising is intended to increase consumption as well as brand share and has a powerful effect on young people
Sponsorship and advertising work in exactly the same way and are only a small part of tobacco marketing
Tobacco advertisers are driven by a commercial imperative to increase sales, and they show no concern for the ethical or public health consequences of their actions
Voluntary agreements simply do not work and must be replaced by statutory measures
Methods
The select committee identified five UK advertising agencies with clients in the tobacco industry, and using its statutory powers it requested internal documents covering tobacco related business in the previous five years. On our advice it requested particular types of document (box 1). Between them the agencies submitted 16 boxes containing several thousand pages of material. We have no way of knowing what proportion of the requested …
Sign in
Personal subscribers, sign in here:
Article access
Article access for 1 day
Purchase this article for £20 $30 €32*
The PDF version can be downloaded as your personal record
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Reddit
Technorati
Twitter
Stumbleupon
Rapid responses
Latest Responses
Re: How much of a social media profile can doctors have?
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Diagnosis and management of Raynaud’s phenomenon
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Is it unethical for doctors to encourage healthy adults to donate a kidney to a stranger? No
Published 13 February 2012
Re: Report predicts 20 million AIDS orphans in Africa by 2010
Published 13 February 2012
Re: On the impossibility of being expert
Published 13 February 2012
Most responses
Does anyone understand the government’s plan for the NHS? (17 responses)
Published 17 Jan 2012
Bad medicine: medical nutrition (15 responses)
Published 18 Jan 2012
Shared decision making: really putting patients at the centre of healthcare (8 responses)
Published 27 Jan 2012
How much of a social media profile can doctors have? (7 responses)
Published 23 Jan 2012
Why legislation is necessary for my health reforms (7 responses)
Published 1 Feb 2012