The continuing discussion of the economic impacts of smokefree
policies on the hospitality industry provides another excellent example of
how individual stories can be used (by the tobacco industry in this case)
to counter statistical evidence.
There is now a strong and well documented literature -- based on
statistical studies -- documenting that smokefree polcies have no effect
or a positive effect on the hospitality business [1]. Moreover, the
"studies" that do not reach this conclusion have been shown to be of lower
quality, usually relying on anectdotal evidence rather than "hard numbers"
such as actual business revenues or employment [1]. In addition, these
"negative" studies are uniformly financed by the tobacco industry and its
allies; by comparison the studies finding no effect or a positive effect
are funded by independent sources.
Despite this strong case, media reports continue to report
undocumented claims that these laws are bad for business [2,3] with equal
weight as the scientific evidence.
This result demonstrates the effectiveness of the tobacco industry's
organized public relations campaign to keep the myth alive that smoking
policies hurt bars and restaurants [4].
Rapid Response:
Smokefree policies: Statistics vs. Stories
The continuing discussion of the economic impacts of smokefree
policies on the hospitality industry provides another excellent example of
how individual stories can be used (by the tobacco industry in this case)
to counter statistical evidence.
There is now a strong and well documented literature -- based on
statistical studies -- documenting that smokefree polcies have no effect
or a positive effect on the hospitality business [1]. Moreover, the
"studies" that do not reach this conclusion have been shown to be of lower
quality, usually relying on anectdotal evidence rather than "hard numbers"
such as actual business revenues or employment [1]. In addition, these
"negative" studies are uniformly financed by the tobacco industry and its
allies; by comparison the studies finding no effect or a positive effect
are funded by independent sources.
Despite this strong case, media reports continue to report
undocumented claims that these laws are bad for business [2,3] with equal
weight as the scientific evidence.
This result demonstrates the effectiveness of the tobacco industry's
organized public relations campaign to keep the myth alive that smoking
policies hurt bars and restaurants [4].
References:
1. Scollo M, Lal A, Hyland A, Glantz S. Review of the quality of
studies on the economic effects of smoke-free policies on the hospitality
industry. Tobacco Control 2003;12:13-20.
http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/12/1/13?maxtoshow=&HITS=1...
2. Hu W. The Smoking Ban: Clear Air, Murky Economics. New York
Times 28 Dec 2003. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/12/28/nyregion/28SMOK.html
3. Criag, T. Studies Cloud Smoking Ban Issue: Backers, Bars Argue
Effect on Business. Washington Post 28 Dec 2003.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A35098-2003Dec27?language=printer
4. Magzamen S, Charlesworth A, Glantz S. Print media coverage of
California's smokefree bar law. Tobacco Control 2001;10:154-160.
http://tc.bmjjournals.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/2/154?maxtoshow=&HITS=...
Competing interests:
None declared
Competing interests: No competing interests