IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v18y2021i21p11150-d663331.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Digital Surveillance to Identify California Alternative and Emerging Tobacco Industry Policy Influence and Mobilization on Facebook

Author

Listed:
  • Qing Xu

    (Global Health Policy and Data Institute, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    S-3 Research, LLC, San Diego, CA 92121, USA)

  • Joshua Yang

    (Department of Public Health, California State University, Fullerton, CA 92834, USA)

  • Michael R. Haupt

    (Global Health Policy and Data Institute, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    Department of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, CA 92093, USA)

  • Mingxiang Cai

    (Global Health Policy and Data Institute, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    S-3 Research, LLC, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    Global Health Program, Department of Anthropology, University of California, San Diego, CA 92093, USA)

  • Matthew C. Nali

    (Global Health Policy and Data Institute, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    S-3 Research, LLC, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    Global Health Program, Department of Anthropology, University of California, San Diego, CA 92093, USA)

  • Tim K. Mackey

    (Global Health Policy and Data Institute, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    S-3 Research, LLC, San Diego, CA 92121, USA
    Global Health Program, Department of Anthropology, University of California, San Diego, CA 92093, USA)

Abstract

Growing popularity of electronic nicotine-delivery systems (ENDS) has coincided with a need to strengthen tobacco-control policy. In response, the ENDS industry has taken actions to mobilize against public health measures, including coordination on social media platforms. To explore this phenomenon, data mining was used to collect public posts on two Facebook public group pages: the California Consumer Advocates for Smoke Free Alternatives Association (CCASAA) and the community page of the Northern California Chapter of SFATA (NC-SFATA). Posts were manually annotated to characterize themes associated with industry political interference and user interaction. We collected 288 posts from the NC-SFATA and 411 posts from CCASAA. A total of 522 (74.7%) posts were categorized as a form of political interference, with 339 posts (64.9%) from CCASAA and 183 posts (35.1%) from NC-SFATA. We identified three different categories of policy interference-related posts: (1) providing updates on ENDS-related policy at the federal, state, and local levels; (2) sharing opinions about ENDS-related policies; (3) posts related to scientific information related to vaping; and (4) calls to action to mobilize against tobacco/ENDS policies. Our findings indicate that pro-tobacco social media communities on Facebook, driven by strategic activities of trade associations and their members, may act as focal points for anti-policy information dissemination, grass-roots mobilization, and industry coordination that needs further research.

Suggested Citation

  • Qing Xu & Joshua Yang & Michael R. Haupt & Mingxiang Cai & Matthew C. Nali & Tim K. Mackey, 2021. "Digital Surveillance to Identify California Alternative and Emerging Tobacco Industry Policy Influence and Mobilization on Facebook," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-12, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11150-:d:663331
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11150/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/21/11150/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jason J Jones & Robert M Bond & Eytan Bakshy & Dean Eckles & James H Fowler, 2017. "Social influence and political mobilization: Further evidence from a randomized experiment in the 2012 U.S. presidential election," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-9, April.
    2. Emily Savell & Anna B Gilmore & Gary Fooks, 2014. "How Does the Tobacco Industry Attempt to Influence Marketing Regulations? A Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(2), pages 1-10, February.
    3. Selda Ulucanlar & Gary J Fooks & Anna B Gilmore, 2016. "The Policy Dystopia Model: An Interpretive Analysis of Tobacco Industry Political Activity," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(9), pages 1-21, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Valente, Thomas W. & Pitts, Stephanie & Wipfli, Heather & Vega Yon, George G., 2019. "Network influences on policy implementation: Evidence from a global health treaty," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 222(C), pages 188-197.
    2. Gary Sacks & Devorah Riesenberg & Melissa Mialon & Sarah Dean & Adrian J Cameron, 2020. "The characteristics and extent of food industry involvement in peer-reviewed research articles from 10 leading nutrition-related journals in 2018," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(12), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Jenny L Hatchard & Joao Quariguasi Frota Neto & Christos Vasilakis & Karen A Evans-Reeves, 2019. "Tweeting about public health policy: Social media response to the UK Government’s announcement of a Parliamentary vote on draft standardised packaging regulations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-16, February.
    4. Patricia A McDaniel & Ruth E Malone, 2020. "Tobacco industry and public health responses to state and local efforts to end tobacco sales from 1969-2020," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(5), pages 1-25, May.
    5. Tess Legg & Jenny Hatchard & Anna B Gilmore, 2021. "The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(6), pages 1-24, June.
    6. Oppermann, Daniel, 2021. "Corona protests in Germany: insights into a new movement," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 25-40.
    7. Linda Hancock & Natalie Ralph & Florentine Petronella Martino, 2018. "Applying Corporate Political Activity (CPA) analysis to Australian gambling industry submissions against regulation of television sports betting advertising," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(10), pages 1-21, October.
    8. Joël Cariolle & Yasmine Elkhateeb & Mathilde Maurel, 2022. "(Mis-)information technology: Internet use and perception of democracy in Africa," Documents de travail du Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne 22010, Université Panthéon-Sorbonne (Paris 1), Centre d'Economie de la Sorbonne.
    9. John C. Boik, 2016. "Optimality of Social Choice Systems: Complexity, Wisdom, and Wellbeing Centrality," Working Paper 0005, Principled Societies Project, revised Mar 2017.
    10. Thomas Fujiwara & Karsten Müller & Carlo Schwarz, 2021. "The Effect of Social Media on Elections: Evidence from the United States," NBER Working Papers 28849, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Ariel Bardach & Andrea Alcaraz & Javier Roberti & Agustín Ciapponi & Federico Augustovski & Andrés Pichon-Riviere, 2021. "Optimizing Tobacco Advertising Bans in Seven Latin American Countries: Microsimulation Modeling of Health and Financial Impact to Inform Evidence-Based Policy," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-13, May.
    12. Benjamin Wood & Gary Ruskin & Gary Sacks, 2020. "How Coca-Cola Shaped the International Congress on Physical Activity and Public Health: An Analysis of Email Exchanges between 2012 and 2014," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(23), pages 1-11, December.
    13. Jiménez Durán, Rafael & Muller, Karsten & Schwarz, Carlo, 2024. "The Effect of Content Moderation on Online and Offline Hate: Evidence from Germany’s NetzDG," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 701, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    14. Scott, C. & Hawkins, B. & Knai, C., 2017. "Food and beverage product reformulation as a corporate political strategy," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 37-45.
    15. Enai Ojeda & Christian Torres & Ángela Carriedo & Mélissa Mialon & Niyati Parekh & Emanuel Orozco, 2020. "The influence of the sugar-sweetened beverage industry on public policies in Mexico," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 65(7), pages 1037-1044, September.
    16. Hawkins, Benjamin & Durrance-Bagale, Anna & Walls, Helen, 2021. "Co-regulation and alcohol industry political strategy: A case study of the Public Health England-Drinkaware Drink Free Days Campaign," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 285(C).
    17. Julia Stafford & Tanya Chikritzhs & Hannah Pierce & Simone Pettigrew, 2021. "An evaluation of the evidence submitted to Australian alcohol advertising policy consultations," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(12), pages 1-16, December.
    18. Eastmure, Elizabeth & Cummins, Steven & Sparks, Leigh, 2020. "Non-market strategy as a framework for exploring commercial involvement in health policy: A primer," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 262(C).
    19. Campbell, Norah & Mialon, Melissa & Reilly, Kathryn & Browne, Sarah & Finucane, Francis M., 2020. "How are frames generated? Insights from the industry lobby against the sugar tax in Ireland," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 264(C).
    20. Apurva Kasture & Stefanie Vandevijvere & Ella Robinson & Gary Sacks & Boyd Swinburn, 2019. "Benchmarking the commitments related to population nutrition and obesity prevention of major food companies in New Zealand," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 64(8), pages 1147-1157, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:21:p:11150-:d:663331. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.