IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v368y2025ics027795362500111x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reputational revival and industry survival: A rhetorical analysis of tobacco industry evidence before a UK parliamentary select committee

Author

Listed:
  • Hawkins, Benjamin
  • van Schalkwyk, May CI.

Abstract

The tobacco industry is facing an existential threat from increasingly stringent tobacco control policies. At the same time, their exclusion from policy-making processes curtails their ability to oppose further regulation of their business. Trans-national tobacco companies (TTCs) claim that their investment in electronic nicotine delivery systems (ENDs) present a viable alternative business model to the sale of combustible cigarettes. However, many public health actors argue that entry into the ENDS market is being used by TTCs to shape the development of this product category, influence tobacco control debates and re-engage policy-makers in ways precluded by the World Health Organization's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). The appearance by four tobacco company executives before the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee enquiry into electronic cigarettes is an important example of how the tobacco industry is ‘healthwashing’ its reputation through ENDs investments and is being invited back into policy spaces from which it had been previously excluded. This article employs rhetorical theory to conduct a micro-level analysis of the tobacco industry's policy influencing strategy. It examines not just the ways in which TTC actors frame the ENDs product category, tobacco control policy and their role within this, but the rhetorical appeals, forms of language and discursive strategies used to engage and persuade their audience. In so doing, it contributes to the growing literature on the commercial determinants of health and previous macro-level framing analyses of these industries. Finally, it sets out a methodology for similar analyses of TTC rhetoric in other contexts, of other health-harming industries, and comparative analyses between industries.

Suggested Citation

  • Hawkins, Benjamin & van Schalkwyk, May CI., 2025. "Reputational revival and industry survival: A rhetorical analysis of tobacco industry evidence before a UK parliamentary select committee," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 368(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:368:y:2025:i:c:s027795362500111x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117782
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027795362500111X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.117782?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. MacKenzie, Ross & Mathers, Annalise & Hawkins, Benjamin & Eckhardt, Jappe & Smith, Julia, 2018. "The tobacco industry’s challenges to standardised packaging: A comparative analysis of issue framing in public relations campaigns in four countries," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(9), pages 1001-1011.
    2. van Schalkwyk, May CI. & Hawkins, Benjamin & Eisenkraft Klein, Daniel & Koon, Adam D., 2024. "The role of metaphor in the corporate political strategies of health harming industries: Comparing the concept of balance in the gambling and opioid industry discourses," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 356(C).
    3. Brandt, A.M., 2012. "Inventing conflicts of interest: A history of Tobacco industry tactics," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 102(1), pages 63-71.
    4. Friedman, L.C. & Cheyne, A. & Givelber, D. & Gottlieb, M.A. & Daynard, R.A., 2015. "Tobacco industry use of personal responsibility rhetoric in public relations and litigation: Disguising freedom to blame as freedom of choice," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 105(2), pages 250-260.
    5. Lencucha, Raphael & Drope, Jeffrey & Labonte, Ronald, 2016. "Rhetoric and the law, or the law of rhetoric: How countries oppose novel tobacco control measures at the World Trade Organization," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 100-107.
    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. Patay, Dori & Schram, Ashley & Friel, Sharon, 2022. "The role of causal ideas in the governance of commercial determinants of health. A qualitative study of tobacco control in the pacific," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 314(C).
    2. Crosbie, Eric, 2019. "Removing the last billboard for the tobacco industry: Tobacco standardized packaging in Ireland," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(10), pages 932-935.
    3. Tanaka M Mango & Tsepeso Setoboli & Nothando Tshuma & Emmanuel Sibanda, 2025. "Livelihood Effects of Smallholder Tobacco Contract Financing Schemes in Mutoko District, Zimbabwe," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 9(2), pages 2996-3011, February.
    4. Wancong Leng & Rui Mu, 2020. "Barriers to Tobacco Control in China: A Narrative Review," Societies, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-13, December.
    5. Matthew Tieu & Michael Lawless & Sarah C. Hunter & Maria Alejandra Pinero de Plaza & Francis Darko & Alexandra Mudd & Lalit Yadav & Alison Kitson, 2023. "Wicked problems in a post-truth political economy: a dilemma for knowledge translation," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 10(1), pages 1-11, December.
    6. Barlow, Pepita & Stuckler, David, 2021. "Globalization and health policy space: introducing the WTO health dataset of trade challenges to national health regulations at World Trade Organization, 1995-2016," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 108988, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    7. Barlow, P. & Thow, A.M., 2021. "Neoliberal discourse, actor power, and the politics of nutrition policy: A qualitative analysis of informal challenges to nutrition labelling regulations at the World Trade Organization, 2007–2019," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 273(C).
    8. Barlow, P. & Stuckler, D., 2021. "Globalization and health policy space: Introducing the WTOhealth dataset of trade challenges to national health regulations at World Trade Organization, 1995–2016," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 275(C).
    9. Michael S. McLeod & Joshua B. Sears & Gaylen N. Chandler & G. Tyge Payne & Keith H. Brigham, 2022. "Rhetoric, Risk, and Investment: Letting the Numbers Speak for Themselves," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(7), pages 1657-1687, November.
    10. Frank Houghton & Sharon Houghton & Diane O’Doherty & Derek McInerney & Bruce Duncan, 2019. "Greenwashing tobacco—attempts to eco-label a killer product," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 9(1), pages 82-85, March.
    11. Marwah M. Hassounah & Abdulmohsen H. Al-Zalabani & Mohammed D. AlAhmari & Afraa A. Murriky & Anwar M. Makeen & Abdullah M.M. Alanazi, 2020. "Implementation of Cigarette Plain Packaging: Triadic Reactions of Consumers, State Officials, and Tobacco Companies—The Case of Saudi Arabia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(8), pages 1-14, April.
    12. 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.
    13. Viveca Morris & Jennifer Jacquet, 2024. "The animal agriculture industry, US universities, and the obstruction of climate understanding and policy," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 177(3), pages 1-42, March.
    14. Clare, Kathryn & Maani, Nason & Milner, James, 2022. "Meat, money and messaging: How the environmental and health harms of red and processed meat consumption are framed by the meat industry," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    15. Barlow, Pepita & Gleeson, Deborah & O'Brien, Paula & Labonte, Ronald, 2022. "Industry influence over global alcohol policies via the World Trade Organization: a qualitative analysis of discussions on alcohol health warning labelling, 2010–19," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113820, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Raphael Lencucha & Jeffrey Drope & Ronald Labonte & Benedito Cunguara & Arne Ruckert & Zvikie Mlambo & Artwell Kadungure & Stella Bialous & Nhamo Nhamo, 2020. "The Political Economy of Tobacco in Mozambique and Zimbabwe: A Triangulation Mixed Methods Protocol," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(12), pages 1-13, June.
    17. Peter Choate & Dorothy Badry & Kerryn Bagley, 2022. "The Alcohol Industry and Social Responsibility: Links to FASD," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-16, June.
    18. Barlow, Pepita & Sanap, Rujuta & Garde, Amandine & Winters, L. Alan & Mabhala, Mzwandile A. & Thow, Anne Marie, 2022. "Reassessing the health impacts of trade and investment agreements: a systematic review of quantitative studies, 2016–20," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 113791, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Rima Nakkash & Ahmed Ali & Hala Alaouie & Khalil Asmar & Norbert Hirschhorn & Sanaa Mugharbil & Iman Nuwayhid & Leslie London & Amina Saban & Sabina Faiz Rashid & Md Koushik Ahmed & Cecile Knai & Char, 2020. "Attitudes and practices of public health academics towards research funding from for-profit organizations: cross-sectional survey," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 65(7), pages 1133-1145, September.
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:socmed:v:368:y:2025:i:c:s027795362500111x. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    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.